74 20 2479 https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/ec81450c819bc5e6bad3355d8ca48b99.pdf 6cd03545afa62ea154ceabc39948137c Issue An issue of a recurring publication. Volume Number The volume number of the issue 13 Issue Number The number of the issue (within a volume) 3 Publication Year The year the issue was published 1998 Publication Date The date the issue was published Winter Text Any textual data included in the document Vol. 13 No. 3 Winter 1998 2 Open Hands Vol. 13 No. 3 Winter 1998 Resources for Ministries Affirming the Diversity of Human Sexuality Open Hands is a resource for congregations and individuals seeking to be in ministry with lesbian, bisexual, and gay persons. Each issue focuses on a specific area of concern within the church. Open Hands is published quarterly by the Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (United Methodist) in cooperation with the Association of Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (American), the More Light Churches Network (Presbyterian), the Open and Affirming (United Church of Christ), and the Reconciling in Christ (Lutheran) programs. Each of these programs is a national network of local churches that publicly affirm their ministry with the whole family of God and welcome lesbian and gay persons and their families into their community of faith. These five programs— along with Open and Affirming (Disciples of Christ), Supportive Congregations (Brethren/Mennonite), and Welcoming (Unitarian Universalist)— offer hope that the church can be a reconciled community. Open Hands is published quarterly. Subscription is $20 for four issues ($25 outside the U.S.). Single copies and back issues are $6. Quantities of 10 or more, $4 each. Subscriptions, letters to the editor, manuscripts, requests for advertising rates, and other correspondence should be sent to: Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773 / 736-5526 Fax: 773 / 736-5475 Member, The Associated Church Press © 1998 Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. Open Hands is a registered trademark. ISSN 0888-8833 Printed on recycled paper. WE’RE WELCOMING—NOW WHAT? Bridging Word and Deed A WORD FROM OUR PUBLISHER A Time of Transition 4 MARK BOWMAN Bidding farewell to editor Mary Jo Osterman and welcoming interim editor Chris Glaser. BRIDGE-BUILDING VISIONS Bridges Over Troubled Water 5 CHRIS GLASER Welcoming congregations as bridges over troubled waters of doubt, fear, and schism. Border Crossing 6 MARK ELAM ANDERSON A poet’s vision of building bridges for the marginalized and privileged alike. Incarnating Good News 8 MIRIAM PRICHARD Beyond opening our doors to opening our hearts. What If We Become a Gay Church? 11 LISA ANN PIERCE Isaiah’s vision of transformation for those who wonder, “How can we be inclusive and keep our identity?” How Long? 12 ALYSON HUNTLY Why do we still sit silently when gays and lesbians are demeaned from the pulpit? Call for Articles for Open Hands Fall 1998 — A House Divided Theme Section: The fall issue will serve as an internal dialogue within the welcoming movement on how we understand Christian unity: What are acceptable differences of opinion within the church and what is adequate cause for separation? And what are the necessary boundaries of belief and behavior that define our community of faith? Tools Section: We are also requesting articles describing practical experience and suggestions in the following areas: Welcoming Committees, Connections (with other justice concerns), Worship, Outreach, Leadership, Youth, Campus, Children. These brief articles may or may not have to do with the theme of a given issue. Contact with idea by May 1 Manuscript deadline: July 15 Chris Glaser, 404/622-4222 or ChrsGlaser@aol.com Winter 1998 3 Publisher Mark Bowman Interim Editor Chris Glaser Designer In Print—Jan Graves Illustrations Ophelia Chambliss Program Coordinators Mark Bowman Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (UMC) 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 773/736-5526 Ann B. Day Open and Affirming Program (UCC) P.O. Box 403 Holden, MA 01520 508/856-9316 Bob Gibeling Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran) 2466 Sharondale Drive Atlanta, GA 30305 404/266-9615 Dick Lundy More Light Churches Network (PCUSA) 5525 Timber Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 612/470-0093 Brenda J. Moulton Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (ABC/USA) P.O. Box 2596 Attleboro Falls, MA 02763 508/226-1945 Editorial Advisory Committee Howard Bess, W&A Ann Marie Coleman, ONA Dick Hasbany, MLCN Bobbi Hargleroad, MLCN Dorothy Klefstad, RIC Susan Laurie, RCP Samuel E. Loliger, ONA Tim Phillips, W&A Lisa Ann Pierce, SCN Dick Poole, RIC Caroline Presnell, RCP Paul Santillán, RCP Margarita Suaréz, ONA Stuart Wright, RIC RCP BRIDGE-BUILDING TOOLS Welcoming Committees Why Be Specific In Our Welcome? 14 PAT TYMCHYSHYN A congregation questions specifically welcoming gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered persons. Connections Whose Church Is It, Anyway? 15 SUSAN LAURIE A firsthand account of our place among the Lazaruses at the gate of our national church councils. Worship Only Say the Word… 16 BOBBI WELLS HARGLEROAD What a difference it makes to be specific in our worship! Outreach Avoiding “Been There/Done That” 16 DIANA ROGER A congregation takes specific steps to go beyond mere welcome and grows. Leadership Six Handy Guidelines for Dialogue on “The Issue” 18 ALLEN FLUENT Helpful hints for church leaders coping with controversy over inclusiveness. Youth How “Welcoming” Are Youth Groups? 19 TREY HALL Results from a survey of youth groups of Reconciling Congregations that may help shape your youth program. Campus “Now I Know God Loves Me” 20 DAPHNE BURT A campus pastor tells the story of evangelism with a lesbian who doubted God’s love. Children Keeping Secrets—A Children’s Story 21 LIZ LANG Sometimes we keep a secret to surprise someone, but sometimes we keep a secret because we are afraid. SUSTAINING THE SPIRIT Everyone is Welcome Here 22 DAVID GOLDEN A new hymn celebrating the reconciling ministry of First United Methodist Church of Corvallis, Oregon. Movement News and Gatherings .......... 24 Profiles of Welcoming Communities ..... 25 Selected Resources .................................. 26 Annual Welcoming List ........................... 27 Next Issue: SEXUAL ETHICS 4 Open Hands Open Hands begins the transition to a new editor with this issue. Mary Jo Osterman resigned a editor in December. Mary Jo provided strong leadership and guidance for this magazine during her five years as editor. She led Open Hands through many changes while maintaining a high level of professional publishing standards. I know that you as readers of Open Hands are appreciative of Mary Jo’s work and wish her the best in her new endeavors. Chris Glaser has assumed the editorship of Open Hands on an interim basis. Chris is known to many of you as a longtime activist in Presbyterians for Lesbian & Gay Concerns and as a prominent author and speaker on lesbian, gay, and bisexual concerns in the church. His writings have been included in this magazine, and he has published four books, including Uncommon Calling and Coming Out to God. Chris brings to the job a diverse background in youth, campus, and parish ministries. He has both written and edited church curricula for youth on issues ranging from racism to worship. For three years he served as volunteer editor of More Light (the newsletter of PLGC) and continues as a contributing editor and columnist. For a decade he directed the Lazarus Project, the first ministry of reconciliation between the church and the gay and lesbian community funded by a mainstream denomination. He earlier served on the Presbyterian Task Force to Study Homosexuality while completing his Master of Divinity degree at Yale Divinity School in 1977. We are blessed to have someone of Chris’s background and expertise willing to step in as editor for the next several months. During this time, the Reconciling Congregation Program, in consultation with leaders of More Light, Open and Affirming, Reconciling in Christ, and Welcome & Affirming programs, will search for a permanent editor. During this transition, Open Hands will continue its mission of providing a diversity of resources, analyses, and stories on concerns facing welcoming churches. Your feedback and suggestions are always welcomed. Mark Bowman Publisher A Time of Transition Winter 1998 5 We’re welcoming— now what? Any congregation or ministry that has wanted to put its ministry where its mouth is has asked that question. This issue of Open Hands offers some thoughtful responses. The metaphor selected to help us visualize our response is that of a bridge: bridge-building visions (section one) and bridge-building tools (section two). At first I resisted this image. I couldn’t think of a bridge in the Bible, and my exhaustive concordance and biblical thesaurus do not list the word. Clearly the apocryphal poem (“Border Crossing” by Mark Elam Anderson) that leads off our articles provides the basis for this choice: Now comes building: a bridge to the desert, that others might cross; a bridge to the delta, that even the slave masters might cross… I considered other images of building that would fit our context as people of The Way. The building of the tabernacle, the portable residence of God in the wilderness. The building of the temple in Jerusalem, too holy to be built by the warrior king, David. The temple of Christ’s body and the temple of our bodies. The church as the body of Christ and the temple of living stones. The building of the church among strangers at Pentecost. The Reformation, or reconstruction, of that church. But the more I thought of bridges, the more I appreciated the selection of the image to suggest what we are about in the welcoming congregations movement. A bridge offers both a refuge and a way, both safety and direction. Bridge builders help others get to the other side by careful engineering and sturdy construction, while risking getting wet, sinking, drowning, or being swept away. And bridges exemplify God’s grace, being crossed by the just and the unjust. Congregations that welcome lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered souls serve as bridges over troubled waters. Troubled waters of doubts of our belovedness. Troubled waters of fear, ignorance, and bigotry. Even troubled waters of schism. Congregations working on being inclusive, not just of sexual minorities but of all the marginalized, serve as bridges to the church’s future. We assure the broader church that inclusiveness can be achieved while preserving “The Church’s One Foundation.” And we provide a way for all to cross to the other shore, the Land of Promise. This publication has been a bridge between churches and for the church. I am grateful to be a part of Open Hands as interim editor, a bridge between past and future issues. I give thanks to God for Mary Jo Osterman’s meticulous planning and building, making the crossing easier and possible, and including the construction of a new section on practical ministry (section two). I also give thanks to God for the initiative of the Reconciling Congregation Program in beginning this journal, the subsequent support of its ecumenical partners, and you, the reader, for making this and the movement to which it gives voice a priority of your concern and compassion. Chris Glaser Atlanta, Georgia Bridges Over Troubled Water Bridge-Building Visions 6 Open Hands No wonder the children grumbled. Arid desolation, no visible life bigger than a bug. Hateful sirocco1 winds, scouring dust flaying the skin right off the body. Waterless wastes, salt flats shimmering all the way to the margins of hope. Pharaoh’s army got drowned, but from the hot heart of the howling gale the clatter of dry bones rattles out their undead hatred, filling our ears with the powdery parchment of hypocrisy: Our pilgrim people are individuals of sacred worth who are unfit to proclaim the word of God, whose soulmates are incompatible with our law and forbidden the permanence of covenant, lest an errant shepherd forfeit credentials. No wonder the children grumbled, craving the cozy, closeted comforts of slavery. Grumble we may, but our dry eyes once beheld the bush that burned and was not consumed. Our dusty ears once heard a different voice, a voice that spoke not hatred but hope, a voice that echoes still in the parched recess of our disappointed hearts: Oh my people Oh my children Come back to me Come home to me and I will give you rest. The voice of the sirocco can go on howling its hatred, muttering its hypocrisy, singeing our faces with its scorn; it can rail and flail all it likes, but it will never turn us back: For God has already planted the seeds of Sabbath within us, has already revealed the healing, reconciling work of creation. We have experienced hearts and lives transformed, not to denial, but to affirmation. We have witnessed miracles, and no hot vain wind can rob us of our memories. In the shadow of a blazing bush burned into the back of our eyes, in the flakes of manna and the droplets of rockwater still clinging to our lips, in the echo of archangels’ call still resonating in our ears, in the faces and lives of those men and women of all orientations who have incarnated the reality of the Creator to us, we have glimpsed, touched, and tasted Canaan’s fair and happy land. For all its seductive security, the cozy slave pit of the closet cannot compare to the wide open spaces that lie ahead beyond the salt flat beyond the mountains across the river in the land of God’s Sabbath. Listen now! The voices of chaos diminish before the murmured songs of archangels and the swelling cresting word crashing against the mountains, washing over the wilderness: Oh my people Oh my children come back to me come home to me and I will give you rest. Border Crossing Mark Elam Anderson Source This poem was first printed in Shalom to You, (July 1996), newsletter of Shalom Ministries, a United Methodist ministry of empowerment, education, and justice in Portland, Oregon. It was written in celebration of the ordination of Jeanne Knepper, Shalom’s director. Copyright ©1996 by Mark Elam Anderson. Adapted for ecumenical audiences and used with permission. Notes 1A sirocco wind is a hot, steady, oppressive wind blowing from the Libyan deserts across the Mediterranean into Southern Europe, often bringing dust and sometimes accompanied by rain.; also any hot, oppressive wind, esp. one blowing toward a center of low barometric pressure. (Webster’s New World College Dictionary, Rev. & Upd.) Winter 1998 7 How can we surrender now? How can we do anything but answer? Yes, a voice from the heights crying across the wilderness, nourishing and authoritative all at once; Yes, oh yes, we come! Blistered, exhausted, parched and ravenous, we come! Look up there! Is it a mirage, shimmering on the horizon? Is it a cruel illusion, some trick of the sun and the heat and the wind, a promise of compassion masking a hot blast of intolerance? No, it’s really there! Bluer than sky, flowing, not shimmering, rushing along its course, desolation’s margin, ere the cool green promises come to fulfillment: A river. The river. How shall we cross? Tentatively, one cautious step at a time, testing river bed for firmness, fearful of stubbing our toes on river rocks, of stumbling and drenching our garments? Or shall we plunge in, gasping at the bracing frigidity of the torrent, laughing, tripping, plunging, washing all the dusty pain and disappointment and weariness of this exodus downstream, down toward the delta, down where it belongs. We trip, we fall, our heads submerge, our nostrils and ears fill with water; sputtering, laughing, we break the surface, baptismally cleansed, dead to and resurrected from all the deaths that come before, resurrected to the life that opens before us, as we rise from the water, stagger toward the shore, happy and frightened at the same time: For once we are there, once we have become citizens of this promised land, once we have taken possession of this place God has given us, even though the journey has ended, the work has barely begun. Now comes building: a bridge to the desert, that others might cross; a bridge to the delta, that even the slave masters might cross;2 a bridge into the hearts of all who begrudge our claim to this land God has promised, not just to us, but to all who bear God’s image, even those who give voice to the sirocco; for this is to be the land of inclusion, of fulfillment, of peace with justice, of all the things that God intended for us when first we were quickened. Yes, God called us to a land of rest, but only at the completion of Creation, and Creation is far from complete. So before we rest, before we proclaim Sabbath, we build, and the voice once distant and mediated through burning bushes and archangels, now immanent and unmediated, sings within our hearts and bursts forth from our own lips: Oh my people Oh my children welcome back welcome home welcome to the land I give you the land of Sabbath the land of justice the land called Shalom. ▼ 2The delta here alludes to the rich and fertile soil along the Nile in Egypt, the land of the oppressors. The bridge to the desert alludes to crossing the Jordan to the Promised Land. Mark Elam Anderson, pastor of Amity and McCabe United Methodist Churches in Oregon, is former chair of Shalom Ministries, an outreach ministry of the Metropolitan District of the Oregon-Idaho Conference of the United Methodist Church, which serves lesbian, gay, and bisexual people, people living on the social or economic edge, people who have been alienated from religion, and churches who want to welcome any of these people. Mark is married to Amy Boyett, a software professional, with whom he shares three children, Sarah, Sean, and Drew. 8 Open Hands Christians tend to speak rather glibly of “the Good News,” but many would be hard-pressed to explain or describe its content. This casual use and a vague notion of its meaning tend to diminish the term’s significance. We need to study the content of God’s Good News to us before we speak of our response. Further, we must examine its relevance to our lives, its implications and guidelines for the way we live, and thus, the way we offer the Good News to others as individuals and as welcoming congregations. The quality of our response to any good news is determined by both our reception of its truth and our perception of its relevance to us. In order to elicit a truly visceral and involving response, the news must be removed from the realm of objective, intellectual detachment and brought into personal experience and the heart’s inner core. We must be gripped by the message; we must believe that we are individually and personally addressed. Otherwise we will relegate the news to a ho-hum response, distance ourselves from it, and proceed as if we hadn’t heard it. In the fifth chapter of his second letter to the Corinthians, the apostle Paul has given us one of the most compelling interpretations of the Good News as he speaks of God’s reconciling act in Christ. “If you want in one sentence a definition of what the Christian Church stands for in the world, 2 Corinthians 5 gives it to you…There is Christianity in a nutshell,”1 wrote H.C.N. Williams, former provost of England’s Coventry Cathedral, itself a symbol of reconciliation because of that congregation’s forgiving response to the Germans who destroyed it by firebombs during World War II. Paul writes, “In Christ, God was reconciling the world[’s people] to [God’s] self, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting the message of reconciliation to us” (2 Cor. 5:19). This is the Good News of the gospel. God was in Christ who came and changed everything. “So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; see, everything has become new!” (2 Cor. 5:17). The old, sad, defeated, divisive, guiltridden order has gone and a totally new order has begun. Now that’s Good News! On the personal level, we see that through God’s initiative and reconciling work, God has enfolded us, covered us, and surrounded us with an unconditional and redemptive love. To know oneself as personally blest and singled out opens a mysterious floodgate of unabated gratitude, energy, and joy. To know oneself to be the object of an unmerited gift of grace and love is the epitome of ecstasy which becomes the impetus out of which we receivers become givers, bearers of the Good News to others. On the global level, the very nature of the message reveals that this news is not addressed to us in isolation. It is not an exclusive honor. On the contrary, receiving the gift joins us to all humankind because it simultaneously confers on us a responsibility. We who have received the gift are now commissioned as givers— such is the flow inherent in the gift. Our full realization of the Good News assures our response, becoming in us an incarnation of its reality and intention and joy for the world. Like a gushing stream, the Good News sweeps us into completeness, into one Body, one community composed of many members with Christ as the head. We speak easily these days of being a “member” of this or that society, group, or association. For the Christian, this term has its fullest and most organic expression in the church as the Body of Christ. Paul offered this moving and solemn concept of the church— not as a large human institution— but as the “continuing incarnation, so that Christ is no longer only with his people but within them, and his incarnation has appropriated them for its extension.”2 Christ came for the world; therefore, the church is for the world. Kenyon Wright wrote, “The church exists by mission as a fire exists by burning… Ministry in the world is not an optional extra. It is the very essence of the church.”3 To whom shall we go? To whom shall we direct our ministry? Churches have readily acknowledged the mandate to deliver the Good News to the broader world. Christians have gone out to the farthest reaches of the earth to preach the gospel to everyone. However, churches have not so easily recognized the call to do and to be the Good News to those within their own fellowships. We must be to one another within our own congregations and communions what we purport to be to the rest of the world. The person to whom we seek to show mercy or concern or openness and welcome need not be a person “outside the gates.” That person may sit alongside us in our pew! As W.O. Carver suggested, “Each church has its own opportunities and problems, which it meets not for itself simply, but for all the churches of every community and always on behalf of the entire Body of Christ. The behavior of each Christian community has significance for the whole of Christian— The old, sad, defeated, divisive, guilt-ridden order has gone and a totally new order has begun. Now that’s Good News! Incarnating Good News Miriam Prichard Winter 1998 9 ity…being linked, as we are, with Christ as our head.”4 There are no New Testament demarcations between those in the far-flung areas of the world and those within our own congregations. All are to be included in the ministry of reconciliation, and the way we serve one has an impact upon our service to all. What is the responsibility inherent, then, in claiming ourselves as a “welcoming” community? Such self-designation implies a commitment to a depth of hospitality far beyond the casual. How do we welcome the stranger? (For purposes of this discussion, the word stranger is used to mean “those who come.”) All are to be received as Christ. Catholic Worker cofounder Dorothy Day clarified: “Hospitality is to be given not for the sake of humanity; not because it might be Christ who stays with us, comes to us, takes up our time; not because these people remind us of Christ…but because they are Christ, asking us to find room for him exactly as he did that first Christmas.”5 This of course applies to all strangers, but in our context as reconciling congregations, it is incumbent upon us to single out a class of especially vulnerable strangers: gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered people who seek membership and fellowship in our churches. Many of them are coming to us out of a cold more chilling than the worst weather winter can summon. Many are coming with a more depleting, gnawing hunger than absence of food engenders. Many are coming with their last spark of hope that here, finally, in this particular fellowship, they will find the warmth, nurture, and acceptance denied them in so many other places. Despite the challenges involved in leading a congregation to become welcoming, opening their doors is probably the easiest thing that welcoming congregations do. Much more is required beyond the initial smiles, handshakes, and assurances of seating. The enfolding love of Christ alerts every atom in my being that I am welcome and worthy, and yet, in many churches, our non-engagement with one another belies the experience that every member of Christ’s Body is welcome and worthy. To truly “bring them in” will require a special, deep, intentional, and steadfast commitment to hospitality and inclusion; otherwise, these strangers are left standing just inside the door or waiting on the fringes of congregational life. Just as a newborn child entering into its human family needs to be held, stroked, loved, crooned over, spoken with, acknowledged, seen, affirmed, and validated, so this entrant into the congregational family needs to be engaged and enfolded in a true relationship, not just tolerated. Spiritual growth-in-community is thwarted without true engagement, and reconciliation can be achieved neither in the abstract nor in detachment. As Dorothy Day explained, “We cannot love God unless we love each other, and to love we must know each other. We know God in the breaking of bread, and we know each other in the breaking of bread, and we are not alone anymore. Heaven is a banquet and life is a banquet, too, even with a crust, where there is companionship. We have all known the long loneliness and we have learned that the only solution is love and love comes with community.”6 However, engagement may be misunderstood. In an attempt to describe their ideal of Christian fellowship, many people use the metaphor of the family, as in “one-big-happy.” The idealized image fostered by this concept may present an unforeseen stumbling block to the achievement of true community, since, in many cases, it tends to engender a glossing over of differences. Consequently, the uneasy peace prevailing covers a tenuous facade which will not hold together in the long run. Quaker activist and spiritual writer Parker Palmer offers relevant words of wisdom in this regard: If the church is to serve as a school of the Spirit…It must find ways of extending hospitality to the stranger. I do not mean coffee hours designed to recruit new members to the church, for these are aimed at making the stranger “one of us.” The essence of hospitality… is that we let our difference, our mutual strangeness, be as they are, while still acknowledging the unity that lies beneath them.…Only as individual understandings of God’s will are compared, contrasted, and interwoven with each other can we begin to move toward the wholeness which God intends for us, the wholeness of the entire Body of Christ…When a community’s identity is rooted in the truth that we are all members of one another…that our deepest identity is in our commonality in God…then it can embrace the stranger with grace and ease.7 An aspect of our welcome too easily overlooked is our recognition of the gifts that the stranger brings. The stranger is also a messenger of reconciliation. In both the Benedictine monastic tradition and Celtic Christianity, one major feature of hospitality is the acknowledgment that the guest has gifts to offer. The giving is circular, proceeding from host to guest and then from guest to host. Hosts and guests have duel roles as givers and receivers. A worthy, reconciling response, then, is total, not doled out or carefully measured. There will be no subtle boundaries, no glass ceilings, no invisible walls beyond which the lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgendered person is disallowed. Rather, the response of welcome will be Just as a newborn child entering into its human family needs to be held, stroked, loved, crooned over, spoken with, acknowledged, seen, affirmed, and validated, so this entrant into the congregational family needs to be engaged and enfolded… 10 Open Hands Miriam Prichard, a member of Pullen Memorial Baptist Church in Raleigh, North Carolina, is married and the mother of two children. A native Mississippian, she came to North Carolina by way of Southern Baptist Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky, for a career with Baptist students in colleges, universities, and schools of nursing throughout the state. She recently retired from a second career as an English teacher in an alternative school for “disruptive and unruly” students, an occupation she found to be inspirational as well as challenging. Notes 1H.C.N. Williams, “Introduction to the Community of the Cross of Nails,” The Nature of Christian Community, Sanford Garner, editor, (Coventry, UK: Community of the Cross of Nails, Coventry Cathedral), p. 3. 2W.O. Carver, The Glory of God in the Christian Calling (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1949), pp. 43-44. 3Canon Kenyon E. Wright, “The Serving Community,” The Nature of Christian Community, op.cit., p. 34. 4Carver, op.cit., p. 152. 5Dorothy Day, Selected Writings, Peter Ellsberg, editor (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1992). 6Dorothy Day, The Long Loneliness: The Autobiography of Dorothy Day (San Francisco:Harper & Row, 1980). 7Parker Palmer, The Company of Strangers: Christians and the Renewal of America’s Public Life (New York: Crossroad, 1994): pp. 130, 160. 8Robert Frost, “Birches,” The Complete Poems of Robert Frost (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1967), p. 153. poured out, pressed down, and running over “up to the brim and even above the brim.”8 There will be no suggestion of ambiguity in such a response. Christ is our model of wholeheartedness, having given himself without stint. “For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, whom we proclaimed… was not ‘Yes and No’; but in him it is always ‘Yes.’ For in [Christ] every one of God’s promises is a ‘Yes’” (1 Cor. 1:19-20). Now we see that this is to be our response: a great, visceral, visible, incarnate “Yes.” A “Yes” with staying power. A “Yes” with depth beyond the open door. A “Yes” which says, “I behold the Christ in you: come in! Come bring your gifts and your blessings to this congregation. Join in this great circular sweep of Christian love: your gift to me, mine to you, all to each and each to all.” That is the quality of the “Yes” by which all will know the fullness of the joy of reconciliation, the joy of true membership in the whole Body of Christ, having no alienating walls between us, no more distancing, “all one Body we” as we demonstrate our own reconciliation and carry that message of Good News to the world. ▼ Winter 1998 11 You’ve probably heard the question, or perhaps asked it yourself. It’s a common concern among members of churches that welcome gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered people. “What if we become a gay church?” It’s often asked alongside statements like: “It’s not that I’m homophobic, I just want to make sure there are other families like mine.” Or, “My partner and I chose this church because we wanted to have straight friends. I’m glad they welcome us, but I don’t want this to become a totally gay church.” This question, “What if we become a gay church?” is a serious one. At issue is nothing less than that age-old dilemma: “How can we be inclusive and keep our identity?” There are no easy answers. The only assurance we have is the ancient covenant promise that God will deliver us. But perhaps that is enough. The Israelites faced the question of identity and inclusivity when they returned to their homeland of Palestine after the Babylonian exile. Isaiah offered God’s answer in a vision of “a house of prayer for all peoples” that included foreigners and eunuchs. The vision, found in the first eight verses of chapter 56 begins: Thus says [our God]: Maintain justice, and do what is right, for soon my salvation will come, and my deliverance be revealed. Isaiah 56:1 “What If We Become a Gay Church?” Lisa Ann Pierce Isaiah thus challenges and encourages a disenchanted people returning to their decimated, war-torn land. In the context of famine, poverty, and conflict, the prophet speaks a wildly optimistic word: deliverance is on the way. Yet the people must have been scandalized by what the prophet said about inclusivity, for it was a radical reinterpretation of the law. According to Torah, eunuchs and many foreigners were to be excluded from the assembly of God (Deut. 23:1, Lev. 21:17-20, Deut. 23:3-6). Yet Isaiah 56 presents a vision for deliverance with foreigners and eunuchs as central players in the salvation drama: To the eunuchs who keep my sabbaths… and hold fast my covenant… I will give them an everlasting name… And the foreigners who join themselves to [God]… these I will bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer; their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be accepted on my altar… Isaiah 56:4-7 Although the prophet’s proclamation stands in tension with Torah, this prophecy is set in the context of the larger salvation history of Israel: “Maintain justice, and do what is right, for soon my salvation will come and my deliverance be revealed.” The Hebrew word translated “deliverance” is the same word rendered “maintain justice and do what is right” earlier in the verse. There is a word-play here, showing the Israelites that by maintaining justice and doing what is right (which includes welcoming the gifts of the foreigner and eunuch), they are participating in God’s mighty act of deliverance. Thus continues their saving history, for God is building a new people— a new Israel—from exiles, eunuchs, and foreigners. They are a people of justice and righteousness, a people who live God’s vision for deliverance. Doing the right thing is deliverance, and deliverance is doing the right thing. What does Isaiah 56 have to do with the question, “What if we become a gay church?” The prophet offers us a vision that transcends our fearful questioning. It is a vision beyond issues of exclusion and inclusion. It is a vision of transformation. To be excluded is to be discarded by those who have the power to say who is in and who is out. To be included, however, is to be included on the terms of those same powerful people. Far beyond this power to exclude or include is the prophet’s vision of a God who already gathers the outcasts of Israel, and gathers others to them. Everyone enters on God’s terms and shares their gifts freely. Everyone is changed—indeed delivered—by God’s gathering action. And our deliverance is being part of God’s gathering action. To ask the question, “What if we become a gay church?” makes sense in a society where heterosexuality has been granted a position of power and privilege. The question represents the very reasonable anxiety that we sometimes feel when this social order is challenged. Gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered, and straight alike, we are accustomed to our churches being essentially heterosexual in character. We want to include folks and not lose our The prophet Isaiah offers us a vision that transcends our fearful questioning. It is a vision beyond issues of exclusion and inclusion. It is a vision of transformation. 12 Open Hands identity. We want to welcome and be welcomed, but we feel some anxiety at the prospect of the real transformation that can happen when God brings us together. God invites us to enjoy a radical vision that transcends our anxieties. God invites us to trust that deliverance will come when outcasts are gathered to outcasts, and everyone’s gifts are given freely. We are invited to risk coming together on God’s terms, trusting that our identity rests more on being God’s children than on maintaining heterosexual dominance in our church. And taking this risk together, we step into the possibility of God’s transformative power changing us into something entirely new: not a gay church, and not a church dominated by heterosexual culture, but a church transformed and delivered. Gathered together, and freely sharing our gifts, we live into God’s vision of a people delivered to a new creation. ▼ Lisa Ann Pierce currently ser ves as Interim Pastor of St. Paul Mennonite Fellowship, a General Conference Mennonite church in St. Paul, Minnesota. St. Paul Fellowship is a Publicly Affirming congregation of the Supportive Church Network of the Brethren/Mennonite Council for Lesbian and Gay Concerns (BMC). Lisa also edits Dialogue, a BMC publication. How Long? Alyson Huntly “How can we be inclusive and keep our identity?” One verse of the familiar hymn, “The Church’s One Foundation,” has had special resonance for many Presbyterians in the United States recently as they come to terms with an amendment to their church constitution approved last year (Amendment B) which bars gays and lesbians from ministry or elected office in their church. Though with a scornful wonder This world sees her oppressed By schisms rent asunder, By heresies distressed. Yet saints their watch are keeping: Their cry goes up: “How long?” And soon the night of weeping Shall be the morn of song. Words: Samuel J. Stone, 1966; in public domain; adapted by Alyson Huntly. Tune: Samuel Sebastian Wesley, 1864. In public domain. I thought of this hymn during a sermon at a recent presbytery meeting in Ottawa. The preacher asserted that it is God’s will for all of us to be in heterosexual marriage. There are simply no other options— no space in his rigid moral judgment for other choices. No one moved, or walked out, or objected. Some of us did turn a little pale, and several of us made eye contact. My gut ached as I wondered, “How long?” Would we have sat so silently, I wondered, if the speaker had excluded and demeaned, not lesbians and gays, but blacks or the disabled? Would we have let such blatant exclusion and bigotry slide by if it had been directed at other marginalized groups in our society? Perhaps. Perhaps this is a sign of the deep schisms that still exist in our church. But I think we are even more silent than usual when religious condemnation or hatred is directed to gays and lesbians. Our fear of schism still seems to keep us from speaking out. And we let the heresy of exclusion go on. God calls us to inclusive love, love of our neighbor, even when our neighbor is stranger, outcast, or “other.” For in Christ there is no rich or poor, male or female, Jew or Greek, black or white, gay or straight…but one human family united in God’s love. Until then, may the saints continue to keep watch—and cry out “how long?” ▼ Source This article was first published in Consensus, the newsletter of Affirm United (Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals and their friends of the United Church of Canada). Used with permission. Alyson Huntly is the editor of Consensus, the newsletter of Affirm United (Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals and their friends of The United Church of Canada). She has just completed a book, Daring to Be United, describing the United Church of Canada’s struggle over the issue of homosexuality. It will be published by United Church of Canada Press this spring. Ina Edminster and Lisa Ann Pierce at St. Paul Mennonite Fellowship, November, 1997. Photo: Karen L. Abshier Winter 1998 13 14 Open Hands “Why Be Specific In Our Welcome?” Pat Tymchyshyn Several years ago the Church and Society Work Area of Wesley United Methodist Church in Champaign, Illinois, formed a task force to explore how our church could become a Reconciling Congregation. The road was not smooth and took some rather unexpected turns. This tells the story of a journey from “reconciling” to “inclusive.” In 1995 we were excited to be a part of our new Reconciling Task Force. James Preston from the Reconciling Program came to speak to our congregation. We organized study groups. Several members attended the national reconciling convocation at Augsburg Seminary. And we really felt that becoming a Reconciling Congregation was completely logical and in keeping with Wesley’s nature. But that proved not to be the case. We met strong resistance to becoming part of the national movement. Our task force had been created to help Wesley decide where it was in relation to the acceptance of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered persons. In the process, we engaged in dialogues, formal presentations, study groups, and members of our committee visited every task force, committee, work area, and fellowship group in the church. Still, there was resistance. Some expressed fears that the national reconciling movement was directing Wesley! We attempted to become a task force that was more obviously Wesley-centered and Wesley-born. Rather than using materials from the Reconciling Congregations Program and similar programs, we changed the content of our message to the personal stories of lesbian, gay, and bisexual current and former members of Wesley. The message was better received, but it was clear that the congregation was not yet ready to formally adopt a reconciling statement. Some of the objections were: “Wesley is already a welcoming place, why do we need to make an official welcome to l/g/b people?” “Why are we considering welcoming only a certain group of people?” “If we are going to advertise Wesley as a welcoming place, should we make it clear that we welcome all people?” Our task force decided to metamorphose again and become an Inclusiveness Task Force, focusing on letting people outside the church know how welcoming a place those of us inside already knew our congregation to be. We enlisted the aid of the congregation in forming the following welcoming statement: “Wesley United Methodist Church is a diverse and welcoming community uniting in seeking Christ. We neither exclude nor judge anyone. We invite everyone in all circumstances and walks of life, including you.” We print this statement in every church bulletin. The task force officially became a standing work area of the church, intended to continue the work of welcoming everyone without losing sight of the original goal of becoming a Reconciling Congregation. Our services included: signing at Christmas and Easter worship services and at large workshops; adding a TTY/TDD device for the hearing-impaired; promoting a Bible study designed for lesbian, gay, bisexual and straight alike; planning a conflict resolution workshop; and supporting the regional church’s Reconciling Congregation study groups and workshops. We continue to encourage and facilitate study and discussion sessions on the question of why some people are or feel excluded from the church or by society. Perhaps by “living the question,” as the poet Rainer Maria Rilke once wrote, we will “live into the answer” of why it may be necessary to become specific in welcoming those who believe themselves unwelcome. ▼ Pat Tymchyshyn is chair of the Church and Society Work Area of Wesley United Methodist Church in Champaign, Illinois, and a member of its Inclusive Work Area. The mother of a gay son, she founded the local PFLAG chapter. She is a retired teacher of nursing. Bridge-Building Tools Winter 1998 15 Whose Church Is It, Anyway? Susan Laurie I used to be “in.” It used to be “my” church. As a child I was at church several times a week: choir practice, scouts, youth group, and Sunday worship. I knew nothing of church politics or debates. I just knew people who represented Christ as loving and caring. As an adult, I found a church and pastor who asked us to think and act as Christ taught, preaching grace and inclusion. Again, I felt loved and valued and included. Not until I discerned a call from God to pursue ordained ministry did I run into denominational rulebooks that kept me out. I was naive as to the extent of some people’s passion to let me know I am not a full member of “my” church. Now I find myself outside the doors of a denomination that carefully excludes me as a lesbian Christian. Every four years the United Methodist Church gathers for its General Conference, the opportunity for church policies to be changed. In April 1996 I arrived at Denver’s gathering to join a large group of volunteers from the Reconciling Congregation Program. Many people had worked many hours preparing our witness. I felt very positive about the effort: its creativity, attention to detail, and foundation in the gospel. I knew I would spend emotional and spiritual energy as well as physical energy. I was prepared to be a persistent, faithful witness. I was not prepared for the larger experience of insider/outsider dynamics. As I stood with our group of Reconciling United Methodists day after day, literally opening doors for delegates, making our present felt, I watched as other groups also stood outside. We were not the only ones trying to gain recognition in the conference. Others were striving for voice and representation on the inside: Black Methodists for Church Renewal, the Women’s Caucus, a rural caucus, an urban caucus (called Holy Boldness), Hispanic ministries, the Oklahoma Mission Conference, and others. “Celebrate Diversity”… how often it has been employed in order that we might slide in under its banner without seriously embracing its meaning. Though not officially denounced as we were, others were also familiar with limitations on their participation in the church. If a few members of a minority gain position, a demarcation line is drawn against “too many.” This stumbling block of tokenism was brought home for the assembly by a speech from Minerva Carcaño punctuated by her repetition of the phrase, “Two is enough.” Though eloquent, the speech itself became a token moment as attitudes seemed untouched. Legislation was proposed for clearly inclusive church membership: Therefore all persons without regard to age or intellectual ability, race or nationality, gender or sexual identity, class or handicapping conditions shall be eligible to attend its worship services, to participate in its programs, to receive the sacraments and be admitted as baptized or professing members in any local church . . . The voting body, insiders by definition, declared no list was necessary. They felt it sufficient to say “Therefore all persons shall be eligible for worship…” That would’ve been sufficient if all meant all. But the list is necessary, pertinent, and instructive. It does not lose significance as it grows longer, it keeps us mindful. As I stood among the other groups on the outside of the governing body inside, I gained better understanding what these struggles are about. “Celebrate Diversity” is a sentiment that I hear in my lesbian community. However, I pause to wonder how often it has been employed in order that we might slide in under its banner without seriously embracing its meaning. We celebrate diversity because it helps us know God, it calls or pushes us to think about our faith, challenging our comfort. “For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ…The eye cannot say to the hand, ‘I have no need of you’…(1 Cor. 12:12, 21a).” We need each other. Succumbing to a theology of scarcity— that there’s not enough of God’s love to go around— we compete for crumbs. I will not call this a lack of faith, but it is the result of a tentative faith. As we allow as to how God’s grace envelops the wider body of all people, we know God’s presence in our own hearts. God does so love the world! So let’s protest with confidence the exclusion of any person or group from our midst. We must demonstrate solidarity, listening and educating ourselves about the subtleties of classism, racism, ableism, sexism. Our benefit is that we learn from one another, enriching worship, gaining biblical insights, challenging our discipleship. I appreciate those who have been in the struggle for decades, even generations. Sometimes I am ready to quit next week. As a cloud of witnesses whose faith is not reduced to nor limited by rulebooks, we will live into the fullest possible understanding of God’s grace and provision. “If one member suffers, all suffer together with it; if one member is honored, all rejoice together with it” (1 Cor. 12:26). Let’s forget the sentimental idea of “my” church and dwell in the whole body of Christ. ▼ After 16 years as a high school teacher, Susan Laurie attended Garret-Evangelical Theological Seminary in Evanston, Illinois, receiving her M.Div. degree in 1995. She is seeking ordination in the Western Pennsylvania Annual Conference, while living with her partner of 15 years in Edinboro, Pennsylvania. 16 Open Hands Only Say the Word… Bobbi Wells Hargleroad It was the first Sunday of October 1997 and the Table at the front of our large, formal sanctuary was prepared for World Communion Sunday. It was also Solidarity Sunday, and members of our mission board, in partnership with Dignity / Chicago, were distributing strips of rainbow-colored ribbon at various entrances to the church. The worship service began and, toward the end of the sermon, our preacher for the day called attention to the ribbons and how important it was for all—ALL—to know they were welcome at this Table, explaining that the ribbons had been distributed that day to claim our solidarity with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered sisters and brothers, many of whom have known only exclusion and rejection from Christ’s church and table. It was a word we needed to hear. We, mostly white, middle class, heterosexual, mostly knowing-we-belong-here folks, needed the reminder, having adopted a “Toward a More Inclusive Church” statement the year before. We had made a commitment, but it was still very much a work in progress. Even in the power of the moment, most of us assumed that the ribbons were mainly for us. We regulars. “The choir.” It wasn’t until later that week that we realized how important they had been for a stranger in our midst. A stranger who went home to write us a several-page letter about the power our welcome had had for him. Reared as a Christian, he wrote, he’d nonetheless been cast aside by both family and church when he came out as a gay man. He had tried life without church. He had tried a variety of gay congregations. Then, for some unclear reason that Sunday, he had tried us. “For those of us who have been rejected,” the visitor wrote, “that simple invitation to join in the Communion meal can be a life-changing force.” Entering, he was astounded to see the rainbow ribbons, never guessing that we knew what they meant. Reading the explanatory card that came with each ribbon, he was yet more astounded to see that we did. He witnessed an elderly man, who reminded him of his grandfather, chatting with a young woman about the meaning of the ribbons. He noticed a father, with two children in tow, fasten a ribbon on each of them before setting out to find the “perfect pew.” He was amazed, the man wrote, to hear the words gay and lesbian in the sermon, and yet more surprised that they were not followed by terms like sin or demon-possessed or predatory. He struggled to fight back tears as he was welcomed with everyone else to the Communion table. He wrote further: To simply be accepted and welcomed is a powerful experience if you’re not accustomed to it…historically, the church has not always extended the sacred invitation of communion to everyone. And for those of us who have been rejected, that simple invitation to join in the Communion meal can be a life-changing force. He has been with us for worship numerous times in the past several months. His letter has been read and reread in a variety of settings. We continue to learn from it and be led by it. Yet the question I have is, if he had wandered in on any other Sunday, would he have felt welcomed? Would he have returned? Would there have been any sign of welcome? A symbol? A statement in the bulletin? A word from the pulpit? Would the prayers have touched the concerns of his life? Would pictures of new members have shown a variety of households, perhaps one like his own? Or would thoughtless references to “family” have driven him away? Worship, we say, is where we gather most authentically as a community. How do our worship services reflect to newcomers that they’re welcome? Especially if those newcomers, because of their history with the Church, are primed to see rejection rather than arms open in welcome? All of us in the welcoming church movement must reflect on how do we welcome people into worship—specifically, visibly, and clearly? This is the first of a series in Open Hands devoted to our sharing of stories of what has worked to make worship inclusive of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered folk. Which of you will be next to tell your congregation’s story, revealing successes or mistakes, strengths or weaknesses? Doing so will help us all. ▼ Bobbi Wells Hargleroad is Minister of Mission at First United Church of Oak Park (Presbyterian Church [U.S.A.] and United Church of Christ). Situated near Chicago, the congregation became a More Light/Open and Affirming church in February 1996. Avoiding “Been There/Done That!” Diana Roger Your church has voted to welcome lesbian, gay, and bisexual people fully into its life and leadership. Now what? Is your church finished with the welcoming issue? As the chairperson of a welcoming task force, I can offer examples of how one church proceeded after the vote. Winter 1998 17 Bellevue First Congregational UCC Church formally adopted an open and affirming statement in January, 1996. Some members of this congregation expressed concern from the beginning that going through an educational process followed by a vote could be merely an exercise in political correctness. They felt that the risk of divisiveness might be too high if the only result turned out to be a document that went into a file cabinet. People were eager to know whether going through an undoubtedly difficult process would make a difference. Being in the Greater Seattle area where there are a number of welcoming congregations, our task force had excellent mentoring. Input from those congregations was crucial. Before I approached the church council with a request to study the welcoming issue, I knew of post-vote actions taken by other churches. It was my expectation that becoming truly inclusive would be an ongoing process, and I had a clear picture as to what might happen following a vote. This was shared with our pastor, the council, the task force, and ultimately the congregation. The statement, which was later adopted, was written collaboratively and included a commitment to “continue exploring what it means to be faithfully Open and Affirming in a changing world.” One of the first things we did after our vote was to publicize our decision. A press release was prepared and sent to the local papers, followed up with phone calls. Articles appeared in several publications, including the Seattle Gay News and the newsletter of a local lesbian/gay organization. Members of the local PFLAG chapter were notified. A presentation was made to a local interfaith organization telling about our decision and how it was reached. The church council turned our welcoming task force into a permanent entity (a subcommittee of our outreach commission). The council also voted to include a specific portion of our welcoming statement in every Sunday bulletin and church newsletter. A parchment copy of the statement was framed and is prominently displayed. We made what would be our first annual financial contribution to our denomination’s coalition for lesbian and gay concerns. During the year following our vote, our church youth asked for their own series of open and affirming classes, to be patterned on the classes that had been offered to the entire congregation. (They had been invited to participate in the initial classes but most had not.) The classes were presented with an understanding that the youth would vote at the conclusion. They unanimously affirmed the welcoming stance. Our church’s 100th anniversary was in 1996, the year we officially became welcoming. A book updating our church history was written to commemorate the anniversary, and it contained a section about our welcoming journey. Our time capsule was opened and new materials, including our open and affirming statement, were inserted before re-sealing. We celebrated the one-year anniversary of our vote. Each week for a month we had short speeches and testimonials in church as well as articles in our newsletter. An especially moving testimonial was given by a gay member who started attending after he heard about our welcoming stance. Our pastor gave a sermon on the subject of inclusiveness, and we had a cake and ceremony at our quarterly congregational meeting. Our committee still puts articles in the church newsletter from time to time. It becomes clear to anyone listening to our pastor’s sermons over time that he views gay and lesbian people as part of God’s family and our church family. He intentionally includes different configurations of families when asking people to light the Advent candles. Our church was using inclusive language in our music and liturgy before our open and affirming discussions, but I think this is something that should be emphasized as a necessary part of being welcoming. Some of us occasionally attend seminars for people from area UCC and Disciples of Christ churches. Here we give suggestions and support to those whose churches have not yet voted, and we also share ideas about ways to live out our commitments to inclusivity. Last year the open and affirming UCC congregations in the Seattle area jointly sponsored an ad in the Seattle Gay News, which ran for a number of consecutive weeks. The ad listed the churches, saying that they “have publicly stated their non-judgmental welcome to all people regardless of sexual orientation.” Our library committee has asked for book and video suggestions, and some have been purchased. Pertinent articles are posted on the church bulletin board, including articles from the newsletter of a local gay/lesbian organization. Sexual orientation issues continue to be discussed from time to time in adult education classes. Prospective new members receive a packet that includes our welcoming statement. In addition, they are told about the process that the church went through before declaring this position. Similarly, a full copy of our statement is given to members of the confirmation class and is discussed as part of a lesson on Christian concerns about justice. Our personnel committee makes our welcoming statement and our antidiscrimination policy known to job applicants. When residents of the State of Washington were recently given the chance to end employment discrimination based upon sexual orientation, our church was not silent. Petitions to put an initiative on the ballot were made available to any who wanted to sign. When the initiative qualified for the November election, our pastor supported it through our newsletter. (The initiative, incidentally, failed.) We are approaching the two-year anniversary of our vote. Our church has grown by approximately 20% in that time. Many of the new members are young couples with children in search of an open-minded faith family. Our vote has been of interest to the gay community; we have had more gay and lesbian visitors than in the past. People with close relatives who are gay and lesbian have expressed thankfulness for the discussion that has taken place, and there is a new sense of openness. Nonetheless, we do not feel that we have “arrived.” We know that we have more work to do. ▼ Diana Roger lives in Renton, Washington. She ser ves on the boards of directors of The Multifaith AIDS Projects and The Eastside Network, an organization for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered persons, their families and supporters. 18 Open Hands Six Handy Guidelines for Dialogue on “The Issue” Allen Fluent On May 15, 1994, our United Church of Christ congregation on Long Island, New York, unanimously adopted a statement that welcomed people into our full life and ministry regardless of sexual orientation. That “inclusive statement” was the product of a year-long study and discussion period in our church, during which we shared information, discussed, preached, prayed, heard testimony, argued, comforted and abused one another, and probably expressed both our faith and our fears more directly than we had at any other time in recent memory. For some of us, this heady tussle of ideas, emotions, faith claims and egos seemed invigorating and refreshingly churchlike, in a way reminiscent of the communities written to by the apostle Paul. It even came as a pleasant change of faire from the pious and practical tidbits ordinarily minced over on the plates of our official boards and committees. For others, however, the process of discerning our direction as a congregation in this way was disheartening, as long-term members felt their faith was being scrutinized, their attitudes were being questioned, their cherished beliefs denied. While some church members felt hurt by attitudes of fellow members that seemed rigid and uncaring, others complained that the moral standards upheld by scriptural teachings that had formed their life foundations were being abandoned, and expressed pain that these convictions were being interpreted as attitudes of prejudice and bigotry. When the pastors preached or led discussions on the subject, a chorus of voices protested, “We never get to hear the other side,” as though for every moral issue there should be two sides and a moderate position in the middle. Becoming a “welcoming congregation” was raised as a pastoral issue at our church. It was not an impersonal cause, or something we did because the denomination said we ought to (though our denomination had, in fact, taken a strong national position). From the very first conversations we had, it was clear that this was an issue people took personally, and to which we responded with passion. From the most enthusiastic supporters of the effort to the most ardent opponents, this was so; and though it often made our conversations intense and difficult, it was something that lent a sincerity to the process, and gave us great reason, upon reflection, to appreciate one another. How does a congregation of God’s people get through such a time? There are six principles that I have come to identify as crucial as we move through such a process. I do not claim that I have always been good at following all of them, but one of the joys of being a pastor is to know that there are many gifts among the members of a church. Thus, I have learned some of these from my fellow members along the way. The principles that helped us are: Don’t pretend to be neutral when you’re not. Sometimes people expect leaders and pastors to be neutral or “objective” on matters of social conscience, and even more people expect processes of decisionmaking in the church to treat all positions equally. I think that this is largely a myth. No minister in her/his right mind would want to be “neutral” about racism, sexism, or ethnocentrism; nor should such positions be given “equal time” in church discussion or debate. Our task as church leaders is to represent the Gospel of Jesus Christ as best we are able to discern it, to listen to faith-based disagreements, and to seek with our fellow members the truth that God inspires within us. Leading value-free discussion may have merit within some secular settings, but it is never appropriate in the church. Resolve the issue in a timely manner. It is important to allow for full consideration of such an issue. Most people agree with this. But it is also important to set benchmarks for accomplishment and bring the process to a definite and official conclusion. Churches are often reluctant to decide controversial issues, but there is nothing worse for the health of a church than to leave disagreements unresolved. Uncertainty about an important direction in the life of the community is painful to the community. So resolve it! Do not confuse the need to be understanding with the temptation to compromise. In a stable religious community, there are longtime members who will feel threatened by change. Their feelings deserve understanding, and their role as valuable and knowledgeable participants in the life of the church needs to be acknowledged by pastors and church leaders. It is tempting, however, to accommodate ourselves to the desire of such persons for things to move more slowly (or not at all). One of the hardest things a congregation has to do is to convince ourselves that in the eyes of Christ those who are most familiar to us and those who are least familiar to us have an equal claim upon our Christian love. We cannot decide to accommodate our long-term friends at the expense of others waiting for the love of God to be extended to them in this holy place. Keep the door open to a quiet change of heart. As anyone who watches political polls knows, people change their minds on a frequent basis. It is important to allow this to happen as often as needed, without forcing people into a commitment they will later regret. Remember that good people have lots of conflicting opinions in the course of their lives, so appreciate them for their inner selves and respect them enough to allow them to change their minds as often as they need to on their way to their own personal truth. Keep targeted on the human issues. Don’t allow debate around competing Bible verses, images of radical social protest, or imaginative reconstructions of bedtime behavior to obscure the genuine human and spiritual topic you are discussing - the openness of your congregation to accept the full range of spiritual gifts that can be brought by Christian people of various sexual orientations, for the life and ministry of Christ’s church in this place. Winter 1998 19 Base your position within your congregation’s own tradition and identity. Congregations always find positions more acceptable if they can be stated as an outgrowth of the self-understanding that the members already share. Church leadership should be skillful in interpreting any new direction in terms of the congregational tradition. If this is not done, the new direction will be perceived as a betrayal of the church’s common purpose. When becoming a welcoming church is understood as fulfilling our understanding of who we are, on the other hand, the process becomes a means for the church to grow in its integrity and understanding of its mission. When our congregation voted our “inclusive statement” in 1994, a few people left. I actually counted no more than eight, and all held a literalist interpretation of the Scriptures. They are people of integrity and I miss them, but I believe that their decision to join more conservative congregations was the right one for them and for the church. Some others pulled back for a time, feeling unsure about the direction our church was going. The vast majority celebrated the decision, and takes pleasure today in the growing diversity of our membership. Our membership numbers are relatively stable, though we seem to be growing a little younger and a little less affluent. Our budget has remained about the same, though we seem to be sending a higher percentage of our money to outreach and mission. It has taken some time for the issues we once argued about to begin fading as topics that divide us. In the meanwhile, we are enjoying the diverse gifts for ministry that have come to us as a result of that difficult time. ▼ The Rev. Allen M. Fluent, D.Min., is senior minister at Mt. Sinai Congregational United Church of Christ, Mt. Sinai, New York. How “Welcoming” Are Youth Groups? Trey Hall As more and more congregations welcome lesbian, gay, and bisexual members, young people who’ll be leading those churches in the future need appropriate nurturing. A survey for youth and youth leaders designed to assess youth programming and to gather needs and suggestions from youth groups in the Reconciling Congregation movement was sent to the 130 Reconciling Congregations at the end of May 1997. While only eight congregations in five states responded, the diversity of congregations that they represent makes it possible to note general attitudes and to offer tentative suggestions as welcoming congregations in all denominations develop outreach and support and curriculum for their youth groups and specifically for lesbian, gay, and bisexual youths. The survey was motivated by the general question “What can we say about the sensitivity level of youths in Reconciling Congregations to lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons (l/g/b) in society and church?” Through the survey’s series of questions, four characteristics of the youth were considered: •involvement in the leadership of the church; •perception of the church as a safe place to discuss sexuality issues; •awareness of the life experience of lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons; •desire for education about sexuality issues. The data responses from individual youth and youth leaders were solicited in an evaluative discussion format. For this reason, a traditional statistical analysis cannot be applied, and results will be conveyed less objectively. However, the general trends and attitudes of the youth who responded are represented accurately by the following observations: 1. The majority of the youth are very active in programs within the church, but very few are part of the Reconciling Committee (or other similar committees). 2. All youth are aware of the open stance of their church. They know what the term “Reconciling Congregation” signifies, and are confident that their church is a safe place for all people, regardless of sexual orientation. One youth responded, “It’s a church! Of course it’s a safe place!” Many, however, are not aware of the antigay policies and polity of their denomination, specifically, its statements concerning ordination, holy unions, and the alleged “incompatibility” of homosexuality with Christian teaching. 3. While they are aware of their congregation’s open stance and are socially aware of the presence of l/g/b persons in society and the life of the church, most youth do not believe that they personally know l/g/b persons in their congregations, and very few have had any contact with l/g/b youth. Several youth do not feel that their congregation has helped them to relate to l/g/b persons. While most are aware of l/g/b youth in their schools, only two youth groups responding report any self-professed l/g/b members of the youth group. 4. While most youth seem to be at healthy levels of acceptance of l/g/b youth, many are unsure about the issues faced by this group. They have little knowledge of the Bible’s commentary on sexual relationships. Youth and youth leaders overwhelmingly report a need for curriculum resources on human sexuality and the Bible, and a sensitivity/experiential study on l/g/b youth and youth issues. Overall the study found that all of the youth groups are cognizant of and content with their congregation’s statement of reconciliation. This observation from Fellowship UMC (Vallejo, California)—“Everyone is open-minded to the diversity of people; they’re very accepting”— typifies the results found in most youth groups of Reconciling Congregations. A few youth leaders reported a deliberate attempt to include the voice of l/g/b persons in their programming in the form of panels, video discussions, participation in a l/g/b youth conference, and a regular sexuality series in the United Methodist Youth schedule. One congregation even includes a 20 Open Hands section on sexuality in its confirmation class! However, it seems that most youth groups are in need of a transition from the theory and discussion of welcoming all people to a praxis of inclusion. Perhaps the youth groups serve as an indicator for welcoming congregations as a whole. A youth from Wesley UMC (Fresno, California) speaks simply and effectively: “We are very prepared; we only need to spread the word.” To cultivate an affirming environment, youth groups must not only inform themselves about the variety of human sexual experience and create a safe space for dialogue with and for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and straight youth, but also must seek to move beyond the traditional model of “if you build it, they will come” by emphasizing a proactive evangelism. Such intentional outreach may include these steps: •sharing the reconciling message with area youth groups that are not welcoming; •connecting with l/g/b youth groups from P-FLAG chapters and community centers; •advertising in l/g/b friendly publications and other media; •sponsoring youth speaker panels at regional church youth events; •working with the area school board and local high schools to establish support groups for l/g/b students and students with l/g/b family members; •participating with the welcoming committee in the local congregation and at regional church events. Becoming open to the idea of welcoming lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth to a church youth group is only the first step. Publicizing a youth group’s welcome, actively engaging l/g/b youth, and opening and continuing dialogue and education regarding the issues and persons involved are all needed as we reach out beyond our insular congregations with the message of reconciliation. ▼ Trey Hall is a first year M.Div. student at the Candler School of Theology at Emory University, Atlanta. He wrote this while serving as an intern for the Reconciling Congregation Program last year. WLHall@Emory.edu “Now I Know God Loves Me” Daphne Burt I met Jane1 in the fall of her sophomore year. She frightened me. Jane was a member of the rugby team; she drank a lot, and she was the kind of “in your face” lesbian that I didn’t always feel prepared to deal with. But I liked her openness and her honesty. I told her that I believed that God loves all people, including gay and lesbian people. She told me that when she had come out to the youth pastor of her church, he had told her that because of her orientation, she was going to hell. She had not been back to church since. My ministry at Mary Washington College is evangelical at its core. I get out of bed every morning because I passionately believe that young adults need to know that God loves them. Many of them don’t know who God is, or don’t believe that they are loveable. I minister to the entire student body, but I am particularly concerned about the gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered students who have been told that God doesn’t love them because of their orientation or identity. Jane was…the kind of “in your face” lesbian that I didn’t always feel prepared to deal with. I watched for Jane. I keep “office hours” at the fountain in the middle of campus, and Jane started stopping by to “check in.” Our conversations ranged from how she was doing in her classes to discussions about relationship ethics (Such as: Was it OK to flirt with men even though you’re a lesbian? What is the kindest way to end a long term relationship?). Jane could not come to our large group meetings, but there was no question in either of our minds that I was her pastor. I never stopped stressing God’s love for her, but she still couldn’t bring herself to believe it. I received notice of a conference being held in Michigan during spring break entitled: “The Gifts We Offer, the Burdens We Bear—The Vocation of Gay and Lesbian People in the Church and Society.” The next time I saw Jane at the fountain, I was straightforward: “Jane, there’s this conference in Michigan in March. I’m going. So are you.” Five of us drove in one car to Michigan. When we arrived at the conference, Jane and the others came in contact with something they had never seen before: Christian gays, lesbians, and bisexuals— all active in their churches. She met other college students. She learned from committed couples, male and female. She discovered that it was possible to be a person of faith without being ashamed of her sexuality. When we returned, I asked Jane to make a presentation to our board of directors. She told them: “Now I know that God loves me. I need to go back to church. I want to go back to church. Even if the church doesn’t think I’m OK, God thinks I’m OK. I need to worship and get back in touch with the God who loves me.” Deliberately inclusive campus ministry risks loss of funding, negative publicity, and accusations of “not really being Christian.” Students like Jane make it all worthwhile. ▼ Daphne Burt is an ordained pastor of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and serves the Campus Christian Community at Mary Washington College in Fredericksburg, Virginia. The CCC voted to be Reconciled in Christ in 1995. Note 1 Not her real name. Winter 1998 21 Keeping Secrets A Children’s Story Liz Lang It seems like there are different kinds of secrets. One kind is exciting, such as when you give a friend a present. You want them to open it right away and sometimes it’s hard not to tell them what it is even before they open the gift! Then there’s another kind of secret. It’s when we think there’s something wrong with us or we think other people think there’s something wrong with us. We keep secrets then because we’re afraid they won’t include us or like us anymore. Our church once had a minister with a secret. Do you know what the secret was? She was a woman who wanted to marry another woman, a lesbian. And she knew that a lot of church people think there’s something wrong with being a lesbian. In fact, a lot of church people think it’s so bad to be a lesbian that they wouldn’t even hire one as their minister. So Debra didn’t tell anyone at our church that she was gay, another word used to describe women who deeply love women and men who deeply love men. Meanwhile, some of the old-timers were worried that there weren’t enough people in our church. So they started praying for God to bring new people. And new people started coming. There were Skip and Kathy and Sheila and Liz and Louise and Carol and Dottie. There was something surprising about them. They all had the same secret that Deb had—they were gay and lesbian, too! One day, Debra decided she’d had enough of secret-keeping! It was time to tell the church that gay and lesbian people belong in the church; that God loves us all. She decided to tell the truth. This took lots of courage! Some people in the church were very angry. They said, “We don’t want her as our minister anymore.” So one day there was a great big meeting where people debated (which means they argued) about whether Debra should stay as the minister. One woman, an elder named Bernice, stood up and said the most amazing thing. “I have been praying for God to send us new people. If those people who come are gay and lesbian, well, God sent them and they belong here. We must welcome them.” People said lots of others things, and then they took a vote. There were more people who wanted her to stay than to leave. So she stayed. Some of the people decided to leave our church. It was a very sad time, but also, it was a very happy time. We were surprised about what happened next. We discovered that we wanted to tell the truth more and more. We discovered that people had lots of different kinds of secrets and that telling the truth about ourselves made us feel better. We found that without secrets to keep we could be more open to the love of God. So now we’re a church that celebrates the truth. ▼ Copyright © 1995 by Liz Lang. All rights reserved. Reprinted by permission. Liz Lang has been a Disciple of Christ since the ’60s. Liz and her partner, Louise Petrasek, began attending Findlay Street Christian Church in Seattle, Washington, a few months before the events of this story. Liz serves on the national coordinating council of the Gay, Lesbian, & Affirming Disciples Alliance. 22 Open Hands Sustaining the Spirit EVERYONE IS WELCOME HERE Copyright ©1997 by David Golden Permission granted for use in worship. Winter 1998 23 — EVERYONE IS WELCOME HERE — TO FIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH OF CORVALLIS, OREGON, IN CELEBRATION OF THEIR RECONCILING MINISTRY. David Golden is diaconal minister of music and youth at Christ United Methodist Church, 12755 NW Dogwood St., Portland, OR 97229. 503/646-1598 24 Open Hands Movement News Lutherans Endorse ENDA Reconciling in Christ congregations will have an easier time promoting civil and ecclesiastical rights for gays and lesbians since the 1997 Churchwide Assembly of the Evangelical Church in America, meeting in Philadelphia last August, endorsed the federal Employment Non Discrimination Act (ENDA) by an 80% vote. The bill, which would outlaw discrimination based on sexual orientation in private industry, will be reconsidered by the U.S. Congress this year after a narrow defeat in the Senate last year. The action resulted from the efforts of Lutherans Concerned/North America, whose program executive, Bob Gibeling, authored the “memorial” or motion originally passed by the Southeastern Synod ELCA (GA, AL, MS, and TN). Presbyterians Vote on “Fidelity and Integrity” Early voting results of more than half the presbyteries of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) indicate a decisive rejection of Amendment A, a proposed change intended to soften the antigay stance of The Book of Order that governs the denomination. As of February 25, 68 presbyteries have opposed the measure of the 105 which have voted. The amendment would moderate the restrictions of the previously passed “Amendment B” that requires that those ordained in the church as ministers, elders, and deacons “live in fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman or chastity in singleness.” Since the PC (U.S.A.) fails to recognize marriage between same-gender partners, this qualification effectively rules out ordination of noncelibate lesbian and gay members. The new measure instead calls for “fidelity and integrity in marriage or singleness, and in all relationships of life.” More Light congregations which ordain openly gay or lesbian local church officers are more likely to face disciplinary actions unless the new wording is approved. (Jerry Van Marter, Julian Shipp, and Dick Lundy contributed to this article.) ONA Plants “Burning Bush” Fifty people planted a “burning bush” at the Massachusetts Conference Center of the United Church of Christ in Framingham last Oct. 8 to honor the national Open and Affirming (ONA) movement of the UCC. A gift of the Plymouth (New Hampshire) Congregational Church, the bush, which turns fiery red in autumn, is intended to serve as “a gesture of friendship to visually, physically, and spiritually connect and strengthen the network of ONA churches.” The Plymouth congregation has previously presented bushes to its “sister” ONA churches in New Hampshire. Massachusetts was chosen as the site for the “national bush” because of that Conference’s significant contributions to the ONA movement. (Ann Day) Upcoming Gatherings March 20-22 Brethren/Mennonite Parents of L/G/B Children, Laurelville (PA) Mennonite Church Center: “Building Bridges Across A Chasm of Silence,” ninth annual Connecting Families Weekend Retreat. Leaders: Revs. Debbie Eisenbise and Lee Krähenbühl, pastors of Skyridge Church of the Brethren in Kalamazoo, MI. Contact: B/M Parents of L/G/B Children, P.O. Box 1708, Lima, OH 45802; 612/722-6906; BMCouncil@aol.com May 2-4 Regional (IN/MI/OH) Reconciling Congregation Program gathering at De Sales Retreat Center in Brooklyn, MI. Contact: Shawn Wietstock, 219/288-7907, or Mary Ann Carlson, 216/691-0219. May 22-24 More Light Churches Network’s 1998 Conference at McKinley Church, Champaign-Urbana, IL: “1978-1998: Honor the Past; Transform the Future.” Keynote: ethicist Dr. Beverly Wildung Harrison of New York’s Union Theological Seminary. Contact: Richard Sprott, 510/268-8603, rasprott@ix.netcom.com June 25-28 United Church of Christ Coalition for L/G/B/T Concerns meets at the University of Illinois, Chicago. “Daring Intersections/ Listening at the Edges: Expressions of Sexual Identity, Race, Class, Gender, and Ableness” will include art forms, scripture, and personal storytelling.Contact: John Lardin 313/753-4808 or e-mail jwlardin@aol.com July 16-19 First combined Lutherans Concerned/North America and Integrity international assembly, Chicago, IL. “That We May Be One” Keynote: Rev. Dr. Carter Heyward, Episcopal priest, theologian, author, activist, professor of Anglican and feminist theology at Episcopal Divinity School, Cambridge, MA. Contact Bob Gibeling in Atlanta, 404/266-9615. July 16-19 Gay, Lesbian, and Affirming Disciples Alliance retreat at Benedict Inn, a retreat center in Beech Grove outside Indianapolis, IN. Open to all, especially members of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ). Leader: Rev. Melanie Morrison, author, ordained UCC minister, retreat leader. Contact: GLAD Alliance at P.O.Box 19223, Indianapolis, IN 46219-0223. July 24-26 Regional (AR/MO/KS/NE) Reconciling Congregation Program gathering at Trinity UMC in Kansas City, MO: “Changing Attitudes, Changing Ways, Changing Church.” Speakers: Bishop Fritz Mutti, Dr. Tex Sample, Dr. Emilie Townes, Gene Lowry. Contact: Gerry Heckel, 816/444-8512. July 24-26 Supportive Congregations Network of the Brethren/Mennonite Church meet in Wichita, KS: “Dancing in the Southwind: Weaving an Inclusive Spirit.” Contact: SCN, P.O. Box 6300, Minneapolis, MN 55406; 612/722-6906; SCNetwork@aol.com Winter 1998 25 Cherokee Park United Church St. Paul, Minnesota Cherokee Park United Church was formed in 1968 by the merger of UCC and Presbyterian congregations. Located in St. Paul’s Westside (west of the Mississippi River), the congregation is in the midst of a culturally and economically diverse neighborhood and opens its building to a number of groups, including two Spanish-speaking congregations. It sponsors an after-school tutoring program, a community youth choir, and has a float in the annual Cinco de Mayo parade. Becoming a More Light Church is viewed as a continuation of its commitment to justice. New Covenant Community Normal, Illinois The New Covenant Community is oriented toward the campus of Illinois State University in Normal. Affiliated with the Disciples of Christ, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), and the United Church of Christ, the congregation is a welcoming community for people who have fallen away from active church participation. Newly-installed Copastors Bob and Susan Ryder have been longtime supporters of justice issues, including justice for l/g/b/t persons, and are thrilled to be at a welcoming congregation. The Congregational Church Exeter, New Hampshire Gathered in 1683, this 500-member “pillar church” stands in the center of a historic New England town. The church has received many new members in the wake of its ONA vote. There is a greater willingness for members to examine serious issues and to listen to one another’s feelings. The Christian Growth and Mission and Action committees have cosponsored special events and continue to incorporate the ONA vision into their work. First Church of Christ Northampton, Massachusetts Both UCC and American Baptist, the 300 members of this congregation gather in the heart of Northampton for worship and strong community-based ministry. “A radical celebration of diversity” in age, sexual orientation, race, and socio-economic status, the church is also in the final stage of a million-dollar building campaign which will restore the exterior and add a handicap access ramp and elevator. Some 35 groups currently use the church’s space, including several gay/lesbian groups. The congregation also engages in a ministry of membership to help new lesbian and gay members feel truly at home in its fellowship. Plymouth Congregational Church, UCC Madison, Wisconsin With an increasing number of younger members over the past ten years, this 230-member urban congregation has developed strong Christian education and health ministry programs. It has a halftime parish nurse and offers a course on parenting teens. Other mission outreach includes work with a homeless shelter and a free meal program two days a month. The church is an active participant in area ecumenical gatherings of “welcoming movement” congregations and regularly participates in the Madison Gay/Lesbian Pride March. RECONCILING CONGREGATIONS The logo is absent here and on our masthead because of objections from the United Methodist Church to our incorporation of its logo. Berry Memorial United Methodist Church Chicago, Illinois This small urban congregation on the northwest side of Chicago sees itself as a large family in which all folks are invited and encouraged to be active in its ministries. The congregation has a strong emphasis on ministries with children and houses community day care and after-school programs. The congregation also houses a community food pantry, several recovery groups and scouting programs. It has responded positively to recent challenges to become truly welcoming—not only by becoming a Reconciling Congregation, but by receiving a Hispanic pastor in a cross-cultural appointment and by providing a home for a new African congregation, Gye Nyame. Christ United Methodist Church Santa Rosa, California Christ UMC was founded 35 years ago as an alternative to traditional worshiping communities. Its worship space is an octagonal room with flexible seating. This 200-member congregation shares its worship space with a Reform Jewish congregation. The members have a long history of social justice involvement. Last year a mission team went to Nicaragua. Christ UMC has an active youth program, a strong music ministry and a deaf ministry. A garden on the church grounds raises food for hunger programs. The church houses a nursery school and several 12-Step programs. The vote to become a Reconciling Congregation was 80 in favor, one abstention, and no negative votes. Delavan United Methodist Church Delavan, Wisconsin Delavan is located in southern Wisconsin in the midst of a growing resort area around Lake Geneva. The congregation is an oasis of openness and diversity in a more conservative community. Its 300 members are politically and theologically diverse joined by respect and tolerance. The church building is a Welcoming Communities More Churches Declare Welcoming Stance MORE LIGHT OPEN AND AFFIRMING 26 Open Hands RECONCILING IN CHRIST Selected Resources community center with one room dedicated for use by a variety of community groups. The congregation also sponsors a parish nurse and houses a Hispanic ministry. The Reconciling Congregation discussion and unanimous decision grew out of concern for a number of parents and family members of gay and lesbian persons in the congregation. St. John’s United Methodist Church Miami Beach, Florida Over the past decade St. John’s UMC has been transformed from an older traditional church to a community of faith which reflects the diversity of the residents of Miami Beach. The congregation’s focus is on being the disciples of Jesus Christ in the world. Members are involved in ministries with children and with women who are victims of abuse. The decision to become a Reconciling Congregation was a part of the congregation’s outreach and growth over the past several years. Please note that “Reconciled in Christ” congregations are now referred to as “Reconciling in Christ” by vote of the executive committee of Lutherans Concerned/North America. Lake Edge Lutheran Church Madison, Wisconsin Lake Edge Lutheran Church is situated on the east side of beautiful Madison. Comprising about 400 households, the congregation has committed itself to the vision of “daring to embody the Gospel.” This vision has resulted in identifying ten congregational goals, the first of which is “Becoming an Inclusive Community.” Thus the congregation dares to create an atmosphere of openness, declaring its intent to seek, welcome, and include all who wish to share its vision and mission. Lake Edge has a history of open dialogue concerning issues of human sexuality. Mt. Tabor Lutheran Church Salt Lake City, Utah Mt. Tabor Lutheran Church was established in 1907 as a mission to Danish immigrants. This congregation of 250 members now seeks to reach out with the gospel to all people in its downtown/university community. Mt. Tabor has been actively involved in Lutheran campus ministry at the University of Utah as well as in the city’s Interfaith Hospitality Network, St. Vincent de Paul soup kitchen, and the Utah Food Bank. The church affirms ELCA’s position of welcoming all persons who seek the grace of Jesus Christ. St. James Lutheran Church Kansas City, Missouri St. James Lutheran Church is an urban Kansas City congregation with approximately 950 members and a strong emphasis on social ministry, which includes work with Habitat for Humanity and a food pantry in the building. The parish diversity includes people of color and of diverse economic backgrounds. The Reconciling in Christ Affirmation of Welcome is one way the church reaches out to encourage diversity in the congregation. St. James is also the host church to the local Lutherans Concerned chapter, and gay and lesbian people have become incorporated into the church’s ministry. OPEN AND AFFIRMING Order from: ONA Resources, P.O. Box 403, Holden, MA 01520- 0403. Checks payable to UCCL/GC. Price includes postage. OK! We’re ONA. Now What? An ONA Idea Book. Ideas from congregations across the country about living out an ONA commitment. $8.00 Blessing Ceremonies: Resources for Same-Gender Services of Commitment. Materials include theological background, sample services, liturgical resources, and personal accounts of those who have been part of such services. $12.50 MORE LIGHT CHURCHES NETWORK Order from: Ralph Carter, More Light Resources, 111 Milburn Street, Rochester NY 14607-2918; 716-271-7649; ralph.carter@ pcusa.org. Checks payable to MLCN. Price includes postage. More Light Resource Packet. Includes More Light brochure, “How to” ideas for developing More Light ministry in the congregation, sample More Light statements, and much more. $18.00. Brochure available separately for free. Keeping the Flame Alive, 20 suggestions for welcoming congregations. Free; copy or internet. RECONCILING CONGREGATION PROGRAM Order from: RCP, 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641. 773/726-5526. Claiming the Promise: An Ecumenical Welcoming Bible Study Resource on Homosexuality. Mary Jo Osterman. Chicago: Reconciling Congregations Program, 1997. Study book and leader’s guide. Copies are $5.95. Leader’s guide is $9.95. Plus shipping. Still on the Journey: A Handbook for Reconciling Congregations in Ministry with Lesbians, Bisexuals, and Gay Men. 54pp. $15. RECONCILING IN CHRIST PROGRAM Prices include shipping. Reconciling in Christ Information Packet. Background information and advice, brochures, relevant material and resource list. Free. Order from: Bob Gibeling, 2466 Sharondale Dr., Atlanta, GA 30305; 404/266-9615. This Is My Story. Video by Lutherans Concerned featuring personal stories of g/l Christians. Two versions, one for an individual and the other for a congregation. 22 minutes. $15. Specify which version and order from: Lutherans Concerned InfoX, 409 Roland Hills Dr. Mogadore, OH 44260; or by e-mail: InfoX@lcna.org Inclusive Faith. Video for congregations considering the Reconciling in Christ program. $15. Order from: (see directly above). Winter 1998 27 OUR WELCOMING MOVEMENT GROWS Since 1978, 811 local churches, 42 campus ministries, 29 judicatories, and four national ministries have publicly declared themselves welcoming of all people, including lesbian women and gay men. These 886 welcoming communities are found in ten denominations in 46 states and the District of Columbia of the United States and in 5 provinces of Canada. The complete list (as of January 15, 1998) follows. The affiliation of each is designated by the following codes: CONGREGATIONS UNITED STATES ALABAMA Huntsville UU Church (WEL) ALASKA Anchorage UU Fellowship (WEL) Palmer Church of the Covenant (W&A) Sitka UMC of Sitka (RC) ARIZONA Mesa Celebration of Life Presbyterian (ML) Phoenix Asbury UMC (RC) Augustana Lutheran (RIC) Faith Lutheran (RIC) Tucson Church of the Painted Hills (ONA) First Christian (O&A) Rincon Congregational UCC (ONA) St. Francis in the Foothills UMC (RC) ARKANSAS Little Rock Pulaski Heights Christian (O&A) CALIFORNIA Alameda First Christian (O&A) First Congregational (ONA) Albany Albany UMC (RC) Altadena Altadena Congregational (ONA) Christ the Shepherd Lutheran (RIC) Baldwin Park First Presbyterian (ML) Belmont Congregational Church UCC (ONA) Benicia Community Congregational (ONA) Berkeley Berkeley/Richmond Intercity Min. (O&A) Epworth UMC (RC) First Baptist (W&A) First Congregational (ONA) New Fellowship UCC (ONA) St. John’s Presbyterian (ML) Shepherd of the Hills Lutheran (RIC) Trinity UMC (RC) University Lutheran Chapel (RIC) University Church (O&A) Campbell First UMC (RC) Carlsbad Pilgrim Congregational UCC (ONA) Carmel UU of Monterey Peninsula (WEL) Chatsworth West Valley UMC (RC) Claremont Claremont UMC (RC) Claremont UCC, Congregational (ONA) Concord First Christian (O&A) Danville Peace Lutheran (RIC) El Cerrito Christ Lutheran (RIC) El Cerrito UMC (RC) Mira Vista UCC (ONA) Northminster Presbyterian (ML) Eureka First Congregational (ONA) Fair Oaks Fair Oaks UMC (RC) Fairfax Fairfax Community (ONA) Fremont Fremont Congregational (ONA) Niles Congregational UCC (ONA) Fresno First Congregational (ONA) Wesley UMC (RC) Gardena First UMC (RC) Guerneville Community Church, UCC (ONA) Hayward Eden UCC (ONA) United Church (ONA) Westminster Hills Presbyterian (ML) Hollywood Hollywood UMC (RC) Irvine Irvine UCC (ONA) Lafayette Lafayette Christian (O&A) Larkspur Redwoods Presbyterian (ML) La Verne Church of the Brethren (SCN) Long Beach First Congregational UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Los Alamitos Community Congregational UCC (ONA) Los Angeles Bethel Lutheran (RIC) Mt. Hollywood Congregational UCC (ONA) United University (ML, RC) Westwood Hills Congregational (ONA) Wilshire UMC (RC) Los Gatos First UMC (RC) Malibu Malibu UMC (RC) Marin City St. Andrews Presbyterian (ML) Milpitas Sunnyhills UMC (RC) Modesto College Avenue Congregational (ONA) Napa Emmanuel Lutheran (RIC) Newark Holy Redeemer Lutheran (RIC) North Hollywood St. Matthew’s Lutheran (RIC) Toluca Lake UMC (RC) Oakland Beacon Presbyterian Fellowship (ML) Faith American Lutheran (RIC) First Lutheran (RIC) Lake Merritt UMC (RC) Lakeshore Avenue Baptist (W&A) Lutheran Peace Fellowship (RIC) Montclair Presbyterian (ML) Plymouth UCC (ONA) St. Paul Lutheran (RIC) Palo Alto Covenant Presbyterian (ML) First Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) First Presbyterian (ML) St. Andrew’s UMC (RC) University Lutheran (RIC) Pasadena First Congregational UCC (ONA) Richmond Grace Lutheran (RIC) Riverside First Congregational (ONA) Sacramento Lutheran Church of Our Redeemer (RIC) Unitarian Universalist Society (WEL) San Bernardino First Congregational Church, UCC (ONA) San Diego First Lutheran (RIC) First Unitarian (WEL) Pacific Beach UMC (RC) San Francisco Bethany UMC (RC) Calvary UMC (RC) Christ Church Lutheran (RIC) Church of the Advent (OAS) Church of St. John the Evangelist (OAS) City of Refuge (ONA) Dolores Street Baptist (W&A) First Congregational UCC (ONA) First Mennonite Church (SCN) First St. John’s UMC (RC) First Unitarian Society (WEL) First United Lutheran (RIC) Glide Memorial UMC (RC) Hamilton UMC (RC) Noe Valley Ministry (ML) Pine UMC (RC) Seventh Avenue Presbyterian (ML) St. Aidan’s Church (OAS) St. Francis Lutheran (RIC) St. John the Evangelist Episcopal (OAS) St. John’s UCC (ONA) St. Mark’s Lutheran (RIC) St. Paulus Lutheran (RIC) Temple UMC (RC) Trinity Church (OAS) Trinity UMC (RC) San Jose Christ the Good Shepherd Lutheran (RIC) First Christian Church (O&A) New Community of Faith (ONA, W&A) St. Paul’s UMC (RC) San Leandro San Leandro Community (W&A) San Mateo College Heights UCC (ONA) San Rafael Christ in Terra Linda Presb. (ML) Faith Lutheran (RIC) First Congregational UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) TOTAL AC Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada) ...... 9 ML More Light Churches Network (Presbyterian) .................................. 91 OAS Oasis (Episcopal) ................................................................................48 ONA Open and Affirming (United Church of Christ) ............................. 238 O&A Open & Affirming (Disciples) ............................................................ 34 RIC Reconciling in Christ (Lutheran) ..................................................... 154 RC Reconciling Congregation Program (United Methodist) ................. 161 SCN Supportive (Brethren/Mennonite) ..................................................... 19 W&A Welcoming & Affirming (American Baptist) ..................................... 28 WEL Welcoming (Unitarian Universalist) ................................................ 107 28 Open Hands Santa Barbara La Mesa Community (ONA) Santa Cruz First Congregational UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Grace UMC (RC) Santa Monica The Church in Ocean Park (RC) Santa Rosa Christ UMC (RC) First Congregational UCC (ONA) UU Fellowship of Sonoma Co. (WEL) Saratoga Grace UMC (RC) Sausalito First Presbyterian (ML) Stockton First Christian (O&A) St. Mark’s UMC (RC) Sunnyvale Congregational Community (ONA) Raynor Park Christian (O&A) St. John’s Lutheran (RIC) Tiburon Community Congregational (ONA) Shepherd of the Hills Lutheran (RIC) Westminster Presbyterian (ML) Vacaville St. Paul’s UMC (RC) Vallejo Fellowship UMC (RC) First Christian (O&A) Walnut Creek Mt. Diablo UU (WEL) Walnut Creek UMC (RC) West Hollywood Crescent Heights UMC (RC) West Hollywood Presbyterian (ML) Yucaipa Faith Lutheran (RIC) COLORADO Arvada Arvada Mennonite (SCN) Aurora Parkview Congregational UCC (ONA) Boulder Boulder Mennonite (SCN) Community UCC (ONA) First Congregational (ONA) First UMC (RC) Colorado Springs All Souls Unitarian (WEL) Denver Capitol Heights Presbyterian (ML) Fireside Christian (O&A) First Universalist (WEL) Our Savior’s Lutheran (RIC) Park Hill Congregational UCC (ONA) Sixth Avenue United (ONA) Spirit of Joy Fellowship (SCN) St. Paul’s UMC (RC) Washington Park UCC (ONA) Evergreen Wild Rose UCC (ONA) Fort Collins St. Thomas Lutheran Chapel (RIC) Greeley Family of Christ United (ML) Pueblo Christ Congregational, UCC (ONA) Telluride Christ Presbyterian (ML) CONNECTICUT Coventry Second Congregational (ONA) Ellington First Lutheran (RIC) Fairfield First Church Cong. (ONA) Glastonbury First Church of Christ Cong. (ONA) Guilford First Congregational UCC (ONA) Hamden Spring Glen Church, UCC (ONA) U Society of New Haven (WEL) Hartford Central Baptist (W&A) First Church of Christ, UCC (ONA) Madison Shoreline UU Society (WEL) Mansfield Center First Church of Christ Cong. (ONA) Middletown First Church of Christ Cong. (ONA) New Haven Church of Christ in Yale Univ. (ONA) First & Summerfield UMC (RC) United Church on the Green (ONA) Noank Noank Baptist (W&A) South Glastonbury Congregational Church (ONA) Stamford St. John Lutheran (RIC) Storrs Storrs Congregational (ONA) Waterbury South Congregational (ONA) Westport Unitarian Church (WEL) Windsor First Church UCC (ONA) DELAWARE Newark New Ark UCC (ONA) Wilmington West Presbyterian (ML) DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Washington, D.C. All Souls Unitarian (WEL) Augustana Lutheran (RIC) Christ Lutheran (RIC) Christ UMC (RC) Community of Christ Lutheran (RIC) Dumbarton UMC (RC) First Congregational (ONA) First Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Foundry UMC (RC) Georgetown Lutheran (RIC) Grace Lutheran (RIC) Lutheran Church of the Reformation (RIC) Riverside Baptist (W&A) Sojourner Truth Cong. UU (WEL) St. Paul’s Lutheran (RIC) Westminster Presbyterian (ML) FLORIDA Clearwater UU Church of Clearwater (WEL) Gainesville United Church (ONA) Unitarian Universalist Fellowship (WEL) Key West Holy Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Lake Mary Grace UMC (RC) Miami Beach Miami Beach Community (ONA) Riviera Presbyterian (ML) St. John’s UMC (RC) North Palm Beach First Unitarian (WEL) Orlando First Unitarian (WEL) Pinellas Park Good Samaritan Presbyterian (ML, ONA) Tallahassee United Church (ONA) Tampa First United Church (ONA) John Calvin Presbyterian (ML) Unitarian Universalist (WEL) GEORGIA Athens Unitarian Universalist Fellowship (WEL) Atlanta Clifton Presbyterian (ML) Grant Park-Aldersgate UMC (RC) Ormewood Park Presbyterian (ML) Trinity UMC (RC) Marietta Pilgrimage UCC (ONA) HAWAI‘I Honolulu Calvary By the Sea Lutheran (RIC) Church of the Crossroads (ONA) Honolulu Lutheran (RIC) ILLINOIS Carbondale Church of the Good Shepherd (ONA) Champaign Community UCC (ONA) McKinley Memorial Presbyterian (ML) St. Andrew’s Lutheran (RIC) Chicago Albany Park UMC (RC) Augustana Lutheran (RIC) Berry Memorial UMC (RC) Broadway UMC (RC) Christ the King Lutheran (RIC) Christ the Mediator Lutheran (RIC) Ebenezer Lutheran (RIC) Epworth UMC (RC) Gladstone Park Lutheran (RIC) Grace Baptist (W&A) Grace UMC (RC) Holy Covenant UMC (RC) Holy Trinity Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) Immanuel Lutheran (RIC) Irving Park Christian (O&A) Irving Park UMC (RC) Lake View Lutheran (RIC) Lincoln Park Presbyterian (ML) Mayfair UMC (RC) Nazareth UCC (ONA) Norwood Park UMC (RC) Park View Lutheran (RIC) Peoples Church (ONA) Resurrection Lutheran (RIC) St. Luke’s Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) St. Mark Lutheran (RIC) St. Paul’s UCC (ONA) Trinity Lutheran (RIC) United Church of Rogers Park (RC) University Church (ONA, O&A) Wellington Avenue UCC (ONA) Elmhurst Maywood House Church (RIC) Evanston Lake Street Church of Evanston (W&A) Hemenway UMC (RC) Wheadon UMC (RC) Hazel Crest Hazel Crest Community UMC (RC) Naperville First Congregational Church (ONA) Normal New Covenant Community (ML, ONA, O&A) Oak Park Euclid Avenue UMC (RC) First United Church (ML, ONA) Good Shepherd Lutheran (RIC) Oak Park Mennonite (SCN) Park Forest UU Community (WEL) Rockford Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Streamwood Immanuel UCC (ONA) Waukegan First Congregational UCC (ONA) Wilmette First Congregational UCC (ONA) Winfield Winfield Community UMC (RC) INDIANA Bloomington St. Thomas Lutheran (RIC) Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Goshen Circle of Hope Mennonite Fellowship (SCN) Indianapolis First Congregational UCC (ONA) Northeast UCC (ONA) North Manchester Manchester Church of the Brethren (SCN) South Bend Central UMC (RC) First Unitarian (WEL) Southside Christian (O&A) West Lafayette Shalom UCC (ONA) IOWA Ames Ames Mennonite (SCN) Lord of Life Lutheran (RIC) University Lutheran (RIC) Cedar Rapids Faith UMC (RC) Peoples Church UU (WEL) Clinton Clinton-Camanche, Iowa MFSA (RC) Davenport Davenport Unitarian (WEL) Des Moines Cottage Grove Avenue Presbyterian (ML) Winter 1998 29 First Unitarian (WEL) Plymouth Congregational UCC (ONA) Trinity UMC (RC) Urbandale UCC (ONA) Iowa City Faith UCC (ONA) KANSAS Kansas City FaithWorks Community (ML, ONA, O&A, RC) Rainbow Mennonite (SCN) Olathe St. Andrews Christian (O&A) Topeka Central Congregational UCC (ONA) KENTUCKY Henderson Zion UCC (ONA) Louisville Central Presbyterian (ML) First Unitarian (WEL) Third Lutheran (RIC) Trinity Lutheran (RIC) LOUISIANA New Orleans St. Mark’s UMC (RC) MAINE Bath UCC, Congregational (ONA) Ellsworth Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Mt. Desert Somesville Union Meeting House (ONA) Rockland The First Universalist (WEL) Waterville Universalist Unitarian (WEL) MARYLAND Adelphi Paint Branch UU (WEL) Baltimore Brown Memorial Park Ave. Pres. (ML) Dundalk Church of the Brethren (SCN) First & Franklin Presbyterian (ML) St. John’s UMC (RC) St. Mark’s Lutheran (RIC) Bethesda Cedar Lane Unitarian (WEL) River Road Unitarian (WEL) Columbia Christ UMC (RC) Columbia United Christian (O&A) St. John UM-Presbyterian (ML, RC) UU Congregation (WEL) Gaithersburg Christ the Servant Lutheran (RIC) Lanham Good Samaritan Lutheran (RIC) Rockville Rockville Presbyterian (ML) Silver Spring Christ Congregational UCC (ONA) Silver Spring Presbyterian (ML) Takoma Park Takoma Park Presbyterian (ML) MASSACHUSETTS Amherst First Congregational UCC (ONA) South Congregational (ONA) Andover Ballardvale United (ONA, RC) Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Auburn Pakachoag (ONA) Boston Arlington Street (WEL) Church of the Covenant (ML, ONA) Mennonite Congregation (SCN) Old South Church (ONA) Braintree All Souls Church (WEL) Brewster First Parish (WEL) Cambridge First Church, Congregational (ONA) Old Cambridge Baptist (W&A) University Lutheran (RIC) Danvers Holy Trinity UMC (RC) Framingham Grace UCC (ONA) Park Street Baptist (W&A) Greenfield First Congregational UCC (ONA) Hingham First Parish Old Ship (WEL) Hingham Congregational (ONA) Holliston First Congregational (ONA) Jamaica Plain Central Congregational (ONA) Middleboro First Unitarian Society (WEL) Needham First Parish UU (WEL) Newburyport Belleville Congregational UCC (ONA) First Parish Society (WEL) Newton Highlands Congregational (ONA) Northampton First Church of Christ (ONA) Unitarian Society (WEL) Osterville United Methodist (RC) Provincetown Universalist Meeting House (WEL) Reading Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Roxbury Church of the United Community (O&A, ONA) Salem Crombie Street UCC (ONA) Shrewsbury Mt. Olivet Lutheran (RIC) Somerville Clarenden Hill Presbyterian (ML) Stowe First Parish Ch. of Stowe & Acton (WEL) Sudbury The First Parish (WEL) Memorial Congregational UCC (ONA) Waltham First Presbyterian (ML) Wayland First Parish of Wayland (WEL) Wellesley Wellesley Congregational (ONA) Wendell Wendell Congregational (ONA) West Newton First Unitarian Society (WEL) Second Church in Newton UCC (ONA) West Somerville College Avenue UMC (RC) Williamstown First Congregational UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Worcester United Congregational (ONA) MICHIGAN Ann Arbor Church of the Good Shepherd (ONA) First UU (WEL) Lord of Light Lutheran (RIC) Memorial Christian (O&A) Northside Presbyterian (ML) Bloomfield Hills Birmingham Unitarian (WEL) Detroit Truth Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) Douglas Douglas Congregational UCC (ONA) East Lansing Ecclesia (O&A) UU of Greater Lansing (WEL) Ferndale Zion Lutheran (RIC) Kalamazoo Phoenix Community UCC (ONA) Skyridge Church of the Brethren (SCN) Lansing Lansing Church of the Brethren (SCN) Southfield Calvary Lutheran (RIC) Williamston Williamston UMC (RC) Ypsilanti First Congregational UCC (ONA) MINNESOTA Becker Becker UMC (RC) Burnsville Presbyterian Church of the Apostles (ML) Edina Edina Community Lutheran (RIC) Good Samaritan UMC (RC) Mahtomedi White Bear UU (WEL) Mankato First Congregational UCC (ONA) Maple Grove Pilgrims United (ONA) Minneapolis First Congregational (ONA) First Unitarian Society (WEL) First Universalist (WEL) Grace University Lutheran (RIC) Hennepin Avenue UMC (RC) Hobart UMC (RC) Holy Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Judson Memorial Baptist (W&A) Lyndale UCC (ONA) Lynnhurst Congregational (ONA) Mayflower Community Cong. UCC (ONA) Minnehaha UCC (ONA) Our Savior’s Lutheran (RIC) Parkway UCC (ONA) Prospect Park UMC (RC) Spirit of the Lakes (ONA) St. Andrew’s Lutheran (RIC) Temple Baptist (W&A) University Baptist (W&A) Walker Community (RC) Wesley UMC (RC) New Brighton United Church of Christ (ONA) Northfield First UCC (ONA) Robbinsdale Robbinsdale UCC (ONA) St. Cloud St. Cloud UU Fellwoship (WEL) Univ. Lutheran of the Epiphany (RIC) St. Paul Cherokee Park United (ML, ONA) Dayton Avenue Presbyterian (ML) Macalester-Plymouth United (ML, ONA) St. Paul Mennonite Fellowship (SCN) St. Paul-Reformation Lutheran (RIC) Wayzatta St. Luke Presbyterian (ML) MISSOURI Kansas City Abiding Peace Lutheran (RIC) All Souls Unitarian (WEL) Fountain of Hope Lutheran (RIC) Kairos UMC (RC) St. James Lutheran (RIC) St. Mark’s Lutheran (RIC) Trinity UMC (RC) Van Brunt Blvd. Presbyterian (ML) St. Louis Centenary UMC (RC) Epiphany (ONA) Gibson Heights United (ML) St. Marcus Evangelical UCC (ONA) Tyler Place Presbyterian (ML) University City Bethel Lutheran (RIC) MONTANA Missoula University Congregational UCC (ONA) NEBRASKA Lincoln Unitarian Church (WEL) Omaha First Lutheran (RIC) NEW HAMPSHIRE Concord South Congregational, UCC (ONA) Exeter Congregational (ONA) Hanover Our Savior Lutheran (RIC) Jaffrey United Church (ONA) Milford Unitarian Universalist Congregation (WEL) Plymouth Plymouth Congregational (ONA) Sanbornton Sanbornton Congregational UCC (ONA) NEW JERSEY Bloomfield Christ Episcopal (OAS) 30 Open Hands Boonton St. John’s Episcopal (OAS) Chatham St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Cherry Hill UU Church (WEL) Chester Church of the Messiah Episcopal (OAS) Clifton St. Peter’s Episcopal (OAS) Denville Church of Our Saviour Episcopal (OAS) East Brunswick East Brunswick Congregational, UCC (ONA) Englewood St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Exeter Congregational Church (ONA) Fort Lee Church of the Good Shepherd (OAS) Hackensack Christ Episcopal (OAS) Harrington Park St. Andrew’s Episcopal (OAS) Hasbrouck Heights Church of St. John the Divine (OAS) Hawthorne St. Clement’s Episcopal (OAS) Hoboken All Saints Parish (OAS) Jersey City Grace Van Vorst Episcopal (OAS) St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Leonia All Saints Episcopal (OAS) Madison Grace Episcopal (OAS) Maplewood St. George’s Episcopal (OAS) Mendham St. Mark’s Episcopal (OAS) Millburn St. Stephen’s Episcopal (OAS) Montclair St. John’s Episcopal (OAS) St. Luke’s Episcopal (OAS) Unitarian (WEL) Montvale St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Morristown Church of the Redeemer (OAS) St. Peter’s Episcopal (OAS) Unitarian Fellowship (WEL) Mt. Arlington St. Peter’s Episcopal (OAS) New Brunswick Emanuel Lutheran (RIC) Newark Cathedral of Trinity and St. Philip (OAS) Grace Episcopal (OAS) Norwood Church of the Holy Communion (OAS) Oakland St. Alban’s Episcopal (OAS) Parsippany St. Gregory’s Episcopal (OAS) Passaic St. John’s Episcopal (OAS) Paterson St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Plainfield First Unitarian Society (WEL) Pompton Lakes Christ Church (OAS) Princeton Christ Congregation (ONA, W&A) Ridgewood Christ Episcopal (OAS) South Orange First Presbyterian & Trinity (ML) Sparta St. Mary’s Episcopal (OAS) Summit Calvary Episcopal (OAS) Teaneck St. Mark’s Episcopal (OAS) Tenafly Church of the Atonement (OAS) Towaco Church of the Transfiguration (OAS) Titusville UU of Washington Crossing (WEL) Upper Montclair St. James’ Episcopal (OAS) Verona Holy Spirit Episcopal (OAS) Wantage Good Shepherd Episcopal (OAS) NEW MEXICO Albuquerque First Unitarian (WEL) Santa Fe Christ Lutheran (RIC) Unitarian Church (WEL) United Church (ONA) NEW YORK Albany Emmanuel Baptist (W&A) First Presbyterian (ML) Binghamton Chenango Street UMC (RC) UU Congregation (WEL) Blooming Grove Blooming Grove UCC (ONA) Brookhaven Old South Haven Presbyterian (ML) Brooklyn Church of Gethsemane (ML) First Unitarian Cong. Society (WEL) King’s Highway UMC (RC) Lafayette Avenue Presbyterian (ML) Park Slope UMC (RC) St. John-St. Matthew-Emmanuel Lutheran (RIC) Buffalo Amherst Community (ONA, O&A) Westminster Presbyterian (ML) Churchville Union Congregational (ONA) Copake Craryville UMC (RC) Dobbs Ferry South Presbyterian (ML) Fairport Mountain Rise UCC (ONA) Gloversville First Congregational UCC (ONA) Grand Island Riverside Salem (ONA) Henrietta John Calvin Presbyterian (ML) Huntington UU Fellowship (WEL) Ithaca First Baptist Church (W&A) Kingston Trinity UMC (RC) Marcellus First Presbyterian (ML) Merrick Community Presbyterian (ML) Mt. Kisco Mt. Kisco Presbyterian (ML) Mt. Sinai Mt. Sinai Congregational UCC (ONA) New York City Broadway UCC (ONA) Central Presbyterian (ML) Good Shepherd-Faith Presbyterian (ML) Grace & St. Paul’s Lutheran (RIC) Jan Hus Presbyterian (ML) Judson Memorial (ONA, W&A) Madison Avenue Baptist (W&A) Metropolitan-Duane UMC (RC) Our Savior’s Atonement Lutheran (RIC) Park Avenue Christian (O&A) Riverside (ONA, W&A) Rutgers Presbyterian (ML) St. Paul & St. Andrew UMC (RC) St. Peter’s Lutheran (RIC) Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Trinity Presbyterian (ML) Unitarian Ch. of All Souls (WEL) Washington Square UMC (RC) West-Park Presbyterian (ML) Oneonta First UMC (RC) UU Society (WEL) Palisades Palisades Presbyterian (ML) Plattsburgh Plattsburgh UMC (RC) Poughkeepsie Unitarian Fellowship (WEL) Rochester Calvary-St. Andrews (ML) Downtown United Presbyterian (ML) First Unitarian (WEL) Lake Avenue Baptist (W&A) Third Presbyterian (ML) Westminster Presbyterian (ML) Saratoga Springs Presb.-New Eng. Cong. (ML, ONA) Saratoga Springs UMC (RC) Sayville Sayville Congregational UCC (ONA) Schenectady First UMC (RC) First Unitarian (WEL) Slatehill Grace UMC of Ridgebury (RC) Slingerlands Community UMC (RC) Snyder Amherst Community (ONA, O&A) Syracuse Plymouth Congregational UCC (ONA) Troy First United Presbyterian (ML) Utica Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Williamsville UU of Amherst (WEL) Yorktown Heights First Presbyterian (ML) NORTH CAROLINA Chapel Hill Church of the Reconciliation (ML) Olin T. Binkley Memorial Baptist (W&A) United Church (ONA) Durham Eno River UU Fellowship (WEL) Raleigh Community UCC (ONA) Pullen Memorial Baptist (W&A) Wilmington UU Fellowship (WEL) Winston-Salem First Christian (O&A) UU Fellowship (WEL) NORTH DAKOTA Fargo St. Mark’s Lutheran (RIC) OHIO Brecksville United Church of Christ (ONA) Chesterland Community Church (ONA) Cincinnati Mt. Auburn Presbyterian (ML) Cleveland Archwood UCC (ONA) Euclid Ave. Congregational UCC (ONA) Liberation UCC (ONA) Pilgrim Congregational UCC (ONA) Simpson UMC (RC) West Shore UU (WEL) Zion UCC (ONA) Cleveland Heights Church of the Redeemer (RC) Noble Road Presbyterian (ML) Columbus Calvary Lutheran (RIC) First English Lutheran (RIC) First Unitarian Universalist (WEL) North Congregational UCC (ONA) Redeemer Lutheran (RIC) Third Avenue Community (RC) Dayton Congregation for Reconciliation (ONA) Faith UCC (ONA) Miami Valley Unitarian Fellowship (WEL) Granville First Baptist (W&A) Lakewood Cove UMC (RC) Parkwood Congregational, UCC (ONA) Norton Grace UCC (ONA) Oberlin First Church in Oberlin (ONA) Shaker Heights First Unitarian of Cleveland (WEL) Toledo Central UMC (RC) Winter 1998 31 OKLAHOMA Oklahoma City Epworth UMC (RC) Tulsa Fellowship Congregational, UCC (ONA) UM Community of Hope (RC) OREGON Ashland United Church of Christ, Cong. (ONA) Beaverton Southminster Presbyterian (ML) Corvallis First Congregational Church (ONA) First UMC (RC) Estacada Estacada UMC (RC) Eugene First Congregational, UCC (ONA) Unitarian of Eugene & Lane Co. (WEL) Forest Grove Forest Grove UCC (ONA) Gresham Zion UCC (ONA) Klamath Falls Klamath Falls Cong. UCC (ONA) Lake Oswego Lake Oswego UCC (ONA) Milwaukie Clackamus UCC (ONA) Milwaukie UCC (ONA) Portland Ainsworth UCC (ONA) First Congregational (ONA) First UMC (RC) Metanoia Peace Community (RC) Peace Church of the Brethren (SCN) Southwest United (ONA) St. James Lutheran (RIC) St. Mark Presbyterian (ML) University Park UMC (RC) Salem First Congregational UCC (ONA) First Unitarian Society (WEL) Morningside UMC (RC) Springfield Church of the Brethren (SCN) PENNSYLVANIA Allentown Muhlenberg College Chapel (RIC) St. John Lutheran (RIC) Devon Main Line Unitarian (WEL) Harrisburg Unitarian Church (WEL) Lansdale Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Levittown United Christian Church (O&A, ONA) Philadelphia Calvary UMC (RC) First UMC of Germantown (RC) Old First Reformed (ONA) St. Michael’s Lutheran (RIC) Tabernacle United (ML, ONA) Univ. Lutheran of the Incarnation (RIC) Pittsburgh First Unitarian (WEL) Sixth Presbyterian (ML) St. Andrew Lutheran (RIC) Upper Darby Christ Lutheran (RIC) Wayne Central Baptist (W&A) RHODE ISLAND East Greenwich Westminster Unitarian (WEL) Newport Newport Congregational (ONA) Providence Mathewson Street UMC (RC) SOUTH CAROLINA Columbia Gethsemane Lutheran (RIC) SOUTH DAKOTA Erwin Erwin UCC (ONA) TENNESSEE Chattanooga Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Knoxville Tennessee Valley UU (WEL) Memphis First Congregational UCC (ONA) Nashville Brookmeade Congregational UCC (ONA) Edgehill UMC (RC) First UU Church (WEL) TEXAS Austin First English Lutheran (RIC) First UU Church (WEL) St. Andrews Presbyterian (ML) Trinity UMC (RC) College Station Friends Congregational (ONA) Dallas Bethany Presbyterian (ML) First Unitarian (WEL) Midway Hills Christian (O&A) El Paso St. Timothy Lutheran (RIC) Fort Worth St. Matthew’s Lutheran (RIC) Houston Bering Memorial UMC (RC) Comm. of the Reconciling Servant (ML) Faith Covenant (ML) Grace Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) Plano Dallas North Unitarian (WEL) San Antonio Spirit of Life (RIC) UTAH Salt Lake City Mount Tabor Lutheran (RIC) South Valley UU Society (WEL) VERMONT Bennington Second Congregational (ONA) Burlington Christ Presbyterian (ML) College Street Congregational (ONA) Middlebury Congregational UCC (ONA) Rutland Rutland UMC (RC) VIRGINIA Alexandria Mount Vernon Unitarian (WEL) Peace Lutheran (RIC) Arlington Clarendon Presbyterian (ML) Unitarian Church (WEL) Charlottesville Sojourners UCC (ONA) Harrisonburg Sanctuary UCC (ONA) Oakton Fairfax Unitarian (WEL) Roanoke Unitarian Universalist (WEL) WASHINGTON Bellevue Eastgate Congregational UCC (ONA) First Congregational, UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Carnation Tolt Congregational, UCC (ONA) Chelan Fullness of God Lutheran (RIC) Edmonds Edmonds UU (WEL) Ellensburg First UMC (RC) Federal Way Wayside UCC (ONA) Leavenworth Faith Lutheran (RIC) Marysville Evergreen UU Fellowship (WEL) Medical Lake Shalom UCC (ONA) Mountlake Terrace Terrace View Presbyterian (ML) Olympia Comm. for Interfaith Celebration (ONA) Pullman Community Congregational UCC (ONA) Richland Shalom UCC (ONA) Seattle Broadview Community UCC (ONA) Central Lutheran (RIC) Fauntleroy UCC (ONA) Findlay Street Christian (O&A) First Baptist (W&A) Magnolia UCC (ONA) Pilgrim Congregational (ONA) Plymouth Congregational (ONA) Prospect UCC Cong. (ONA) Ravenna UMC (RC) Richmond Beach Cong. UCC (ONA) Trinity UMC (RC) University Baptist (W&A) University Christian (O&A) University Congregational (ONA) University Temple UMC (RC) Wallingford UMC (RC) Spokane Unitarian Church (WEL) Suquamish Community Congregational (ONA) Vancouver East Vancouver UMC (RC) First Congregational UCC (ONA) White Salmon Bethel Cong., UCC (ONA) WEST VIRGINIA Wheeling UU Congregation (WEL) WISCONSIN Brown Deer Brown Deer UCC (ONA) Delavan Delavan UMC (RC) Eau Claire Ecum. Relig. Ctr./Univ. Lutheran (RIC) Madison Advent Lutheran (RIC) Community of Hope UCC (ONA) First Baptist (W&A) First Congregational UCC (ONA) James Reeb UU Congregation (WEL) Lake Edge Lutheran (RIC) Orchard Ridge UCC (ONA) Plymouth Congregational UCC (ONA) University UMC (RC) Milwaukee Cross Lutheran (RIC) Pentecost Lutheran (RIC) Plymouth UCC (ONA) Reformation Lutheran (RIC) Village Church, Lutheran (RIC) Racine Our Savior’s Lutheran (RIC) Sheboygan Wesley UMC (RC) CANADA ALBERTA Calgary South Calgary Inter-Mennonite (SCN) Edmonton Unitarian Church (WEL) BRITISH COLUMBIA Vancouver First United Church (AC) Trinity United (AC) Unitarian Church (WEL) MANITOBA Winnipeg Augustine United (AC) First Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Young United (AC) ONTARIO Thunder Bay Lakehead U. Fellowship (WEL) Toronto Bathurst United (AC) Bloor Street United (AC) Glen Rhodes United (AC) Trinity-St. Paul’s United (AC) Waterloo Olive Branch Mennonite (SCN) SASKATCHEWAN Saskatoon King of Glory Lutheran (RIC) St. Thomas-Wesley United (AC) CAMPUS MINISTRIES Key: LCM=Lutheran Campus Ministry LSC=Lutheran Student Center LSM=Lutheran Student Movement UCM=United Campus Ministry UMSF=United Methodist Student Fellowship UNITED STATES CALIFORNIA Cal-Aggie Christian House, UC-Davis (RC) UCM, UC, Riverside (RC) UCM, USC, Los Angeles (RC) Wesley Fdn., UC-Berkeley (RC) Wesley Fdn., UC-Santa Barbara (RC) Wesley Fdn., UCLA, Los Angeles (RC) COLORADO LCM, CU-Boulder (RIC) DELAWARE Wesley Fdn., UD, Newark (RC) DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UMSF, American U. (RC) ILLINOIS Agape House, Univ. Of Illinois, Chicago (RC) Ill. Disciples Fdn., UI, Champaign (O&A) UMSF, Ill. Wesleyan, Bloomington (RC) UCM, No. Illinois, DeKalb (RC) INDIANA LCM, IU, Bloomington (RIC) IOWA LCM, UI, Iowa City (RIC) Stud. Cong., Luther Coll., Decorah (RIC) KANSAS LCM, KSU, Manhattan (RIC) United Methodist CM, UK, Lawrence (RC) KENTUCKY Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary (ML Chapter) MICHIGAN Guild House, UM, Ann Arbor (O&A) Wesley Fdn., Central Mich. Univ., Mt. Pleasant (RC) Wesley Fdn., Univ. Of Michigan, Ann Arbor (RC) MINNESOTA LCM in Minneapolis (RIC) LCM, SCS, St. Cloud (RIC) Stud. Cong., St. Olaf, Northfield (RIC) NORTH DAKOTA Univ. Lutheran Center, NDSU, Fargo (RIC) OHIO UCM, OU, Athens (O&A, RC, W&A) OREGON LCM in Portland (RIC) Wesley Fdn., UO, Eugene (RC) PENNSYLVANIA Christ Chapel, Gettysburg College, Gettysburg (RIC) LSC-LCM, Kutztown U, Kutztown (RIC) TEXAS LCM, UT, Austin (RIC) VIRGINIA Campus Christian Community, MWC, Fredericksburg (RC, RIC) WASHINGTON LCM, WU, Bellingham (RIC) Wesley Club, UW, Seattle (RC) UM Fellowship, UPS, Puget Sound (RC) WISCONSIN LCM, UW, LaCrosse (RIC) LCM, Metro Milwaukee(RIC) LCM, UW-Stout, Menomonie (RIC) Wesley Fdn., Univ. Of Wisconsin, Madison (RC) CANADA SASKATCHEWAN LSC, LSM, Saskatoon (RIC) JUDICATORIES which have passed welcoming resolutions Conferences (ONA) California/Nevada N. Central Pacific Connecticut Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota New Hampshire New York Ohio Rocky Mountain Southern California Conferences (RC) California-Nevada New York Northern Illinois Oregon-Idaho Troy Wisconsin Regions (O&A) Northern California/Nevada Synods (ML) Synod of the Northeast Synods, ELCA (RIC) Eastern North Dakota Eastern Washington-Idaho Greater Milwaukee Metro Chicago Metro Washington, D.C. Pacifica Rocky Mountain Sierra-Pacific Southeast Michigan Southeast Pennsylvania NATIONAL MINISTRIES which have passed welcoming resolutions Disciples Peace Fellowship (O&A) Gen’l Commission on Christian Unity & Interreligious Concerns (RC) Lutheran Student Movement—USA (RIC) Methodist Fed. for Social Action (RC) QTY BACK ISSUES AVAILABLE ___ Be Ye Reconciled (Summer 1985) ___ A Matter of Justice (Winter 1986) ___ Our Families (Spring 1986) ___ Our Churches’ Policies (Summer 1986) ___ Images of Healing (Fall 1986) ___ Minorities within a Minority (Spring 1987) ___ Sexual Violence (Fall 1987) ___ Building Reconciling Ministries (Spring 1988) ___ Living and Loving with AIDS (Summer 1988) ___ Sexual Ethics (Winter 1989) ___ Lesbian & Gay Men in the Religious Arts (Spring 1989) ___ The Closet Dilemma (Summer 1989) ___ Images of Family (Fall 1989) ___ Journeys toward Recovery and Wholeness (Spring 1990) ___ The “Holy Union” Controversy (Fall 1990) ___ Youth and Sexual Identity (Winter 1991) ___ Lesbian/Gay Reflections on Theology (Spring 1991) ___ The Lesbian Spirit (Summer 1991) ___ Lesbians, Gay Men, and Bisexuals in Ministry (Spring 1992) ___ Our Spirituality: How Sexual Expression and Oppression Shape It (Summer 1992) ___ Aging and Integrity (Fall 1992) ___ Reclaiming Pride (Summer 1994) ___ The God to Whom We Pray (Spring 1995) ___ Remembering…10th Anniversary (Summer 1995) ___ Untangling Prejudice and Privilege (Fall 1995) ___ Same-Sex Unions (Spring 1997) ___ Creating Sanctuary: All Youth Welcome Here! (Summer 1997) ___ From One Womb at One Table (Fall 1997) ❑ Please send me the back issues indicated ($6 each; 10+ @ $4). ❑ Send me Open Hands each quarter ($20/year; outside U.S.A. @ $25). ❑ Send Open Hands gift subscription(s) to name(s) attached. Enclosed is my payment of $ _______ OR Charge $ _____________ to my VISA MASTERCARD (Circle one) # __________________________________________ Expiration _____/_____. Name on Card ____________________________________________________ Signature ________________________________________________________ My Name ________________________________________________________ Address _________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip _____________________________________________________ Daytime Phone (______) _____________________ Local Church _____________________________________________________ Denomination _____________________________________________________ Send to: Open Hands, 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 Published by the Reconciling Congregation Program in conjunction with More Light, Open and Affirming, Reconciling in Christ, and Welcoming & Affirming Baptist programs. A Unique Resource on Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual Concerns in the Church for Christian Education • Personal Reading Research Projects • Worship Resources Ministry & Outreach 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 Open Hands Vol 13 No 3 - We’re Welcoming – Now What? https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/dab7b60a2387ed1e75309e90ed37fc7c.pdf 873e05107443ebc3c758eb142f9fe46f Issue An issue of a recurring publication. Volume Number The volume number of the issue 13 Issue Number The number of the issue (within a volume) 4 Publication Year The year the issue was published 1998 Publication Date The date the issue was published Spring Text Any textual data included in the document Vol. 13 No. 4 Spring 1998 2 Open Hands Vol. 13 No. 4 Spring 1998 Resources for Ministries Affirming the Diversity of Human Sexuality Open Hands is a resource for congregations and individuals seeking to be in ministry with lesbian, bisexual, and gay persons. Each issue focuses on a specific area of concern within the church. Open Hands is published quarterly by the Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (United Methodist) in cooperation with the Association of Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (American), the More Light Churches Network (Presbyterian), the Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples), the Open and Affirming (United Church of Christ), and the Reconciling in Christ (Lutheran) programs. Each of these programs is a national network of local churches that publicly affirm their ministry with the whole family of God and welcome lesbian and gay persons and their families into their community of faith. These six programs—along with Supportive Congregations (Brethren/ Mennonite), and Welcoming (Unitarian Universalist)—offer hope that the church can be a reconciled community. Open Hands is published quarterly. Subscription is $20 for four issues ($25 outside the U.S.). Single copies and back issues are $6. Quantities of 10 or more, $4 each. Subscriptions, letters to the editor, manuscripts, requests for advertising rates, and other correspondence should be sent to: Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773 / 736-5526 Fax: 773 / 736-5475 Member, The Associated Church Press © 1998 Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. Open Hands is a registered trademark. ISSN 0888-8833 Printed on recycled paper. TREASURE IN EARTHEN VESSELS An Exploration of Sexual Ethics Outlaws and “Inlaws” 4 CHRIS GLASER Ethics is an “inside” job, especially among outcasts. Sex in Church - Can We Talk? 5 JOHN SPRINGL Isn’t even church a sanctuary from sex? Myth, Mystery, and Human Sexuality 6 JOHN BALLEW Cutting off its sacred import spites our sexuality. Getting Sexuality in Perspective Cross Cultural Comparisons 8 STEPHANIE S. SPENCER More multiple choice than either/or. Sexual Ethics in an Overpopulated World Pollution, Purity, Property, and Procreation 10 CAROL ROBB The marriage of economic and sexual ethics. Blessed and Challenged by Jesus Where We Get the Chutzpah to Do Our Own Ethics 14 THOMAS C. ZIEGERT A Biblical basis for a gay-positive sexual ethic. A Sexual Ethic of ‘Least Harm’ 15 MARIE FORTUNE Revising our understanding of what constitutes sexual sin. Call for Articles for Open Hands Winter 1999 Why Be Specific in Our Welcome? Theme Section: Next year’s winter issue will address the question of why welcoming congregations have a particular focus on g/l/b/t and their families. What is the need? What is the hope? Ministries Section: We are seeking articles describing practical experience and suggestions in the following areas: Welcoming Committees, Connections (with other justice concerns), Worship, Outreach, Leadership, Youth, Campus, Children. These brief articles may or may not have to do with the theme. Contact with idea by August 1 Manuscript deadline: October 15 Chris Glaser, Phone/Fax 404/622-4222 or ChrsGlaser@aol.com We welcome the Open & Affirming Ministries as a full ecumenical partner of Open Hands. Spring 1998 3 Publisher Mark Bowman Interim Editor Chris Glaser Designer In Print—Jan Graves Program Coordinators Mark Bowman Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (UMC) 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 773/736-5526 www.rcp.org Allen V. Harris Open & Affirming Minstries (Disciples) 1010 Park Avenue New York, NY 10028 http://pilot.msu.edu/user/ laceyj/ Ann B. Day Open and Affirming Program (UCC) P.O. Box 403 Holden, MA 01520 508/856-9316 www.coalition.simplenet.com Bob Gibeling Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran) 2466 Sharondale Drive Atlanta, GA 30305 404/266-9615 www.lcna.org Dick Lundy More Light Churches Network (PCUSA) 5525 Timber Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 612/470-0093 http://www.mlcn.org Brenda J. Moulton Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (ABC/USA) P.O. Box 2596 Attleboro Falls, MA 02763 508/226-1945 http://users.aol.com/ wabaptists Editorial Advisory Committee Howard Bess, W&A Ann Marie Coleman, ONA Dick Hasbany, MLCN Bobbi Hargleroad, MLCN Dorothy Klefstad, RIC Susan Laurie, RCP Samuel E. Loliger, ONA Tim Phillips, W&A Lisa Ann Pierce, SCN Dick Poole, RIC Caroline Presnell, RCP Paul Santillán, RCP Margarita Suaréz, ONA Stuart Wright, RIC RCP Movement News ..................................... 30 Welcoming Communities ....................... 30 Selected Resources .................................. 32 Next Issue: BISEXUALITY What Makes ‘Good Sex’ Good? Developing a Gay-Positive Sex Ethic 18 MARVIN M. ELLISON Creating an ethic that embraces rather than singles out sexuality. A Sexual Desiderata 20 JIM WOLFE “There can be too little but never too much love.” Sexual Ethics Without Religion 21 DANIEL A. HELMINIAK A sexual ethic for a new and secular millennium. Giving a Future to a Present Love 23 MARGARET A. FARLEY Why love prompts commitment. MINISTRIES Worship Signs of God - Making Banners in Worship 24 JAN GRAVES Outreach Why March in Gay Pride? Just Peace! 24 CHARLES A. WOLFE Connections An Open Letter from African-American Clergy and Laity 25 NATIONAL BLACK PRESBYTERIAN CAUCAS Children For the Sake of Children Like Me 26 SOL KELLEY-JONES Campus A Work of God 27 BROOKE ROLSTON Leadership The Trial of Jimmy Creech 28 MARK BOWMAN SUSTAINING THE SPIRIT Prayers of the Body 29 NANCY A. HARDESTY, MELINDA MCLAIN, DOUGLAS SAYLOR, ALEXA SMITH, TIM TYNER 4 Open Hands Treasure in Earthen Vessels may describe not only our spirituality, as in 1 Corinthians 4:7, but our sexuality as well. The image affirms the rich resource that our God-given sexuality is. In times past, it has been an embarrassment of riches; that is, something not to be spoken of publicly. But, as Jesus once said of the gospel, what is spoken in whispers will be shouted from rooftops. What is most private and personal— sexual union— is celebrated in the most public and holy way with family and friends in church: a wedding. Jesus himself adds to our merriment by turning water to wine, just as the sensual god Dionysus was said to have done in the temples of his cult on the very day when the Christian calendar remembers Jesus’ first miracle at the wedding in Cana. The movement in theological circles of late has been to reclaim our bodies as good and as capable of revealing the sacred. God shaped our bodies and redeemed them in the body and Body of Christ, in whom our bodies have been reclaimed to do as Christ would do, and in whom our bodies will be resurrected. Body theologians have reminded us that agape and eros are not at odds; rather, to divorce them is at the peril of a disembodied spirituality or a despiritualized sexuality. Both sexuality and spirituality drink from the same well: eros, that passion for union with another, whether with God in prayermaking or with the beloved in lovemaking. But, since we have this treasure in earthen vessels— vulnerable, fragile, fallible—eros must dance with agape, that benevolent love that, for the follower of Jesus, wishes the best for the other. The pages of Open Hands have focused on sexuality before. It seems especially timely now. First, in the chronology of the magazine. Our last issue dealt with “Now That We’re Welcoming— Now What?” One of those “whats” is that all of us— straight, lesbian, gay, bisexual— may reflect on sexual ethics together. We who are lesbian and gay, who have often fulfilled our calling of reminding the church to deal honestly with its sexuality, have much to offer our congregations in this dialogue. And heterosexuals have much to offer us from their experience. In that conversation, bisexual people offer unique insights and challenges; and so, our next issue will focus on bisexuality. Second, the issue of sexual ethics is timely given the current national dialogue on everything from gay marriage to sex in the workplace. A twice-divorced and thrice-married representative in Congress (alas, from Georgia) introduces the “Defense of Marriage Act” into Congress which a President accused of sexual infidelity signs into law. Does it make heterosexual marriage more binding? No, it rejects the legal rights of gay people to marry! Meanwhile, growing awareness of sexual harassment in the workplace and sexual misconduct by helping professionals reveals a host of victims, requiring therapeutic care, costly litigation, and stricter regulations that have the unfortunate byproduct of sending a chill throughout human interactions. Finally, sexual ethics is being discussed as never before in the gay community. With some bemusement I witness the debate among gay male writers that sets Michelangelo Signorelli and Gabriel Rotello (who argue that the days are over for “anything goes”) over against Eric Rofes and the group Sex Panic! (who resist sexual regulations as sex-negative). Though this conversation is seen as something new, we in the gay religious community have been having this dialogue for decades! And the lesbian community, religious or not, has long voiced concern about ethical sexuality, probably growing out of women’s experience as the usual victims (along with children) of sexual misbehavior and abuse. John Rechy’s famous 1977 book, The Sexual Outlaw, named the experience of many of us who came out years ago. We were sexual outlaws simply because of who we were. We were not welcome to participate as equals in the dialogue on sexual ethics in mainstream culture, let alone the church. We had to find our own “in-laws,” that is our own sense of a spiritual/sexual center that stayed us in our sexual relationships, our own sexual guidelines. We made mistakes along the way, but we also made startling discoveries about the sacred nature of human sexuality. Many of us bought into the church’s duality that segregated sexuality and spirituality and felt compelled to make a choice between our sexuality and the church. Those of us who didn’t and remained within the church found ourselves spiritually abused even for our most ethically correct choices. Small wonder, then, that we might resist when the church begins discussing our sexual ethics. The Welcoming Congregations movement may be the only place where straight and gay and lesbian and bisexual Christians may dialogue about human sexuality as equals. Dialogue comes from words meaning “through the word” and connotes finding common ground—shared meaning and purpose. When it comes to either sexuality or spirituality, too often we end up in a discussion, a term derived from words that mean “breaking things up” and connotes analysis, having a polarizing effect. Instead, a dialogue on sexual ethics may bring us together on common ground upon which to build a shared approach to human sexuality. What follows may further that dialogue. ▼ Chris Glaser, Interim Editor Atlanta, Georgia OUTLAWS AND “INLAWS” Spring 1998 5 A parishioner bounced into church one Sunday saying that she was happy to be there because church was the only place where no one talked about sex. How tragic and how often this is true! We have come to expect the church to speak volumes on “spiritual” matters and to remain silent about issues of human sexuality, as though to be spiritual is to be sexless. The reality is that people who are whole are wholly sexual and wholly spiritual. Spirituality and sexuality are very close to the heart of human life. They are so deeply intertwined, I don’t think we can separate them completely, for they both have a common denominator of love— pure, unadulterated love, and they are means of learning to live out our lives in love. I believe that the highest form of responding to God’s love is to fully embrace our sexual nature and our spiritual nature. The attitude that spirituality is pulpit material and sexuality is a private matter is not helpful to our era. When something is viewed solely as private, to the point of secrecy, we may resist God’s desire to enter into that aspect of our lives to bless us, and thus we may become laden with guilt and doubts. So uncomfortable we become talking of our sexuality that we mask our sexual fears and doubts with general questions like: “Does God love me?” “Does God love me as I really am?” “Does God understand the real me?” “Do you think I’m a good person? I don’t think you would if you really knew me.” That people mask important concerns about their sexuality in such oblique ways tells me that thinking of sex as a private, secret matter is not helpful. God loves us emphatically, and there should be no doubt of this! I think we would be happier and more confident as Christians if we considered sexuality a personal and yet public matter for dialogue. If we can talk about it with one another, then talking about it with God seems more possible: after all, where two or three are gathered in dialogue or prayer, God is surely present. Sexuality is personal because it is integral to who I am as a person. I cannot live life apart from my sexuality. It has been a part of me since I was born and will be part of my life until I die. It is not my total being, but it molds and shapes me, energizes and enlivens me. Sexuality is public because what I do with my sexuality affects others. If I have children, which are the results of my sexuality, they will attend schools funded by taxes from those who may not have children themselves. If I have unsafe sex that leads to a sexually transmitted disease, I will rely on health insurance or public health programs for medical care that others have supported through premiums or taxes. Sexual ethics begins with personal acceptance of our sexuality and public dialogue about how we integrate sexuality into our lives. Just as we begin our faith journey by accepting our spirituality and dialoguing with others about its relationship to the whole of life, so we should have opportunities to dialogue with others about how sexuality relates to the whole of life. In our faith tradition, part of that dialogue is with members of our spiritual community in the Bible. The Creation stories in Genesis 1 and 2 affirm the goodness of human sexuality and of us, created in the image of God for intimate communion with one another and with God. Our very maleness and femaleness are reflections of God’s self. The goodness of our sexual passion is eloquently lifted up in The Song of Solomon. The loyalty of Ruth and Naomi and the fidelity of David and Jonathan demonstrate the growth of healthy relationships. The stories of Vashti and Tamar are windows to understanding sexual exploitation. The story of the Ethiopian eunuch proclaims God’s open arms to those whom society excludes for sexual reasons. The stories of Jesus and the woman accused of adultery and the woman at the well married five times demonstrate the compassion of God in regard to human sexuality. We need to be clear about the goodness of human sexuality because negative images of sex have dominated the church’s recent history, making people uncomfortable with themselves. Of course, with every good gift of God come challenges and responsibilities. The Bible’s cautionary wisdom is helpful. Breaking our promises (adultery), desiring a person already in a committed relationship (coveting), and demeaning one’s self or another person (violence) are major ethical prohibitions offered in scripture. As we proceed in our sexual journeys, we become aware of who and what completes us, and this helps us find a complementary companion. For most people, it is just this exploration and curiosity which lead us to self-understanding and maturity in developing future lasting relationships. We are often hard on ourselves at this stage of growth. It is well to remember that God is as gracious to us as we learn about our sexuality as God is when we learned to walk and talk. We need to be just as gracious to ourselves and others. God is a great Lover. God created us to be great lovers, too. We have been given the gifts of spirituality and sexuality with which to express love and discover fulfillment. As with everything God has created, God has called both gifts good. To the woman who felt relief that church was a sanctuary from sex, I had to say, “I think you’ve come to the right place. We have much to talk about!” ▼ John Springl (a pseudonym) is a United Methodist pastor. He lives with his wife and children in rural Pennsylvania. SEX IN CHURCH Can We Talk? John Springl God is as gracious to us as we learn about our sexuality as God is when we learned to walk and talk. We need to be just as gracious. 6 Open Hands We live in a century in which myth has come to mean falsehood, and science reigns supreme. Science itself has become the myth from which our society gains its self-understanding. Where once the moon and stars were the subject of poets, philosophers and theologians, now they are destinations for our surveying teams. Within the next few years, the Human Genome Project will complete the mapping of all human DNA. Yet with all of our scientific knowledge, how much better do we actually grasp the mystery of life? In a culture that seems to grow coarser every year, there is little evidence that demythologizing the world has resulted in greater meaning being extended into daily life. Often the opposite seems true. Something parallel has happened with human sexuality. During the past century or so, sexuality has increasingly become an object of scientific— specifically, medical— study. Sexuality is reduced to behaviors to be categorized, and love is investigated by endocrinologists studying hormone levels. In our clinical view of life, sexuality has become a matter about which we increasingly consult experts to expand our skill at performing or to identify our reasons for feeling unfulfilled. Sexuality seems to have become just another product or advertising device. It is not surprising that we experience sexuality itself as increasingly degraded. When everything becomes a subject of scientific knowing, the mystery of life becomes a challenge to be mastered rather than a wonder to be contemplated. And sexuality seems less at home in our churches than in movie theaters and mouthwash ads. In times like these, it is important to understand that this is not the way humans have always experienced our sexuality. In 1989, when I began serving on the (ill-fated) Evangelical Lutheran Church Task Force on Human Sexuality, an early speaker addressing the panel noted that it was ironic that sex was so painful for Christians to deal with because for us “sex is not sacred.” He meant, I gathered, that as opposed to other spiritual traditions in which sex was connected with the Divine, for Christians sex was not a matter of salvation. How true is this? Ancient people in agricultural societies seemed to grasp the power and mystery of sexuality. Life was understood to be inherently fragile and uncertain. Humankind was surrounded by forces invisible and poorly understood. In this context, intercourse with the divine through ritual sex (the cult of Baal in ancient Canaan, for instance) became a way of assuring fertility, harmony and wholeness.1 In the East, particularly in Tantric (“Body”) traditions, the divine was seen as polarized between female and male, shakti and shiva. Maithuna rituals involving sexual union between the participants were seen as a “holy right of obligation.” In making love, the human couple became participants in the divine. The joining of male and female sexual energies together is a manifestation of divine unity. This experience of sexual power was seen as transformative. Tantra has on occasion been referred to as the “lightening path to enlightenment” because of the manner in which it harnesses this creative and generative energy. Mythologies in classical Mediterranean Europe also sought to explore the sacredness of sexuality and love. Interestingly, most of the Greek and Roman deities of the ages— Dionysus (Bacchus in Roman literature), Venus (Aphrodite in Rome), Amor (Latin word for love and used as a synonym for Cupid, the Roman Eros)— can be understood as androgynous. 2 Dionysus was not a traditional fertility god, but rather the avatar of arousal, frenzy and ecstasy. According to some mythic traditions, he was pursued by women whom he had cursed and was torn to bits by them. It is here that we find a close association between eros and thanatos, between sexual ecstasy and death.3 Judaism was the first of the Canaanite religions to eschew a sexual god. In differentiating itself and evolving its own unique identity, ritual sex and the sacred marriage rights of other religions were forbidden— although these rites evidently maintained a hold of sorts on the people, to the vexation of Moses. Still, sexuality and spirituality remained in close connection, such as abstinence during menstrual periods and rituals like bathing that may be understood as emphasizing the holiness of the sexual union which would follow.4 Early Christianity broke from this tradition. Evolving as it did in the Greek world, it found itself reacting to the Dionysian ecstasy. The opposite world view—identified with the god Apollo— emphasized self-mastery instead of ecstasy. This apollonian view exalted the spirit and stressed mortification of all flesh. Augustine, most influential of the early church leaders, was fascinated by the mind and by the need for purity, seeing sex as inherently polluted. Though some medieval Christian writings, especially by women religious, witnessed body and soul inextricably woven together and celebrated the sensual, describing God and even Jesus in male and female imagery, the Reformers viewed the body in opposition to spiritual purity and masculinized God.5 The Christian understanding/myth of the incarnation of Jesus has always been a puzzle when it came to understanding the relationship of body and spirit. One obvious implication—that Jesus was a sexual being—has been especially vexing. Docetism (the belief that Jesus had only the appearance of a human body) was both the first heresy and the most common to face the church. Other theologies evolved (the virgin birth, the immaculate conception of Mary) which further reinforced the wall of separation between the sacred and the sexual. Yet, returning to the biblical story itself, one is confronted with a Savior who permitted physical intimacy with the beloved disciple at the Last Supper as well as an outcast woman who sensually bathed his feet with her tears, dried them with her hair, AND SEXUALITY MYTH, MYSTERY John R. Ballew HUMAN Spring 1998 7 and kissed them with her lips. Though descended from a nonmarried Founder who defended sexual outcasts and eunuchs and rejected divorce, modern Christian theology has evolved a biased sexual ethic that allows heterosexual marriage alone while permitting heterosexual divorce! I call it sacred heterosexuality. To lesbian and gay Christians, it can seem to be the great organizing principle of contemporary Christendom, as we witness the very unity of our denominations, as well as that of the National Council of Churches (U.S.), dependent upon agreement on this point. Gay sexuality is not only theologically important, it has frequently seemed to be the Church’s overriding obsession. Gay women and men find our intimate sexual relationships described as unholy, unchaste, “intrinsically disordered,” not because of how these relationships find expression, but by virtue of the gender of the partners. Sacred heterosexuality cultists demand strict adherence. Lutheran pastors have been defrocked for daring to love outside of the bounds of heterosexuality; United Methodist and Episcopalian clergy have been put on trial for heresy for blessing same-sex unions; and Presbyterians have recently reaffirmed that only married heterosexuals and celibates have a vocation within their church. This view ordains majority secular and ecclesiastical authority as identical with divine intention. Carter Heyward identifies this heterosexist world view as “sacred contempt” for both women and for gay folk.6 Our world has suffered from the diminishing of a mythological cosmology in which the actions of humankind are seen as part of a larger context. We live in a largely secularized world. While some may welcome “liberation” from ancient forms, the contemporary world in many ways has suffered from the resulting mix of too much information and too little meaning. This is particularly evident in human sexuality and relationships, where the result is often harsh and coarse. What is called for is “re-sacralizing” creation and returning to a sense of wonder and creativity.7 Resacralizing sexuality, in this sense, could offer us a way out of our obsessive need to break the world down into smaller, more easily understood, parts. Instead of obsessing about ear differences between lesbians and heterosexual women and hypothalamus sizes between gay men and straight men, we could simply stand before one another as awesome mysteries of creation. In Care of the Soul, Thomas Moore claims that attempting to understand sexuality primarily through scientific means is destructive to the soul-building power of love.8 Love requires mystery. Contemporary North American Christians resist such counsel. Christians have it within our ability to liberate sexuality from the scientific laboratory and resacralize it, to reunite sexuality with both the mystery of creation and the divinity of all love. The mythological import of a sexuality created for at-one-ment between two human beings and of a spirituality intended to bring at-one-ment between the divine and the human could heal the brokenness not only of Christ’s body but of our own. ▼ John Ballew, M.S., L.P.C., is a professional counselor and massage therapist in private practice in Atlanta. A Lutheran layperson, he is a member of the American Counseling Association and, he notes with some irony, the Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality. He can be reached by email at jballew@mindspring.com. Notes 1 Karen Armstrong, A History of God. (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1994), 11. 2Michael Jordan, An Encyclopedia of Gods. (New York: Facts on File, Inc., 1993), 67. 3Georg Feuerstein, Sacred Sexuality. (Los Angeles: Jeremy P. Tarcher, 1992), 84-85. 4Armstrong, 77. 5James B. Nelson, The Intimate Connection (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1988), 23-4. 6Carter Heyward, Touching Our Strength: The Erotic as Power and the Love of God. (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1989), 61 ff. 7Matthew Fox, Creation Spirituality. (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1991), 90. 8Thomas Moore, Care of the Soul. (New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1992), 82. Ads 8 Open Hands I grew up living in five different countries, and moving so often gave me two basic perspectives on life: people are not the same everywhere, and my way of life is not the only and best possible lifestyle. As an American in the Middle East and in South America, I was a member of a minority in terms of language, skin color, economic status, and place of origin. As a diplomat’s child in the United States, other children thought I was weird when my stories of growing up began, “When we lived in Peru…” From these experiences I learned that I needed to listen first and to learn about others if I was going to fit in and make friends. These lessons (people are different; I am not always right) have served me well in studying cultural anthropology, and I have turned my lifelong experience bridging cultures into a professional pursuit. These life lessons also served me well when I came out as a lesbian, because I accepted that people are different everywhere and that being a lesbian is just another way to be in the world. Not just my personal experience, but one hundred years of research in cultural anthropology illustrate that there is a great variety of sexual behavior, gender identity, and emotional relationships among the world’s peoples. The anthropological perspective is akin to the American Indian proverb that to know another wholly one must walk a mile in her moccasins. Anthropologists try to live in others’ houses, eat their food, speak as they speak, become members of their families, and spend time on what they think is important. The ultimate goal of anthropology is twofold: to fully understand and appreciate experience in different human communities, and to see ourselves and our own lives in relationship to the whole of humanity as one variation on the great themes of human existence: relationships to the divine, relationships to other persons, what gives life meaning, what are worthwhile ways to spend our time, and where we find joy, comfort, and hope. In the past thirty years anthropologists have focused more research on the full cross-cultural expression of personal identity, including gender identity, sexual orientation, same-sex emotional relationships, and heterosexual experience outside of the behavior which produces children. The following illustrations from recent research offer us perspective on our own limited understanding of human sexuality. Other cultures’ experience may help l/ g/b/t people in America feel less isolated, as well as challenge people who happen to fit into the American sexual mainstream to see their feelings of “normality” as based in our particular culture, not in some universally-experienced human nature. Two Native American Cultures Because Native American religions place considerable emphasis on the belief that everything that exists comes from the spirit world, if a person varies from the average person then that implies that the spirits must have paid particular attention to making that person the way he or she is. It follows, therefore, that such a person would have an especially close connection to the spirit world. Accordingly, two-spirit persons are often viewed as sacred people, spiritually gifted individuals who can aid others with their spiritual needs. In many tribes, such persons are often shamans or sacred people who work closely with shamans.1 The Kaska Indians of Canada and the Mojave Indians of the United States both have socially valued roles for persons who feel themselves and are recognized by others to act differently from the usual behaviors for women and men in these societies. These persons see themselves and are viewed as having both female and male spirits, and in both cultures these persons are encouraged to assume alternative gender roles and thus find culturally appropriate ways to contribute to the welfare of their families and societies.2 Among the Kaska, hunter-gatherers in the subarctic, hunting is a main source of food, and usually only men hunt. However, some women are interested in masculine tasks, and in a nuclear family with no sons, these women especially are encouraged to learn to hunt. The parents perform a ceremony to transform this daughter into a son. This girl then grows up to hunt with men, and to marry another woman. The wife, who follows a traditional female role, has children by a man that the two married women select, but the woman hunter is considered that child’s true father.3 Boys in Mojave culture also could name the identity of being two-spirited through a ceremony that their parents performed, in which a child could express his desires to become a transvestite. The anthropologist Gilbert Herdt summarizes the meaning of this identity: The two spirit was the product of a long cultural history that involved myth and ceremonial initiation. The ceremonies were sacred and of such importance that their official charter was established in the origin myths of the tribe, known from time immemorial…[ Even before birth] mothers had dreams that their sons would grow up to become two spirits. No doubt this spiritual sign helped to lend religious support for the ceremony. At any rate these signs of gender change [refusing male toys and tasks] were said by the Mojave to express the “true” intentions of the child to change into a manwoman… Clearly, the child was beginning to act on desires that transgressed his role and required GETTING SEXUALITY IN PERSPECTIVE CROSS-CULTURAL COMPARISONS Stephanie S. Spencer Spring 1998 9 an adjustment, through ritual, to a new kind of being and social status in the culture.4 Tahiti In Tahitian culture, there also is a culturally recognized role for men who desire to take on the tasks and appearance of women. A mahu is considered created by God and involves the adoption of a gender identity which is distinct from being either a man or a woman. Even from an early age a boy’s interest in wearing women’s clothes and doing women’s work shows that he is a mahu. The mahu, however, are not the only men in the culture who have sexual interest in other men. According to interviews with both mahu and non-mahu men, men whose gender identity is exclusively male and who marry women also have sexual relationships with mahu. In addition, unlike the two-spirit women in the Kaska example, mahu in Tahiti do not marry someone of the same sex.5 Although there is a social category for men who cross-dress, and have public identities as mahu, there is not such a category for women in Tahiti. However, there is evidence from interviews with Tahitians of frequent sexual relationships between women, while these women usually also have relationships with men.6 Africa and New Guinea Further examples of variations in gender and sexual identity come from Lesotho, in southern Africa, and from the Sambia culture in New Guinea. In both of these societies, there are no “third-gender” roles, but sexual relationships with members of the same gender are seen as normal and necessary parts of growing up to be full adults. In both of these cultures, age is a very important aspect of social status, and relationships between people of different age groups is an important way to learn appropriate gender roles while young. In contemporary Lesotho, women have “romantic and sexual friendships [with each other, which] seemed to model the kind of courting and, later, marital relations the women might find with men. The women referred to each other with the English terms mummies (older) and babies (younger), a form of fictive kinship that ensured social support and cultural validation of desires and affections…The older woman took on the responsible role in the relationship, and she provided her younger partner with gifts and advice. The latter was important because it prepared the young girl for future relationships with men, most significantly her future husband….” 7 In parts of New Guinea, the New Hebrides and Australian aboriginal cultures, age also is important in social status, and, in some of these cultures, sexual relationships between mature men and adolescent boys is a necessary and culturally valued part of initiating boys to adult male status. These relationships do not occur between boys or men of the same age; this is inconceivable to men in the Sambia ethnic group, for example. And, as in Lesotho, these relationships end when mature men marry women, and become fathers, which are part of the definition of a normal adult man.8 In both of these cases, same-gender sexual relationships are culturally valued and accepted experiences that most or all people have as a normal part of growing up. In societies with these kinds of relationships, gender identity is not fluid, but sexual relationships are seen as naturally changing over an individual’s lifespan. Sexuality as Multiple Choice Rather Than Either/Or These examples reveal variation among cultures in aspects of human life which we tend to think of as inherent in being human or as rooted in biology, such as gender or sexual orientation. They further illustrate that the cultural connections between gender roles, sexual relationships, and religious beliefs vary in different societies. This leaves us with unanswered questions which nonetheless open us to the possibility of multiple answers rather than either-or responses. • If not everyone in every culture is considered to be either a man or a woman, then what are “normal” genders for human beings? • If most people in some cultures have heterosexual marriages, but also have same-sex relationships before or while they are married, are the categories heterosexual and homosexual relevant? • Why does our culture put such importance on determining which sexual orientation a person has? • Does sexual identity really change over a lifetime, or do people act on different sexual desires at different times in their lives? • Do you see yourself in these examples, or do you see others differently with these examples in mind? ▼ Stephanie S. Spencer (r.) is a cultural anthropologist, working on her Ph.D. from Boston University. She has conducted research on multicultural education in Boston- area schools and, most recently, in rural Java, Indonesia, for nineteen months, on junior high school students’ experiences of citizenship as members of a nation with over 200 ethnic groups. She also has worked with local community, school, and religious organizations to develop multicultural education programs. Stephanie makes her home in Cleveland with her partner, Arlene Nehring (l.). Notes 1Ritch C. Savin-Williams and Kenneth M. Cohen, eds., The Lives of Lesbians, Gays, and Bisexuals, Children to Adults (Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace, 1996), 418. 2Ibid. 3Ibid., 418-419. 4Gilbert Herdt, Same Sex, Different Cultures. Gays and Lesbians Across Cultures (Oxford: Westford Press, 1997), 124. 5Robert I. Levy, Tahitians. Mind and Experience in the Society Islands (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1973), 130-138. 6Ibid., 140-141. 7Herdt, 79-80. 8Ibid., 81-84. 10 Open Hands Most Christian sexual ethics, until some new voices began to be heard in the last 15 years, are at least latently procreationist. That is, sexuality is deemed moral when and only when it is expressed in relationships that are open to the possibility of procreation. If, as Christians, we know there are additional or more important criteria for “good sex,” we must address Scripture and tradition, attempting innovation in what it means to be faithful. And this will be tricky, because the Holiness Code is a major source of sexual ethics, some of which is supportable and some of which we have, I thank God, ignored. When Christians do social ethics, which includes sexual ethics, we have several authorities. Always we must attend to these: Scripture, tradition of the church, sciences, reason, and contemporary experience. There are no sharp lines between these authorities, because we appropriate one of them through the lenses offered by the others. Nevertheless sometimes they conflict, and when they do, we seek “emergent coherence” among these authorities. In seeking this emergent coherence, no one authority always trumps the others. The Holiness Code prohibits incest (Lev. 18), and also prohibits intercourse with a woman during her menstrual period. It prohibits sex with animals, and also “lying with a male as with a woman”—a prohibition against homosexual intercourse? It prohibits making one’s daughter a prostitute, but it also prohibits wearing a garment of cloth made of two kinds of stuff (Lev. 19). In order to do sexual ethics for contemporary Christians, many theologians have suggested it’s good to stay far away from the sexual ethics in the Bible, particularly the Holiness Code. The most biblical perspective on sexuality will come from texts in the Bible other than the ones on sexuality. Why? Because biblical sexual ethics in the Holiness Code is controlled by concerns about purity and protection of property. Purity is opposed to pollution, and the priests, the writers of the Holiness Code, played the role of declaring what was clean (pure), and what was unclean. The priestly writers (and priestly editors, designated “P” in biblical scholarship), the writers of the Holiness Code, were members of the ruling class. Their duties included being butchers of sacrifices, taboo specialists, artists, scribes, lawyers, judges, counselors, prophets, and warriors.1 An important function of the priests was to make sharp distinctions between the clean and the unclean. In making these distinctions, the priests defined social relations. People who were “unclean” were socially inferior to those who were “clean.” The priests used their right to distinguish what was holy or common to sanction their privileged access to meat. Only the best of the herd could be sacrificed at the altar, and, through the sacrifices of animals at the temple, priests gave themselves access to large quantities of good meat. This was an extraordinary privilege in the ancient Eastern Mediterranean, as it would be today. The entire ritual system—or pollution system, if you will— sanctioned the priests’ class privileges. In the Covenant with Abraham, P wrote the stipulation regarding circumcision and wrote in a role for the priests in directing the proper control of the discharge of blood. Priest-controlled blood discharge was deemed clean. Blood not controlled by the priests was unclean, as in murder or menstrual flow. Women’s normal menstrual flow and flow after childbearing marked them as unclean and therefore untouchable. Clearly, in a pollution system controlled by men women don’t fare very well. Nor do they do well when the concern is primarily to protect property, for in this patriarchal culture women as wives and as daughters were seen as property. Their social status mitigated their status as property, but the Patriarch was the owner of the whole household, including animals and servants. The purity code found in Torah probably reached its final form by the 5th century B.C.E., and to this day subtly influences our thinking regarding right and wrong. Pollution systems are one way religion institutionalizes injustice, in a sense, rendering it less visible and more palatable. At a very deep level, wealthy people are perceived by the whole society as deserving their wealth because they are clean. Poor people deserve their poverty because they are dirty. Purity codes organize and justify the unequal distribution of wealth and social prestige. Jesus of Nazareth tried to undo the purity code. For him sin was not to be unclean. Sin refers to the motivation to do someone harm. Christians are not bound by purity codes and in the secular society we don’t use the language of clean/unclean in our public debate about economics. But it is still very powerfully present in debates about certain controversial issues. If you listen carefully, you can hear concerns about pollution in debate about immigration policy (whether to let in the hordes of the unwashed); welfare reform (whether the society at large should support women who at some basic level are tainted); and rights for gay and lesbian people (whether gay and lesbian people can be Christian, and whether they can model the Christian life to their con- SEXUAL ETHICS IN AN OVERPOPULATED WORLD Pollution, Purity, Property, and Procreation Carol Robb Adapted from a presentation to the Restoring Creation Conference, Ghost Ranch Conference Center, Abiquiu, New Mexico, June 24-28, 1996. Spring 1998 11 gregations if ordained to the ministry of word and sacrament). These are economic matters. They are about who should have access to the social wealth. Purity codes continue to function and are deep in our social psyches. The four evangelists reject physical purity as a necessary condition for relationship to God. The concern for purity that remains in the Gospels relates to purity of intentions and motivations, concern for whether persons by their thoughts and actions intend harm or are motivated by care and compassion. Sexual acts are only rendered impure by the intent to harm.2 So the New Testament sexual code indicates all sexual acts may be genuinely wrong where they involve an offense against equality of women and men, or a substitution of sex for the reign of justice as the goal of human existence. Paul similarly used the term “uncleanness” as an equivalent for greed, referring to the private vice of lust and the social vice of wanting to have more than another or what rightfully belongs to another. But, like the writers of the Gospels, Paul refrained from identifying physical impurity with sin. Physical purity is not for Paul a prerequisite of salvation or of membership in the Christian community.3 As in economic ethics, sexual ethics should have these criteria: a) a vision of community, b) marked by protection of the vulnerable, c) sharing risks and benefits of life together, and d) human responsibility for the quality of economic relations as central to faithful living. This vision provides ethical criteria for us now, and it helps us to interpret the Bible and apply our interpretations. That is why I say what is authoritative for contemporary sexual ethics in the Holiness Code, or any other part of Scripture, are the portions that are motivated by a vision of how to share the risks and benefits of life together, how to ensure that people can always provide for themselves and their families. Bracket other portions of the Code that are motivated by a pollution system or assume that some persons are the property of others. Jesus of Nazareth pointed to this moral vision in the Mosaic Law, criticizing all the hierarchical relationships in the Mosaic Code, while at the same time teaching the leveling provisions of that Code. This is why women were drawn to the Jesus movement. Mark 5:24-34 tells the familiar story of such a woman who reached out to Jesus. The woman, who had had a flow of blood for twelve years, seems to have been alone in the crowd; we see no indication anyone was with her to support or protect her. We surmise she once had some finances, because they had been drained by physicians to no avail. She was unclean, by virtue of her flow of blood, and she touched a man (one called Rabbi, no less) who was clean.4 Yet Jesus, instead of claiming the privilege that was due him by the pollution system, stood in solidarity with the unclean woman. This story is an illustration of why women numbered plenty in the Jesus movement and in the early house churches. The egalitarianism of life in the Spirit had political and social implications for them. And now, even today, the egalitarianism of life in the Spirit has political and social implications for us. If we take into account every human being as well as every earthly creature, we must have concern for human impact on the earth’s life support systems. For the overdeveloped world, consumption and production patterns are the main way we are making earth’s life support systems fragile. Precisely because of the impact of human life in the industrialized world, population is a moral issue. In addition, fertility rates in the twothirds world is an issue for the ecology, though the dynamics there are also complicated by political and economic projects of elites. We must not fool ourselves that there is really no problem with the exponentially increasing human population. We must get our heads around the notion that the primary purpose of sexual relations is no longer reproduction. The primary purpose of sexual relations from this time forward is pleasure, pleasure within relationships of responsibility and mutuality.5 That makes sense because it’s mainly in the context of responsible and mutual relationships that sexual relationships are pleasurable. In a full world, responsibility means accountability for personal decisions about having children to others in our web of life. I believe the contemporary conservative obsession with matters pertaining to abortion and sexuality is a substitute for our deep concern about economic security. Ethicist Gerard Fourez finds an analogue in the nineteenth century’s Victorian focus on sexual ethics, while industrialization was depriving people of basic economic security. At a time such as this, an obsession with sex diverts attention to peripheral elements rather than the central one of a society’s structures and practices, making it possible to conceal problems these structures and practices have created.6 Today national boundaries are melting away in the face of treaties supporting the free flow of transnational corporate capital. These economic giants are rarely held accountable for the 12 Open Hands effects of their investment and disinvestment activities on peoples, land, air, and water—yet the Surgeon General of the United States was fired for acknowledging that masturbation, a way of learning about one’s own body and what gives it pleasure, should be discussed in sex education programs. This is clearly an era when major economic dislocation is occurring. But the churchgoing public’s attention has been diverted from these major economic developments onto issues related to sexuality. I’m aware that well-meaning people oppose the civil rights and vocational calls of sexual minorities on the grounds that these minority peoples threaten family stability. Mark my words. Families in the over-developed world as well as families in the sustainable and excluded worlds are threatened. But they are threatened by economic forces outside our control. When men don’t have access to reasonably-paying jobs, they don’t marry the women they get pregnant. Poor young women rationally calculate their chances of getting jobs with diplomas from their inner-city high schools, and decide they have more economic security getting public assistance than in the paid labor force. Men who can get no paying jobs in Mexico leave their families for work in el norte. The women they leave behind may well begin other relationships, as do the migrant workers. Mothers and fathers in Thailand sell their daughters into sexual slavery for the use of Japanese and German businessmen who like them young, to avoid HIV infection. Families all over the globe are threatened because their governments have made decisions to “develop” their economies in the image of north-Atlantic free markets. The threat to all these families is not gay and lesbian people, many of whom are trying to support their own families. The threat is from economic players who are accountable only to their boards of directors. This is why sexual ethics are vacuous without the capacity of local communities to enforce their economic ethics. Our economics today must affect our sexual ethics in a different way than it did our biblical ancestors. Our sexual ethics must no longer view women as property, no longer allow elites to control what’s pure and impure, no longer require sexuality to always procreate to populate our world. Rather, our sexual ethics furthers economic justice by guiding our sexuality toward pleasure within relationships of mutuality and responsibility. Instead of a goal, procreation becomes a servant of our broader stewardship of the planet. ▼ Carol S. Robb is the Margaret S. Dollar Professor of Christian Social Ethics at San Francisco Theological Seminary and at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley. Her most recent book, Equal Value: An Ethical Approach to Economics and Sex (Beacon Press, 1995), brings together sexual and economic ethics. Notes 1Robert E. Coote and David Robert Ord, In the Beginning: Creation and the Priestly History (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991), 31. 2William Countryman, Dirt, Greed, and Sex—Sexual Ethics in the New Testament and Their Implications For Today (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988). 3Ibid. 4I am indebted to Mary Foskett for this interpretation of the Mark passage, shared during a lecture at San Francisco Theological Seminary in February, 1996. 5For a full theological and theoretical exposition of this thesis see Christine Gudorf, Body, Sex, and Pleasure (Cleveland: Pilgrim, 1994). 6Gerard Fourez, Liberation Ethics (Philadelphia: Temple University, 1982), 111. AD Spring 1998 13 14 Open Hands In a sense, ethics is the defining logic by which we make our moral decisions. Our ethics usually come by way of culture and tradition based on heterosexual- centric values. Thus sexual minorities (g/l/b/t and celibates) are unincorporated. We have had to forge our own models of ethics and morality. What empowers us to develop and maintain with authority an ethical standard for our own lives? With religion opting out of this discussion (insisting on abstinence rather than dialogue), the responsibility has been relegated to us as individuals. Like many Christians, I look to the Bible for empowerment and authority, particularly the Christian Testament. Two texts from Matthew empower me to construct my ethical praxis from Jesus Christ. Matthew 19:11-12 The phrases “for there are eunuchs who have been so from birth” and “let anyone except this who can” taken in the greater context of the Gospel of Matthew let me know that Jesus has spoken particularly of gays and lesbians. Not only that, but he has blessed us and offers us our way to heaven.1 This is done by interpreting this saying of Jesus in light of Isaiah 56:4-5, “For thus says the Lord: To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths, who choose the things that please me and hold fast my covenant, I will give, in my house and within my walls, a monument and a name better than sons and daughters.” As I examined the Greek meaning of the word translated as eunuch in the Christian Testament, I discovered, from sources as varied as works by Aristophanes2 (circa 400 B.C.E.) and an exegesis of the Matthew text by the followers of Basilides3 (circa 100 CE), that they understood the word as a euphemism for people associated with samegender sexual relations as well as nonpropagating persons. Other examples can be cited as well.4 The point is that Jesus did refer to sexual minorities, not just generally, but those who expressed themselves through same-gender sexual relations, and Jesus honored them. Matthew 8:5-13 In this text, a Centurion comes to Jesus asking that he cure his pais. Heterosexual- centric translations are misleading. A more accurate understanding of pais is “adopted son or brother” or “inheritor of my property.” The relationship becomes clearer when we look at Luke and John. In Luke’s gospel (7:1- 10), the object of the centurion’s concern is his dear, or honored, servant. It is misleading to call him the master’s highly valued servant. It makes the centurion seem to be a slaver whom Jesus honors. In John’s gospel (4:46-53), he is called the royal official’s son. With the additional knowledge, gained by John Boswell’s research, that Roman men of prestige adopted males whom they loved and counted as their mates for the purpose of sharing their property, 5 we can see the true relationship between the centurion and his adopted son. (There is not necessarily an age difference implied by the adoption.) The added perspectives of Luke and John may lead us to the conclusion that the adopted son in Matthew was once the centurion’s servant whom he now loves as his partner, and whom he has virtually married for love. Conclusion Empowerment is the first step toward responsible living. The ministry of Jesus Christ was one of empowering the disfranchised, including sexual minorities, such as women and non-propagating persons. What do we do with that knowledge? I make the next step by looking for the guidance Jesus would give those who now know we are blessed: oppress no one. Our relationships should be mutual, communal, egalitarian, and supportive. Relationships with other human beings are to be ends in themselves, not means to an end. Relationships are to be based on love and its healing nature. This requires a balanced life: balanced in our use of resources for our needs, healing our instinct for greed; balanced in our requirement for emotional support, healing our egocentrism; and balanced in our relationships, healing our instinct for power over others. Empowered as we are, we offer a prophetic voice from the margins of church and society. Until the church and society are able to see as we do, we must trust our own authority derived from our unique insights into Christ’s gospel, bearing witness to that light in our words and deeds. In the biblical tradition, the marginalized and disfranchised often find themselves closer to the understanding of God’s truth as the keepers of the flame of righteousness. ▼ Thomas Ziegert is an M.Div. student at the Claremont School of Theology and a “bidenominational” candidate for ministry in both the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) and United Methodist Church. A member of United University Church in Los Angeles, he serves as Coordinator of Affirmation Los Angeles. He is presently working on Eunoeo Theology, a theology of well-being from a gay perspective. Notes 1I work out the details in my paper “For there are eunuchs...an exegesis.” It is unpublished but you can request it free by e-mail from me at TZdla@aol.com 2See Aristophones: “The Acharnians,” “The Wasps,” and “The Knights.” 3John Ernest Leonard Oulton & Henry Chadwick (translators), Alexandrian Christianity, Vol.2, (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1954) p.40. 4See G.W.H. Lampe, A Patristic Greek Lexicon, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1961) p.572, under eunuchos. 5John Boswell, Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe (New York: Villard Books, 1994), 98- 99. BLESSED AND CHALLENGED BY JESUS Where We Get the Chutzpah to Do Our Own Ethics Thomas C. Ziegert Spring 1998 15 A SEXUAL ETHIC OF ‘LEAST HARM’ Marie Fortune With the publication of Sexual Violence: The Unmentionable Sin (1983), I suggested that Christian sexual ethics would be very different if we took the reality of sexual violence seriously. I am even more convinced of this assertion today. Traditional sexual ethics have been shaped by patriarchal values which emphasize male property rights and attempt simple answers and directives to increasingly complex problems. A process of discernment based on non-patriarchal values, such as justice, respect, bodily integrity, consent, reciprocity, and fidelity, requires daily effort in an intimate relationship and can reward us with integrity, authentic intimacy, and the eroticization of equality. What Is Sexual Sin? Traditional Christian sexual ethics rest primarily on the prohibition of sexual activity outside of heterosexual marriage. Such ethics are patriarchal in nature because this prohibition in the Bible was intended to protect male property rights, control women’s sexuality, and insure the paternity of offspring. I believe this confuses the true nature of sexual sin. It is time to shift the concept of sexual sin to that of sexual violence. Sexual ethics then becomes a different enterprise. Adultery, Marriage, and Homosexuality There have been three primary stands in traditional Christian sexual ethics: condemnation of adultery, heterosexual marriage as normative, and opposition to homosexuality. All appear to arise from a concern for the integrity of heterosexual marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman. But this is not the case. The biblical teachings regarding adultery in Hebrew scripture focused on male property rights. The commandment to not commit adultery (Deuteronomy 5:18) forbade “sexual intercourse between a man and a married woman. The Hebrew male did not sin against his own marriage by his extramarital sexual activity; rather he sinned against the marriage of another Israelite [male]. Thus the commandment did not forbid a sexual liaison between an Israelite [male] and a woman taken in war or a prostitute.”1 There is little evidence of ethical concern for the well-being of the woman herself in marriage, “taken in war,” or as a prostitute. The passages in Deuteronomy (22:23-29) which supposedly dealt with the rape of women were also based on male property rights. The sexual assault of a woman is a property crime against her husband or father to whom she “belonged.” There is no recognition of the rights of women to be free from bodily harm nor any sense that the woman in these instances of rape is a victim. Her well-being is not the ethical issue. Adultery is not considered a violation of the relationship between the two sexual partners having to do with broken promises, deception, or faithlessness. Neither is rape considered a sin against the victim. Rather rules governing both adultery and rape emphasize safeguarding a male’s control over his property. The contemporary application of this narrow ethical approach supports the male prerogative of sexual access to women with no sanction except to avoid women who are clearly some other man’s property. The emphasis in Christian sexual ethics on heterosexual marriage as normative has rested on a concern for the public form of the interaction (i.e. are a man and woman legally married before they engage in genital sexual activity?) more than on the private quality of the interaction (how do they treat each other in the relationship?) The implication of this standard is that whatever occurs sexually within heterosexual marriage is morally acceptable and whatever occurs sexually outside this context is morally unacceptable. For example, if a man forces a woman to whom he is not married to perform fellatio on him, this is legally considered rape in most states in the U.S.; if he engages in the exact same behavior two weeks after a marriage certificate is signed, this is not legally considered rape in a number of states. Once again the absence of concern for women’s bodily integrity and choice within heterosexual marriage is startling. There is still little recognition of marital rape, the battering of women, or the denial of reproductive choice as sexual ethical issues. The primary sexual concern of organized Christian bodies in recent decades has been the standard of heterosexual marriage and prohibition of same-sex sexual contact. The United Methodist rule for its clergy summarizes this concern succinctly: “Fidelity in marriage and celibacy in singleness.” This supposed affirmation of marriage has in fact been a cover for the church’s homophobic obsession with homosexuality, particularly the question of whether lesbians and gay men should be ordained. Many denominations in the United States have spent thousands of dollars and many hours debating, studying, reporting, and voting on these issues. The Sexual Confusion The reliance on patriarchal values (primarily male control of property) as the foundation of sexual ethics has clouded the church’s understanding of these questions: What is the central ethical problem in sexual ethics? What is the fundamental violation? What is sexual sin? The persistent confusion about these questions has distorted most efforts to provide useful guidance in sexual matters within our churches in recent years. Sexual ethics within many mainline denominations which permit sexual activity only in heterosexual marriage have been maintained alongside a conscious effort to ignore the reality of sexual violence. The disclosures by women and men of sexual abuse, rape, and sexual harassment have revealed the reality that the majority of church members have experienced some form of sexual abuse. The church all but ignored these disclosures (other than to respond pastorally to some indi16 Open Hands vidual victims) until allegations against clergy began to surface. The problem of sexual abuse by clergy in pastoral or supervisory relationships now appears to be widespread and to cross all denominational lines. As a result of this institutional crisis, the reality of sexual abuse is slowly being acknowledged. Some still see it as an administrative problem, but others are beginning to understand that it is the central ethical issue in sexual ethics. What has created this skewed sense of priorities where, for example, it has been more important to keep gays and lesbians out of ministry than it has been to remove clergy who are sexually abusing children and adults? The problem has been confusion about the nature of sexual sin. If sexual sin is understood as the violation of the precept that sexual activity should only take place within heterosexual marriage, then ethical questions about consent, bodily integrity, choice, power and vulnerability are never asked. If sexual sin is understood as the violation of the bodily integrity of another person through sexual coercion, abuse or assault, then questions about consent, bodily integrity, choice, power and vulnerability take center stage. Sexual Violence The sin of sexual violence is a violation of the victim her/ himself which causes physical and emotional harm. Why is it unethical to violate the sexual boundaries of another person? • Sexual violence is a violation of bodily integrity which denies a person the choice to determine her/his own boundaries and activities. • Sexual violence is a violation of personhood because it objectifies the other, making them a non-person. • Sexual violence creates a victim, that is, renders a person powerless by taking away her/his resources and sense of self. • Sexual violence distorts and misuses sexuality. • Sexual violence destroys trust and violates relationship. • Sexual violence destroys community because it creates an atmosphere of fear and distrust among family, friends, and acquaintances. In a relationship in which there is an inequality of power, like a relationship between parent and child, teacher and student, pastor and congregant, etc., there are additional dimensions to the violation: • Sexual violence violates the adult role vis a vis the child, which is to protect and provide for the child’s welfare. • Sexual violence misuses power and authority. • Sexual violence takes advantage of vulnerability. • Sexual violence denies authentic consent. In sum, sexual violence is a sin because it causes harm to another person and brings suffering which contradicts God’s purpose as stated by Jesus in John’s gospel: “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly” (John 10:10). If we are to find our way out of our confusion about the nature of sexual sin, we need not begin with the question of, to use James Nelson’s phrase, the right organ in the right orifice with the right person (i.e. heterosexual marriage), but with a different question altogether. Paul brings together the teachings of Judaism and Christianity to focus an ethical mandate: Owe no one anything except to love one another; for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law. The commandments, “You shall not commit adultery; You shall not murder; You shall not steal; You shall not covet”; and any other commandment, are summed up in this word, “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore, love is the fulfilling of the law. (Romans 13:8-10 NRSV) If I am seeking to love another person, I can best begin by seeking not to do harm to that person or to myself. To do harm is to sin, to cause suffering and brokenness in our relationship as persons. This is where our Christian sexual ethics should begin. Asking the Right Questions If we take seriously the reality of sexual violence and the ethical questions which it presents, what would our sexual ethics look like? We would begin with Paul’s formulation: “Love does no wrong to a neighbor” and we would affirm the bodily integrity of self and partner and strive to insure that each person be free from bodily harm within an intimate relationship. Our sexual ethics would then address both personal and social dimensions. Four assumptions should support our discernment process: 1. Most people live in relationships of varying degrees of intimacy and most would prefer to do this with integrity. 2. Both women and men are moral agents and both possess the capacity and responsibility for ethical decision-making and action, though our perceptions of our options are likely to be shaped by our gender, race, sexual orientation, age, experiences, etc. 3. No particular gender or relational configuration is assumed. 4. Healthy intimate relationships are only possible in the open and in community. Secrecy encourages shame and isolation which make it very difficult to discern ethical choices. If doing least harm is our goal in relationship to others, what guidelines might assist us in doing least harm? Guidelines provide a short cut to decision-making. Once we have arrived at guidelines which reflect our original principle, we can refer to them quickly in our discernment process and more readily make our choices. The development of guidelines or parameters is an ongoing process and is best carried out in community so that we can test our own ideas against others’ experiences and concerns. But what is the difference between guidelines and rules? Rules are externally imposed requirements which may or may not have a reasonable basis. They sometimes represent the common concerns (or prejudices) of society. They may be necessary to sustain the common good and protect those who are vulnerable, for example marital rape laws, or they may be counterproductive, such as sodomy laws. But rules and laws Spring 1998 17 are not adequate to guide our actions as moral agents. Guidelines, rather, serve as an internal anchor which informs one’s decision-making. Ask yourself: 1. Is my choice of intimate partner a peer, i.e. someone whose power is relatively equal to mine? With this guideline, we recognize that power is always an issue in an intimate relationship and that when power is relatively equal we have the best opportunity to experience authentic consent and choice in a relationship. If there are differences in power due to physical realities such as size or socially constructed realities such as gender, then it is wise to consciously consider how to minimize the impact of those differences on a relationship. For example, a couple can discuss ways they want to relate so that one person’s physical size and strength will not be used to in any way intimidate the partner. This might mean agreeing to remain seated during heated or conflictual discussions so that the larger person does not loom over the smaller person. We will certainly experience sexual feelings towards persons who have significantly more power than we or significantly less power than we, but whether we pursue those feelings is always a choice. Pursuing such a relationship means that we run a high risk of either being taken advantage of (where we have less power, as a client vis a vis a therapist) or of taking advantage of the other person’s vulnerability (where we have more power, as a doctor vis a vis a patient). The possibility of harm is great in either case. 2. Are both my partner and I authentically consenting to our sexual interaction? Both of us must have information, awareness, equal power and the option to say “no” without being punished as well as the option to say “yes.” Consent should never be confused with submitting, going along, or acquiescing. Consent is an alien concept to persons whose life experience has been that sex is something someone does to them— in other words, they feel that they have never had any say in the matter. In sexual interaction, authentic consent requires communication and agreement that “no” means no, “yes” means yes and “maybe” means maybe. “No” will not be punished by withdrawal or more overt coercive tactics. “Maybe” requires waiting for “yes,” not cajoling and pushing. 3. Do I take responsibility for protecting myself and my partner against sexually transmitted diseases and to insure reproductive choice? Does my community support me in gaining information about and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases, as well as information and access to contraception and reproductive options, including abortion? This is a question of stewardship (the wise care for and management of the gift of sexuality) and anticipating the literal consequences of sexual activity. This question takes on even more urgency with the possibility of infection with HIV or the possibility of unwanted pregnancy. My partner and I need to have open communication about sexuality, our sexual histories (including STD’s), appropriate contraception and safer sex. In other words, we need to know each other well before we can make good decisions about a sexual encounter. These are not decisions to be made lightly, under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or on the spur of the moment. These are decisions best made in the context of a relationship which is built over time and in which trust and communication are priorities. This is the best argument against one-night-stands. Having sex with someone you just met means having sex with someone who may be violent, who may have a sexually transmitted disease, and who may be untrustworthy. Why take that chance? 4. Am I committed to sharing pleasure and intimacy in my relationship? My concern should be both for my own needs and those of my partner. The Song of Solomon in Hebrew scripture describes a non-marital sexual relationship without procreative purpose in which erotic longing and pleasure and intimacy are mutually enjoyed. As Christians, if we genuinely live out an incarnational theology, then we must affirm that our bodily selves are good gifts from God and that sexual pleasure is also good. 5. Am I faithful to my promises and commitments? Whatever the nature of a commitment to one’s partner and whatever the duration of that commitment, fidelity requires truthfulness, promise-keeping, attention, and the absence of violence. These are aspects of a relationship which require daily effort. Change in an individual may mean a change in the commitment which should be pursued through open and honest communication. Deep, Abiding Sexual Values Any effort to shift the discussion of sexual ethics in the Christian community towards the values of justice, respect, bodily integrity, consent, reciprocity, and fidelity definitely stimulates resistance in some quarters. There are those who still quickly look for the litmus questions: what about abortion, adultery, homosexuality, and masturbation (in alphabetical order)? If we are to utilize Paul’s ethical insight as outlined earlier, then these are no longer the defining questions. If we are to affirm and promote the eroticization of equality in intimate relationships, these are no longer the defining questions. The values which undergird the five guidelines suggested here encourage us not to meet our own sexual needs at the expense of someone else. These values are also far more stringent than traditional patriarchal sexual ethics. They recognize that there are no simple answers and no permanent resolutions but rather a constant process of ethical discernment if we are to do least harm to those we love the most. ▼ Marie Fortune is the founding director of the Center for the Prevention of Sexual and Domestic Violence. Located in Seattle, the Center serves as a training resource to religious communities in the United States and Canada. (See page 31 for address and phone.) A graduate of Yale University Divinity School and a minister in the United Church of Christ, she is the author and co-author of nine books, including Love Does No Harm: Sexual Ethics for the Rest of Us (The Continuum Publishing Company, New York, 1995), in which the concepts in this article are fully developed. Note 1Raymond F. Collins, Christian Morality: Biblical Foundations (Notre Dame: 1986), 58. 18 Open Hands Is the term “gay sexual ethic” an oxymoron similar to other nonsensical terms, such as “diet chocolate” and “military music”? Many people inside the church and outside think so because they routinely associate gayness with sexual immorality. Interestingly, many queer folks also express reservations, but for different reasons. Many people in the g/l/b/t community object to establishing any normative sexual ethic because “morality” is so often used to persecute and place queer people at risk. Prescribing morals is seen as a repressive project, using fear, shame, and ultimately violence to control those who deviate visibly, publicly from the married heterosexual norm. A fixed, rule-bound code of sanctions only further alienates gay people from loving their bodies and from sharing with others the pleasures of sexual intimacy. Setting up a code, gay or otherwise, to regulate sexuality is terribly misguided and likely doomed from the start. Others, gay and non-gay alike, are simply confused about sexual morality and find themselves wondering if it’s best to keep their own views private and “live and let live.” The dedication of a book on teen sexuality puts the dilemma well: “To the youth of America who must struggle to find their way to sexual health and sanity while the media screams, ‘Always say yes,’ most parents say ‘Just say no,’ and the majority just say nothing.” I agree that conventional morality, including traditional Christian sexual ethics, has by and large been sex-negative, rigid, and hostile to the g/l/b/t community. As a gay man and Christian ethicist, I also believe deep-down that gay people have significant moral wisdom to share about body-love and body-justice, born of our ongoing struggles for survival and self-respect in the face of oppression and more recently the HIV/AIDS pandemic. As carriers of this culture’s discomfort with body and sensuality, gay men and lesbians, as well as bisexual and transgendered people, know something about the joy and responsibility of erotic power as intimate touching. We also know something about what’s required to sustain bonds of affection and care under adverse conditions, a moral knowing we share with other oppressed communities. Developing a gay sexual ethic is worthwhile, in my judgment, because the ongoing, never-ending process of reflecting on our values and conduct strengthens our community. Thinking self-critically, as well as with imagination and good humor, about who we are (character) and what we do (conduct) develops in us “habits of the heart” that can deepen our self-respect, enhance our care of others, and alert us to whatever puts body or spirit in danger. Nonetheless, ethics-making is to be undertaken with a measure of precaution. In his 1855 preface to Leaves of Grass, Walt Whitman gave this good advice: “Reexamine all you have been told at school or church or in any book, dismiss whatever insults your own soul, and your very flesh shall be a great poem…in every motion and joint of your body.” The moral question that intrigues me is, what makes “good sex” good? Conventional sex ethics limits responsible sexuality to only two options: on the one hand, celibacy (abstinence) for singles and gays, and on the other hand, heterosexual marriage that in principle is procreative and monogamous. However, on each score there is good reason to question and dissent. For example, some single persons choose celibacy for sex-phobic and, therefore, highly problematic reasons. In addition, marital rape and abuse take place in too many heterosexual unions to give marriage a blanket blessing. Finally, many sexually active single persons, including many gay and lesbian people, lead loving, responsible, and faithful lives. Making ethical judgments on the basis of social status or category is woefully inadequate. Therefore, we’re still left with deciding, what makes sex morally good, and how can we determine that? About this question, I suspect there’s no one right and finally definitive answer. A variety of responses may appeal to our hearts and minds, as well as open us to further explorations about our lives, our conflicts, our hopes, and our fears. We stand a better chance of sharpening our moral sensibilities if we take other viewpoints into account as we frame our ethic. Along these lines, lesbian- feminist theologian Mary Hunt suggests that we may do best on moral matters when “we engage in creative listening, sketch some general directions, and leave the rest up to the good sense of faithful people.” My own answer, briefly stated, about an ethical eroticism is that good sex is the kind of body-touching that is, at one and the same time, both powerful to the senses (erotically “charged”) and ethically principled. Sex is not doing something to someone else, but rather a mutual process of being with and feeling with another person. Persons, not merely body parts, meet and touch. Therefore, an ethical eroticism requires WHAT MAKES ‘GOOD SEX’ GOOD? Developing a Gay-Positive Sex Ethic Marvin M. Ellison “Reexamine all you have been told at school or church or in any book, dismiss whatever insults your own soul, and your very flesh shall be a great poem...” Walt Whitman Spring 1998 19 paying attention to that other person, as well as to oneself. Both parties must show up, be listened to and taken seriously, and be accountable for what happens, together. I’ve written elsewhere about four basic commitments that in my judgment properly focus ethical concern. Our moral interest should be in eroticizing mutual respect and pleasure as moral goods to be desired in all relations, both sexual and non-sexual. These core commitments include honoring the goodness of the body (and of diverse bodies), granting every person’s entitlement to bodily integrity and moral self-direction, insisting on mutual consent and respect even if love is not (yet) present, and valuing a fidelity grounded in honesty and the willingness to change. During my own explorations about these matters, I’ve reached a somewhat surprising conclusion. As an ethicist, I’ve become convinced that we simply do not need a separate sex ethic to control our sexuality or regulate our sexual conduct. In fact, such an ethic may do more harm than good. In saying this, I am not arguing for a moral free-for-all. Rather, what I am departing from is the legacy of a patriarchal church and culture that fears erotic desire, devalues the body, and seeks to keep men “safe” and in charge by containing women’s lives and women’s bodies within a complex set of male-controlled institutions, most especially male-dominant marriage. It is patriarchy that promulgates the need for special controls on sex, including harsh punishments for sex outside patriarchal marriage, as well as the stigmatizing of those who fail to conform to sexist, racist, and elitist notions of proper male and female roles. Gay people, of course, are the prime cultural exemplars of sexual nonconformists. By definition, we are “sex outlaws” and moral deviants from the perspective of patriarchal law and order. Patriarchy, should we forget, is in force whenever control is the watchword about sex, uppity women and gays are objects of worry, and the pressing agenda is to preserve male gender privilege, especially for males who are white and affluent. Here I must add a particular word to myself and my gay, bisexual, and transgendered brothers. I fear that too many of us still try to mimic the dominant male culture’s norm of masculinity as a way to “pass” as real men and, therefore, be accepted as “one of the boys.” We have learned how to control without guilt, become hardened and cut off from our feelings (but more importantly, be oblivious to the feelings of others), and refuse to be responsible for how our relative power affects others and the earth for good or ill. Together we must become more courageous in our male gender non-conformity, because even when patriarchy is “bent,” it is patriarchy nonetheless! By learning how to resist the force of masculinization in our lives, we stand every chance of becoming more humanized and, therefore, appropriately vulnerable, accountable, and passionate about relations of equality and mutual respect. A sign of our humanizing as men will be our capacity to “turn on” to justice in our bedrooms and throughout the social order. If, as I am arguing, special controls on sexuality are not necessary, and if our safety and well-being are not dependent on fear-based strategies to restrain erotic power and keep things orderly, then is there a place for any kind of sex ethic? My own answer is a qualified yes. Although we don’t need a specialized code that regards sex as dangerous, dirty, and/or chaotic and, therefore, singles out sex for regulation, we can benefit from an adequate life ethic that is able to fully incorporate the erotic as an essential dimension of our humanity. Eroticism is an indispensable human power, one that—contrary to patriarchal fears— we are able to direct with wisdom and compassion. This more comprehensive life ethic honors the moral goodness of respectful touching, but refuses to single out genital touching as especially worrisome or morally significant. Instead, this ethical approach values, but does not overly invest in sexual expression between persons to the exclusion or detriment of other modes of communication. Its primary focus is the quality of respect and care in relationships, the distribution and use of power, and protecting vulnerable persons from abuse, exploitation, and neglect. Such an ethic, at long last, allows us to give sex its due and, at the same time, break with patriarchy’s fear and disquietude with all things sexual. Sexuality is an important, even treasured aspect of our lives, but we can acknowledge its place in our lives without reinforcing racist patriarchal culture’s genital fixation. The moral focus properly belongs on issues of power and safety, including maintaining health and avoiding unintended pregnancy. Such an ethic does not seek to control people, but rather empowers them for exercising responsible freedom and moral selfdirection. An emancipatory ethic supports any and all efforts to help people learn to negotiate fairly and also gain both confidence and skills at receiving others as friends and intimates. A patriarchal sex ethic denies l/g/b/t people our right to be. However, when our existence can no longer be doubted, the fall-back position tells us to “be, but don’t do.” Fortunately, an egalitarian, sex-positive ethic endorses our moral 20 Open Hands right to love and be loved. It also appreciates how the systematic devaluing of embodied love, along with the denial of sexual pleasure and its perversion into domination and control, are particularly cruel, as well as effective, forms of human oppression. Gay moral wisdom about sex tells a truth long-forbidden in our culture: justice- making makes love more pleasurable. By justice I mean the pursuit of right relatedness in terms of mutual respect, care, and the sharing of goods. When we love justice passionately with our whole minds, bodies, and spirits, justice becomes more desirable in every aspect of our lives. Queer people are feared, in part, because our animating moral passion is to break the hold of every form of oppression. The guardians of the status quo know this and fear rightly that our passion for justice-love may be catching. The “gay agenda,” so feared and trivialized by the Christian right, is nothing less than to recruit as many people as we can— of all colors, classes, and sexualities— who along with us will aspire to a morality that insists on each person’s self-respect and seeks to rebuild community by extending justice passionately. In this sense, we are— and should proudly be—a dangerous people, brazenly inviting others to live dangerously, too. We make a difference, in the large and small places of our lives, whenever we love fearlessly. ▼ Marvin M. Ellison has taught Christian social ethics at Bangor Theological Seminary since 1981 and is currently director of the Seminary’s campus in Portland. He received his Ph.D. from Union Theological Seminary in New York and is an ordained minister in the Presbyterian Church (USA). He writes and speaks nationally on a variety of issues, including human sexuality, economic justice, and health care ethics. He co-chairs Maine’s Religious Coalition Against Discrimination and is a member of the Board of Directors of the Maine Bioethics Network. His most recent book is Erotic Justice: A Liberating Ethic of Sexuality (Westminster/ John Knox Press, 1996). Jim Wolfe A prostitute crashes a dinner party and lavishes herself on Jesus, anointing his head with spices and washing his feet with her tears. The highly moral host (a Pharisee) is outraged and says that Jesus would not allow this if he knew what kind of woman this is. But he is wrong. Jesus knows. And guess what? It doesn’t make any difference to him! It is a loving and beautiful thing that this woman has done. She has loved perhaps not wisely and perhaps too well. She may have entered her profession out of desperation to make ends meet and has been exploited. Maybe she has found some pleasure in her work. But now she has heard that a prophet is in town who is inviting everyone into the company of God; she also knows that he is in trouble with the authorities and that his days are numbered. She does not hold back until an appropriate time but bursts in impulsively. She anoints Jesus as if for burial and shows hospitality by washing his feet (which the good host had neglected to do). She does not focus on herself and her sins; she does not repent in the usual sense; she puts her tears into the service of love. Without her asking, Jesus tells the woman that her sins are forgiven, and he tells the Pharisee that she is forgiven much because she has loved much. The answer for the woman who has loved too much is not penitence but yet more love. There can be too little but never be too much love. That is our sexual ethic. Are there guidelines that would help lesbians, gay men, transgenders, bisexuals and straights to practice a love that does least harm and most good? Sure. It is wrong to hurt people (married or not) and good to respect and help. Sex is a gift from God to be received with gratitude and used responsibly and responsively as good stewards. It is wrong to be preoccupied with sex and good to be alive to the erotic in all relationships. It is a shame to hurry love and good to be sensual as well as sexual and to paint in all the colors of love from mania (purple) to storge (slow burning, comfortable green). Do not give anything but love; take precautions against unwanted pregnancy and spreading or catching sexually transmitted diseases. Do not score. Avoid exploitation, the strong preying on the weak, the mature on the immature, the economically well off on the destitute. Make sure consent and pleasure are mutual. Make commitments and change them mutually. Breakup amicably. Sex means more with a person with whom one shares a long-term relationship and means less with strangers. Do not have children until you have the means and readiness to care for them. Provide children with parenting. Through sex one becomes one flesh with spouse, partner or prostitute, so treat your body as a temple in which God’s Spirit dwells. An anthem prays: “Come, Spirit, come, our hearts control. Our spirits long to be made whole. Let inward love guide every deed. By this we worship and are freed.” Jim Wolfe is a professor, poet, preacher, and programmer. He holds a Ph.D. in Religion and Society and teaches sociology at Butler University. This essay grew from teaching Mary Jo Osterman’s course “Claiming the Promise” at St. Andrew Presbyterian Church in Indianapolis. A SEXUAL DESIDERATA Spring 1998 21 In the popular mind, ethics is linked to religion. Religion teaches that God determines right and wrong and that doing what religion teaches is following God’s will. That is true in some way, but it is not straightforward. We come to know right and wrong only gropingly. Especially when new issues arise—like genetic engineering or chemical contraception or sexual orientation— we struggle to decide what is the right response. When we finally decide, if we have acted honestly and in good will, we say that our decision, such-and-such, is the will of God. For surely what is good, as best we can determine, is what God would want. But attributing ethical conclusions directly to God does not guarantee that they are correct. And imposing them on others in the name of God may be the ultimate abuse of power. With the advent of gay liberation, and for absolutely valid reasons, many lesbians and gays rejected the religions that formed and bound them. In the process, some rejected not only the sexual ethics they were taught but also the very notion of valid sexual ethics. The problem of linking ethics with religion is that when the one goes, so does the other. When experience makes clear that religious requirements must be wrong, all requirements go out the window, and sexual expression becomes a free-for-all. The fact of the matter is that ethics is built right into human nature. Our very minds demand that we only affirm what is true— and you cannot dispute this point without confirming it in your very arguing. Similarly, our minds demand that we do only what is good— what is positive, upbuilding, enhancing, what opens onto growth. In the depths of our hearts is a spiritual core. We are geared to embrace the universe, so we spontaneously marvel at beauty, and we long to love and be loved. The lasting fulfillment we desire, of course, always eludes us, but our very desire leads us ever more deeply into the experience of life. Still, only goodness has a future; falsehood and evil inevitably self-destruct. Only what squares with the nature of things can hope to survive longterm. Our spirits sense this fact, so they flee the disorder that is evil, and they gravitate toward the harmony of the good. Experience of this inner movement is called conscience. We ourselves, the very structure of our being, are the source of ethics. Our inherent desire to live ever more deeply urges us to choose what brings richer life. Thus, the ethics that cultures and religions propose is only the goodwilled application to specific issues of the spiritual longing for fulfillment that is built into the human heart. Doing what is right means genuinely serving our own best interests. It might have nothing to do with God and heaven, for what is right must be equally right for the agnostic as for the believer. Then the general ethical question is simply, What contributes to the good? What furthers ongoing growth? What makes for lasting satisfaction? These questions also govern sexual matters. But sex in human beings is complicated. Former thinking— built on Stoic philosophy and funneled into Christianity through St. Augustine— held that, animal-like, sex equated with procreation. But human sex includes not just physical response and biological function. It also entails emotional entanglements. And even more than that, it opens onto the spiritual in us so that making love seduces lovers into dreaming dreams and making promises. Sex in humans opens onto the meaning of life and a universe of shared experience. This is the way human sex is. So “what furthers ongoing growth” in sex must respect all these dimensions. That broader understanding implies that sexual sharing can be completely ethical even outside the confines of heterosexual, child-bearing marriage— as long as, to some degree, as appropriate in each case, the sexual sharing unleashes its life-enhancing potential. Thus, allowing pleasure, fostering bonding, and triggering shared visions and virtues, lesbian and gay relationships, though biologically non-procreative, might express the essential and distinctive nature of human sexual experience as much as heterosexual relationships might. There is no inherent reason why gay and lesbian relationships cannot be fully ethical— which is to say, loving, constructive, life-giving, upbuilding, growth-producing, fruitful, productive. Such broad understanding of sexual intimacy differs from other commonly heard opinions. Some myopically limit sex to the physical. They argue that pleasure is sovereign and it legitimates any sexual experience. Others, more subtle but still narrow, move on the emotional plane. They insist on being “in love” or at least having feelings for someone before engaging in sex. In fact, both those emphases are on target, and they are acceptable—but only if they are incorporated into the broader picture. Once incorporated, they get nuanced. Not any pleasure, not any emotional bonding and delight, but only those that truly serve ongoing growth are allowed. Only those respect the full nature of human sex, and only those are genuinely fulfilling: we are more than bodies and emotions; the human spirit also requires its due. With that understanding, basic ethical rules fall easily into place—not come down from heaven, not imposed by parents, society, or religion—but built right into our own sexual natures and interpersonal relationships. No disease. No physical harm. No unwanted pregnancy. No coercion or manipulation. No abuse of the immature and naive. No emotional harm. No violation of commitments. No betrayal of personal values. These negatives are there because violation of them is destructive. Positively, human sexual sharing requires honesty, trustworthiness, mutual enjoyment, mutual support—some degree of concern and commitment. These requirements may seem restrictive, and in some ways they lead to the same kind of behavior that religion at SEXUAL ETHICS WITHOUT RELIGION Daniel A. Helminiak 22 Open Hands its best traditionally advocated. Yet these requirements are also more freeing than the traditional. If they require concern and commitment, they do not stipulate eternal vows. The nature of each relationship will specify how much concern and commitment is possible and necessary for the relationship actually to be loving, not only in the present moment but also in its long-term effects. It is certainly possible that a passing sexual encounter could respect all these requirements and really be for the overall good of the people involved. It is also possible that a relationship might involve more than two people, whether in sexual intimacy itself or in some configuration of interweaving relationships, and really be for the common good. The “open relationship,” the ménage a trois, and the mistress or gay lover alongside a heterosexual marriage are typical examples. All are possibly ethical, but all are questionable. Real relationship tends to break down in these cases. Almost inevitably someone gets badly hurt. But then again, people inevitably get hurt in any relationship. Everything human is messy. Whether or not those involvements are actually good is the telling question. Answering this question is not always easy, and imposing blanket answers is not helpful. Being willing to ask the ethical question and to follow the required answer in each case— this is what makes people and their behavior ethical. And again, the honest answers will usually fall right where traditional morality placed them. A key complexity of human sex is that it is not just a physical encounter. Humans are persons. In addition to bodies, we have emotions and we have spirits. This is what it means to be a person. So human sex is an interpersonal enterprise. The interpersonal dimension of human sexuality is entwined with the ethical requirements. Indeed, ethical, personal, and interpersonal begin to sound like synonyms. Ethical requirements are not simply a matter of altruism, of being concerned about others. This simplistic me-versusyou view of morality is totally misguided. Ethical requirements are a matter of wholesome self-serving that is inextricably entwined with the good of others. Our whole constitution is outgoing. The horniness in our loins, the longing of our emotions, the dreams and promises of our spirits— all impel us unrelentingly outside ourselves. We fulfill ourselves through interaction with what is beyond us. And when we fulfill ourselves in the good, we actually become that good even as we share it with others. What we are and what they are in honest and loving living becomes one and the same. All talk of selfishness versus altruism is a bugaboo. The sexual act symbolizes this distinctively human state of affairs: when sexual sharing proceeds well, what is good for me is good for you, and vice versa. The physical pleasure, the emotional bliss, and the spiritual self-transcendence— yours and mine— are mutually enhancing. It’s a win-win situation. We are social animals. We live in and with one another. Human sex cannot be extricated from a social context. Even solo-sex usually involves fantasies, memories, and longings about others. Then it is insane to protest, “My body is my own,” “No one has a claim on my life,” and “I have the right to do with myself whatever I please.” Such claims for a new “ethics” are appearing of late in the gay community. Weary of the restriction on free-forall sex that the AIDS epidemic sanely imposed, some free spirits are mounting a campaign to restore the irresponsible days of yore when gay liberation was struggling to be born and desperately threw off all restraints. They claim that physical pleasure is the meaning of sex. They claim the right to high risk behavior in the pursuit of pleasure. Fetishizing HIV, they use risk of infection to heighten the excitement of sex. They claim the right, with consenting partners, to do whatever they wish. Under many circumstances, they certainly can do whatever they wish. After all, there’s truth in the standard schoolyard protest, “It’s a free country.” But that they have the right is mistaken. And the matter is not worth discussing in these terms. The language of rights is part of the bugaboo of me-versus-you. This cut-off-my-nose-to-spite-myface mentality misunderstands the nature of human beings and of society, for both coincide. This mentality mistakenly thinks laws and morality are restrictions imposed from without and fails to see that valid ethics arise from, and serve, our own selves. We are not always sure what the valid ethics are, but pretending there are no ethical requirements in life is not the solution. No one belongs solely to themselves. Family, teachers, neighbors— all have an investment in us. The extreme example is the GI, who is “government issue,” property of the state. He or she will be punished for self-destructive behavior since it costs the military money. Similarly, family, friends, and society at large pay the price for irresponsible sex that results in HIV infection. It is an illusion that the sex of consenting adults is solely their own business. The notions of adultery, infidelity, and sacred vows have long expressed other societal implications of sex. Like it or not, human sexuality is a social reality. Its inherent ethical nature has social implications built right into it. People may kick against the goad and refuse to accept the human state. But such refusal is simple stupidity. One can only lose. Religions call that refusal sin and relate it to God. Understanding what the religions were attempting to do and taking up the task in their place or as a part of them—for the task is really our own— will provide a new ethics that actually meets current needs as we enter the third millennium. Then we might also hope to see a fourth millennium—and heaven, ultimate fulfillment, as well. ▼ Daniel Helminiak is a psychotherapist and educator at the Pittsburgh Pastoral Institute in Pennsylvania. Having ministered as a Roman Catholic priest, he has authored the bestselling What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality (Alamo Square Press, 1994) and more recently has published The Human Core of Spirituality: Mind as Psyche and Spirit (1996) and Religion and the Human Sciences: An Approach via Spirituality (1998), both from State University of New York Press. Spring 1998 23 Why should I want commitment if love rises spontaneously, and if I can identify with it by my freedom at every moment? Why should I promise to love if there are risks to the love itself in making it a matter of obligation? Only something at the heart of our experience of loving can explain this. There are some loves whose very power in us moves us to commitment. “Love’s reasons” for commitment are at last threefold, and they go something like this. First, like all commitments, a commitment to love seeks to safeguard us against our own inconsistencies, what we perceive to be our possibilities of failure. If we are not naively confident that our love can never die, we sense the dangers of our forgetfulness, the contradictions of intervening desires, the brokenness and fragmentation in even our greatest loves. We sense, too, the powerful forces in our milieu—the social and economic pressures that militate against as well as support our love. We need and want a way to be held to the word of our deepest self, a way to prevent ourselves from destroying everything in the inevitable moments when we are less than this. To give to the one we love our word, to yield to her or him a claim over our love, offers a way. Love seek more than this, however. We know that freedom cannot once and for all determine its future affirmation of love. No free choice can settle all future free choices for the continuation of love. Yet sometimes we love in a way that makes us yearn to gather up our whole future and place it in affirmation of the one we love. Though we know it is impossible because our lives are stretched out in time, we long to seal our love now and forever. By commitment to unconditional love we attempt to make love irrevocable and to communicate it so. This is the one thing we can do: initiate in the present a new form of relationship that will endure in the form of fidelity or betrayal. We do this by giving a new law to our love. Kierkegaard points to this when he says, “When we talk most solemnly we do not say of two friends ‘They love one another’; we say ‘They pledged fidelity’ or ‘They pledged friendship to one another.’”1 Commitment is love’s way of being whole while it still grows into wholeness. Finally, love sometimes desires commitment because love wants to express itself as clearly as it can. Commitment is destructive if it aims to provide the only remedy for distrust in a loving relationship. But it can be a ground for trust if its aim is honesty about intention, communication of how great are the stakes if intention fails. The decision to give my word about my future love can be part of converting my heart, part of going out of myself truly to meet the one I love (not part of hardening my heart because of excessive fear of sanctions if I break the law that I give to my love). My promise, then, not only verbally assures the one I love of my desire for constancy, but it helps to effect what it assures.2 * * * * * Commitment is our way of trying to give a future to a present love. It depends upon the power of the past (promise) to influence the present (fulfillment). It aims to strengthen us, so that our love will endure through time; to assure us, so that we may trust within time; to integrate love, so that one day’s fears do not threaten another day’s desires, or one year’s weakness overwhelm another year’s strength. Yet it is not immediately obvious whether commitment is, therefore, a way of resisting time (of making love endure in spite of time, as if there were no time) or of embracing time (giving love a history by giving it a future). Clearly commitment can be related to time in more than one way. The manner of its relationship probably depends to a great extent on how we think about it. If we think of time as a threat to love, then we see our commitments as preserving love against the ravages of time. If we think of time as an opportunity for love to grow, we aim our commitments to ensure for love the time it needs. If we look upon time as something to be spanned, we seek by our commitments to reach across it without being touched. If we consider time as truly integral to commitment itself, then we try to learn time’s mysteries and to prepare for its fruits.3 ▼ Margaret A. Farley, Ph.D., is professor of Christian ethics at Yale University Divinity School. She has been widely published in journals of ethics and religion and is a leader in the field of feminist ethics. 1Søren Kierkegaard, Works of Love, trans. Howard and Edna Hong (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1962), 45. 2Margaret A. Farley, Personal Commitments - Beginning, Keeping, Changing (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1986), 34-35. 3Farley, 40-41. Margaret A. Farley From Personal Commitments Copyright © 1986 by Margaret A. Farley. Used by permission. GIVING A FUTURE TO A PRESENT LOVE 24 Open Hands SIGNS OF GOD Making Banners for Worship Jan Graves “The sign of God is that we will be led where we did not plan to go.” These words arise from a burning bush batiked on ivory muslin. It’s the first thing most people see when they enter our sanctuary for worship. The banner hangs on the wall facing the main entrance and is a visual statement about our relationship to God and the world. It makes an immediate impression and is often the reason why people return. In the 20 years since its making, the banner and its words have become a slogan for our congregation, appearing on buttons and t-shirts and quoted in sermons and at rallies. There are also other banners representing justice issues, covenants, and liturgical seasons. Without reading a single brochure or hearing a single word, people entering our sanctuary know that we are a Christian church, a Reconciling Congregation, a public sanctuary, a justice-seeking church with multi-cultural interests, and have an affinity for rainbows. All worship spaces can benefit from visual symbols like banners. With a little planning, banners can be created by the whole community in just one session using materials people already have in their homes. It can even be done without a sewing machine or other special equipment. First, get a planning group together to brainstorm on design ideas. Think in terms of visual symbols instead of words. Focus on the purpose of the banner. Since many people will be participating, try to think of images that look good in groups— leaves, handprints, flames, drops of water, stones, puzzle pieces, or flowers. For example, our church was planning a reunion. Former members would be returning to share their journeys and ministries. How would we remember them and create a lasting symbol at the event? We chose the theme “Where Our Lights Shine.” “Lights” suggested yellow on a darker background. Instead of stars, we selected arrows to convey journey and action. Participants would have an arrow to decorate in a way that represented their own shining light. Next, determine the overall size and draw a general sketch on graph paper. Select the main media— fabric or vinyl, and issue a call for materials needed to complete the banner. Prepare the background before the banner-making session. Almost any material will do— sheets, bedspreads, linen or vinyl tablecloths, vinyl wallpaper/canvas, 54 inch vinyl wall covering, parachute material, felt, burlap, old drapes, and even outdated or unused paraments. Edges can be frayed or they can be folded over and stapled, glued, double-stick taped or ironed flat with fusible webbing.* A broomstick can serve as a hanging rod. I like to use 1/2" PVC plastic pipe. It’s lightweight, can easily be cut with a hacksaw, and already has a tube to thread the rope for hanging. At the banner-making session, explain the purpose of the banner and the procedure for its construction. Furnish a variety of cloth remnants, trims, ribbons, glitter, yarn, markers, paint pens, fabric paints, and glue. Give people a workspace and let them go to it. If you’re using a vinyl background, contact paper and tapes can be used for the attachments. For our banner, we provided several cardboard arrow patterns so people could trace and cut out their own arrow from the yellow fabric. People didn’t limit themselves to the supplied materials. They attached objects like buttons, ribbons and workplace items to the arrows. Have several people assist in the final assembly. In a wellventilated area, apply spray adhesive to the back of individual fabric pieces. Within a few moments, the adhesive becomes tacky and creates a smooth, dry bond when attached to the background surface. Use fabric glue for smaller pieces. If the pieces are flat, back them with fusion webbing ahead of time and iron into place. In less than an hour, a symbol of the community of faith can be ready for display in a culminating worship service. I’m a big believer in the power of visual symbols. What did you do first when you turned to this page? Did you look at the picture or read the opening sentence? *Fusion webbing, such as Wonder-Under®, available in fabric stores, can be ironed onto a piece of material to create an appliqué or patch. When the paper is removed, the appliqué can be attached to the background material and ironed in place. Jan Graves is the designer for Open Hands and Claiming the Promise and is a member and songleader of Wheadon United Methodist Church in Evanston, Illinois. She facilitated the workshop for the first communally-created banner of the national Reconciling movement in 1987. WHY MARCH IN GAY PRIDE? JUST PEACE! Charles A. Wolfe When I became pastor of Plymouth Church in Wisconsin’s capital city in 1987, the major task was to do the evangelism needed to prevent a 250-member congregation from dying. Deficit budgets and an aging congregation were the primary concerns, not becoming an “Open and Affirming” congregation. At my first annual meeting, a member introduced a motion that we become a “Just Peace” congregation. The motion passed without opposition and minimal discussion. Actively supporting a homeless shelter and being part of the liberal milieu of our state’s educational-political center, it was an easy vote. Of course there should be peace with justice! ©1996 WHEADON UMC Spring 1998 25 Pentecost Sunday, when ten teenagers were confirmed in our church, an organization calling itself Wisconsin Christians United picketed the church, carrying signs that read “Wolfe in Sheep’s Clothing” and “Gays are an abomination to the Lord.” It was an upsetting day; some of our members were shouted at and received hateful looks as they entered for worship. But it also created an opportunity for some who had previously been silent to speak out with passion against such bigotry. The members of the confirmation class were shaken, asking, “Why do they have to spoil our day?” “They can’t spoil your day,” I responded. “What you are doing today means something; it means something to join Plymouth Church— you might as well know up front that being a Christian sometimes has a cost.” When one of our members slipped out early in the service carrying cups of coffee to offer the picketers, he was rebuffed. “We’re not sure about your AIDS control standards, so we won’t take any,” they told him. The whole incident served as an occasion for thoughtful discussion and education around family dinner tables. Last year was one of the few in the past twelve that Plymouth Church has increased its membership, and not only with gays and lesbians. Others also say the welcoming of everyone attracted them. So why do we march in Madison’s Gay Pride March? It has not only to do with being an Open and Affirming congregation: we are also discovering what we meant when we became a Just Peace congregation more than a decade ago! Charles A. Wolfe, Ph.D., is in his twelfth year as pastor of Plymouth Congregational United Church of Christ in Madison, Wisconsin. His advocacy has included testimony before a state legislative committee to oppose legislation designed primarily to offend and isolate gay and lesbian citizens. He also chairs the partnership between the Wisconsin UCC Conference and the Diocese of San Cristobal de las Casas in Chiapas, Mexico. An Open Letter From African- American Clergy and Laity Excerpts from a communication addressed to the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) in the context of the conflict over gays and lesbians in the church, signed by 27 prominent church leaders and issued by the office of the National Black Presbyterian Caucus. It is out of our own historic struggle against Christian prejudice and discrimination, and our distinctive experience of the providence of God through Jesus Christ, as Liberator, that we boldly make this urgent testimony of concern and challenge. Black Presbyterians, from the earliest decades of the 19th century to these closing years of the 20th, have led our Church in justice action on behalf of people who have been objects of Laura Stalder (left) and Rita Honnold of Plymouth Congregational UCC prepare the “Coming Out, Coming Together” banner for the 1997 Gay Pride March in Madison, Wisconsin. Behind them is Plymouth’s own banner held by other members. Years later, in 1992, several events coincided. The Wisconsin UCC Conference organized an educational program through its Gay and Lesbian Coalition on how to become an Open and Affirming Congregation. Our newly-elected moderator of the congregation, Laura Stalder, attended. As a school social worker in a Madison suburb, Laura had watched an educator, whose skills she admired, hounded out of her school district because of her sexual orientation. Laura was outraged and told me that, during her term as moderator, Plymouth would do some educational work and become and Open and Affirming congregation. The process took longer than Laura imagined, with less disruption than I had feared, and when our Open and Affirming task force recommended a statement to the congregation in 1996, it was approved— not unanimously— but by far more than the two-thirds vote required. The hard question for many in the congregation, and what had delayed our vote, had not been whether we could be an “Open” congregation— the opinion that gays and lesbians had no place in the church was never expressed. The issue for Plymouth’s largely working-class congregation was how Affirming is “Affirming”? Does that mean advocating gay civil rights? Marching in gay rights marches? Gay marriages? Contributing to gay causes? The task force responded that it might mean any or all of these things. For a year before Plymouth became officially Open and Affirming, Laura and I had been attending, as observers, meetings of Coming Out, Coming Together (COCT), a coalition of religious groups that sponsored semiannual interfaith services for gays and lesbians and did advocacy work in the community. COCT had been represented in Madison’s annual Gay Pride March for the first time in 1995. Along with PFLAG (Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays), COCT hoped to present a less radical contingent than the more flamboyant groups, like Dykes on Bikes and the Lesbian Avengers. In the spring of 1996, the coalition held one of its interfaith worship services at Plymouth Church. COCT members created the official Coming Out, Coming Together banner, with much of the work being done at Plymouth. Part of that interfaith group, it seemed logical that Plymouth should have its own contingent in the Gay Pride March in the summer of 1996. Four of our members— all straight—marched that first year, carrying the COCT banner. In 1997, six marched, two of whom were Plymouth’s first “out” lesbian couple. And recently, several teenagers from our congregation have expressed a desire to be part of what we anticipate will be a larger body of marchers in this year’s parade. In the past year, we have received into membership seven lesbian members, and this year we will celebrate the baptism of the first baby of a lesbian family. There has not yet been a union service at Plymouth, but that will surely come. Last 26 Open Hands scorn, disenfranchisement, and marginalization in the church and society because of race, class, culture, gender, and stigmas that some attach to anyone who diverges from what others consider the God-given norm. We find it a sad irony that some Presbyterians would adopt the legalistic strategies of those who oppose the remedial measure of affirmative action, the reform of unjust criminal justice codes, and the development of a more compassionate system of public welfare. These Presbyterians, by using a strict and inflexible interpretation of biblical texts and the constitution of the church, seek to establish a hierarchy of sins by which they can single out and exclude other sisters and brothers from participation as full members of our church (Rom. 3:21-23). The modern creeds and constitutions of the Reformed family of churches are open rather than closed interpretations of Scripture and tradition. They focus upon the grace and mercy of God through Christ. They discourage every form of extremism, calling upon each of us to accept, as Christ did, those who have been despised and cast out. They ask us to strive for mutual respect and harmony with those who may disagree with us, and to renounce personal defamation and humiliation as weapons of Christian debate. Because God through Christ loves us, as unlovable as we are, we are bound to love others (1 Jn. 4:19), even those whose sincere ethical choices, opinions, and behavior may be different from our own…. In the confusion of norms and values the greatest gift that each of us has to give or receive is love. The greatest expressions of love, as we know it in Christ, are empathy, compassion, understanding, and “standing with,”— as Christ did—those who are rejected by the scribes and Pharisees. African-American Presbyterians and other racial/ethnic groups in our church have suffered for years from the absence of such qualities and expressions of Christian agape. We know the pain of separation, disparagement, and discrimination. We cannot be neutral in the atmosphere of hostility which currently seems to focus on those whose opinions, actions, sexual orientations, or self-understandings may not be conventional or sanctioned by many. Love demands that we accept and respect each other in Christ, and set aside self-righteous scorn and ridicule, political wrangling, and ecclesiastical terrorism. Only so, can we come to the table of sisterhood and brotherhood and strive for understanding and mutuality in order that our true mission, which is to proclaim and demonstrate the good news about Christ, may be advanced in our church and around the world. As African-American Presbyterians, we refuse to spiritualize Christian unity with pious words about how much “we love sinners, but hate their sin,” and how much we accept those different from ourselves even as we effectively shut them out of fellowship, church offices, and ministries. We know what it is like to have our voice silenced in the congregations and courts of the church. In the dark days of 1904–1906, we were sacrificed in order that a false unity could be joined through the merger of the Cumberland branch and the Northern branch of American Presbyterianism. The latter acquiesced, over our protests, to racially segregated presbyteries and synods. Christian unity is more than a spiritual reality. It is also a concrete, visible, and ethical reality in which we demonstrate the unity of the Triune God by accommodation, incorporation, and loving adhesion in and to each other by divine grace, love, and forgiveness (Rom.14:10-12). FOR THE SAKE OF CHILDREN LIKE ME “And a Little Child Shall Lead Them...” Sol Kelley-Jones A child’s testimony to the Wisconsin State Assembly Committee on Children and Families considering an anti-same-sex marriage bill, March 10, 1997. I read the signs carried by some people who support this bill. They say things like, “God hates gays and lesbians”—that our family is bad. This is scarey for me. Once last year we went to a church service where people were carrying these signs and yelling at us outside. I woke up crying that night, because I dreamed that these same people bombed our church and our family was there. I don’t want to be afraid of these people and others who support this bill and I don’t want them to be afraid of me. I think we can all get along. We don’t have to be exactly the same way. In my history class in school, we’ve been studying about the beginning of the Constitution of the United States. As legislators, you know that it says that all people are created equal and have the right for the pursuit of happiness and equal protection under law. Well, I’ve been learning about Elizabeth Freeman, who was an African-American slave owned by one of the drafters of the Constitution. As a slave she didn’t have any rights. Elizabeth Freeman couldn’t get legally married and her kids could get taken away from her. Today, my parents also can’t get legally married, and it’s scarey for me to know that, if one of my parents died, I could be taken away from my other parent. Two hundred years ago, Elizabeth Freeman went to the government and asked for her rights— like it said in the Constitution. Some people hated or feared African-Americans so much that they would have changed the Constitution rather then allow Elizabeth Freeman her rights. They said terrible things, like if African-American people were freed and had equality under law, everything Americans believed in would crumble. Elizabeth Freeman won her freedom, the right to legally marry and to protect her children. And America didn’t crumble, it got better. I know that there are people here today who will say the same kinds of things about my family that they were saying about Elizabeth Freeman and her family. From studying history, I’ve learned that our Constitution does not say that “all people are equal, except for gay and lesbian people and their children.” It says “all people.” As an elected official, it’s your job to uphold the principles of the Constitution against hate and fear. I’m sure it took a lot of courage for the legislators Spring 1998 27 back then to give African-Americans the right to legally marry and to protect their children. For my sake, and the sake of hundreds of children like me, I trust you will have that kind of courage today. Sol Kelley-Jones, age 11, lives with her two moms Sunshine Jones (l.) and Joann Kelley (r.) in Madison, Wisconsin. Her parents have been in a marriage relationship for 19 years. The three of them are active in James Reeb Unitarian Universalist Congregation. Sol has courageously spoken out about her family at four different legislative hearings in the last year. She has also done ongoing educational work on homophobia in the public schools. She dreams that someday a bill will be introduced that supports kids and adults in families like hers rather than hurts them. A WORK OF GOD Brooke Rolston Names in this article have been changed to protect the innocent. I am learning that it’s important to try to show up in public places at key moments. This fall the University of Washington regents were considering a policy that would open campus housing to domestic partners. Conversation in the community was lively, and most focused the debate on same-sex relations. I learned of a public hearing and decided to go. The room was filled. I went forward and found a long list of speakers signed up ahead of me. I sat down at the end of a row of students, and recognized one as Phil, a participant in a Habitat for Humanity student work party the previous spring. On a campus this large, a moment of recognition is a shared grace. Phil introduced me to his friends. Others began to speak. A state legislator identified himself as a Christian and proceeded to tell the regents that if they ventured in the “ungodly” direction of extending housing privileges to domestic partners, they were acting against clear biblical teaching as well as legal limits on the University’s powers. A local church leader stood to say that older adult regents were jeopardizing the souls of young students, promoting a “gay agenda” among impressionable youth. The students around me knew I was a pastor. What were Phil and his friends anticipating? Did they imagine I would join the damning chorus? I didn’t like waiting, wondering if these students expected me to be another of their persecutors. After half an hour, Phil had to leave for class. I would not have the opportunity to offer another, a different, Christian witness before he left. Finally, I spoke. I offered a welcoming and affirming testimony as a statement of faith from a campus pastor and as a public policy that would not discriminate on the basis of orientation. I just said what I’ve come to believe: that gays and straights alike are made and blessed by God in our sexual identity and in our expression of it. Shortly, the hearing adjourned. As I started to leave, a woman student came up to me and introduced herself as Janine. She told me she’d come to this campus from half-way across the country to escape the confining ideas and repressive people of her earlier years. She also said, “I never thought I’d hear someone in the church say what you said today. Thank you.” Later that week I stopped at the campus office of the sexuality concerns commission, a visit I try to make frequently. This time, a pleasant surprise: I received a welcome hug from Janine, and a smile from Phil, who had just been elected commission chair. Further into the quarter we would all celebrate the regents’ decision to affirm the open housing policy. Janine and Phil, and many others, have felt they might never hear words of hope from the church. I understand that feeling. I thought I’d never find the congregation where I’m a member, or the ministry which I serve as pastor—both open to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people. It’s a sign of the times that my church is threatened with being “disfellowshipped” (cut off from our regional body) over our stance on sexual orientation issues, and that our campus ministry is one of two in the region reprimanded for offering open studies on the Bible and homosexuality. We’ve lost some financial support, but found some friends. This is an exciting time to be in the church. It is also a frustrating time. This winter I met another student, Regina, who, coming out as a lesbian, has been rejected by family and church. She told me that her highest religious experience came in her early teens at an Easter sunrise service. She felt that God had stirred her life and spirit personally that morning. And then she began learning who she was made to be, spoke openly of her sexual identity, and was sent away. She’s begun attending our fellowship. She likes the discussion and camaraderie, but when we plan a time of worship, she tells me, “I can’t do that yet. I don’t know if I can ever believe in God again.” I can’t find the words to express my pain at hearing how her church cut her off from a young and vibrant faith. If I can’t find my words, how hard it must be for her to find words to express her many feelings and continue her search! The marvel is that she is trying. I believe that her attempt is— and that she is— a work of God. Brooke Rolston is an ordained American Baptist minister serving as campus pastor at Covenant House/Campus Christian Ministry at the University of Washington. He is a member of University Baptist Church in Seattle, a congregational member of the Association of Welcoming and Affirming Baptists. 28 Open Hands The Trial of Jimmy Creech Mark Bowman Last summer two women attending First United Methodist Church in Omaha, Nebraska, asked the Rev. Jimmy Creech to officiate at a blessing of their relationship. He agreed, informing his bishop and his church’s Staff-Parish Relations Committee. As news of the impending ceremony began circulating among members of First Omaha, the local daily newspaper published several articles about it. The announcement that the ceremony had occurred quietly on September 14, 1997, provoked several United Methodists in Nebraska to file formal complaints with the bishop’s office. Continued outcry from a small but sizable band of dissidents at First Omaha lead Bishop Joel Martinez to suspend Creech from pastoral duties in early November. The Nebraska Conference Committee on Investigation decided in mid-January to bring formal charges against Creech for “disobedience to the Order and Discipline of the church.” Creech then requested a church trial. The basis for the charges was an amendment to the UM Social Principles adopted by the 1996 General Conference: “Ceremonies that celebrate homosexual unions shall not be conducted by our ministers and shall not be conducted in our churches.” The Social Principles are “intended to be instructive and persuasive in the best of the prophetic spirit.” Creech noted that no one had been tried for violating them. Defense counsel Doug Williamson set a tone for the trial when, during jury selection, he asked how many persons in the jury pool had personal knowledge of a g/l/b person. More than half raised their hands and told of poignant interactions with parishioners, friends, family members, and even other clergy. The case presented by the church was clear-cut. Creech was called to acknowledge that he had conducted the covenanting ceremony between two women. Bishop Kenneth Hicks testified that Social Principles were unequivocal, and that a pastor must comply or leave the church. Then came the defense. A co-pastor and three leaders of Creech’s congregation testified that his ministry was effective and supported by the church’s leadership. A gay man and the mother of a gay man from the congregation witnessed to Creech as a caring and affirming pastor. Creech testified movingly about his journey as a pastor, his ministry with l/g/ b persons and their families, and his resolve that the biblical foundations of his faith and his covenant as United Methodist clergy compel him to offer pastoral services to all persons. Dr. Phil Wogaman, pastor of Foundry UMC in Washington, D.C., former ethics professor and General Conference delegate, testified about the historical role of the Social Principles as a teaching document. After three hours of deliberation, the jury returned its decision prefaced by this statement: “We have gathered in prayer, in silence, and in respectful dialogue. Our vote reflects the difficulty the general church has experienced with this issue. We have struggled— no, agonized— together in a spirit of love. Our hope is that United Methodists everywhere will receive our verdict in the spirit of love and respect.” The vote was 8 guilty and 5 not guilty. Nine votes are required for a conviction, so Creech was acquitted. Immediately after the verdict was announced, Bishop Martinez released a statement saying Creech would return to his appointment at First Omaha. The trial and its verdict resounded through the religious and secular media. About 25 print and broadcast journalists and their accompanying crews had come to Kearney, Nebraska, to cover the trial. Why did this attract so much attention? What can we learn from this? 1) The trial verdict is a reflection of where mainline churches are today, split with an antigay majority. It was fitting that this trial occurred in the “heartland.” 2) Rational discourse can lead to greater openness, and at least convinced some jury members not to discard a fine pastor, nor to send a message of inhospitality to l/g/b persons and their families. 3) It revealed how irrational some of our opposition is to believe that our own message that “everyone is welcome at God’s table” somehow excludes them. 4) The 75-100 Creech supporters reflected diversity— all ages, sexual orientations, dress, and color. The 15-20 Creech opponents were older, Anglo-European, and professionally attired. 5) The convergence of media interest in spirituality/religion and the hot issue of homosexuality offers a forum we can utilize to proclaim our welcoming message. 6) Heterosexual allies are making great sacrifices and commitments on behalf of l/g/b persons and their families. Rev. Jimmy Creech, Rev. Doug Williamson, and attorney Mike McClellan engaged the power structures of the church in this trial as the defense team. They gave countless hours and risked their careers to do so. 7) The immediate backlash against the verdict has been strong and fierce. Emotions about marriage and family along with pervasive homophobia combine to give our opposition fertile soil to cultivate. 8) Finally, never underestimate the power of God’s Spirit. Creech’s acquittal was unexpected. Yet as the trial unfolded, some observers sensed that a larger force was at play. The defense case drew upon biblical foundations. Our supporters gathered daily for prayer, blessing, and singing to invoke God’s Spirit. The prayer network across the U.S. in support of Creech was massive. We shared the confidence of the hymn that “God will raise you up on eagle’s wings.” Mark Bowman is the publisher of Open Hands and the director of the Reconciling Congregation Program. Spring 1998 29 Sustaining the Spirit Oh God, To have the courage of the bleeding woman— Trembling, but still able to reach out for healing… from shame and aloneness, from pain and despair, Without waiting for words. Oh God, To risk as did the bleeding woman— Trembling, but still able to touch another, beyond solitude and fear, Without waiting for words. Oh God, Forgive my hesitant hands, my short reach, As your Spirit moves among us still… Here to be grasped, not explained. As close as the hand of a bleeding sister, a bloodied brother, As real as the ache of my soul. Alexa Smith Prayers of the Body Moonlight crowns her head spreading toward the earth springing forth in warmth from an epicenter of calm. Her eyes are pools of cool pearlized grey which invite my soul to drink in her care. And yet beyond these lies the grace of her touch, light, but direct— gentle, of calm purpose. Now I begin to ponder the joy in me to be released, such ecstasy I can hardly comprehend: What mysteries indeed shall I know? Melinda Mclain Thank you, Heavenly Lover, for giving us love, and making it a means of grace. In each sharp sweet cut of my boyfriend’s glance, I know the intensity of your love for us. Within every crushing hug and scrape of stubbled chin on tender flesh, I feel the power and sting of your claim on us. By the chill on sweaty skin of his breath blown over my shoulders, I am quickened to the Spirit’s call. Thank you, Heavenly Lover, for giving us grace, and making it a means of love. Amen. Tim Tyner Contributing to this page are gay, lesbian, and straight, HIV positive and negative, living and passed on, members and ministers of the United Methodist Church, the United Church of Christ, the Presbyterian Church, and the Metropolitan Community Church. Previously published in More Light Prayers, the January, 1992 issue of the More Light Update the newsletter of Presbyterians for Lesbian & Gay Concerns. Used by permission of the authors. Let me nestle into your lap, Mother God, as Phoebe curls in mine, Limp with trust, knowing that all is provided: shelter, protection, food, and love. Let me feel your hand stroking my head, back, tummy, legs. Gratitude overflows as a purr deep from my center. Rising and falling with the breath of life, let me rest in you, Heartbeat of the Universe. Nancy A. Hardesty Oh Loving Universe, I thank you today for the joys of friendship, for those blessed ones who spend their time curled up on the couch next to me, or holding my hand at the movies when it gets scary, or crying with me when I get bad news from the doctor. Thanks for those beautiful ones who rub my neck or give my tired feet a massage. I am grateful for friends who talk even when there isn’t much to say. Universe, I praise and bless you for the people in my life who make me so glad to be alive. Douglas Saylor 30 Open Hands Movement News Welcoming Communities More Churches Declare Welcoming Stance OPEN & AFFIRMING MINISTRIES The Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) With this issue we welcome the Disciples of Christ as ecumenical partners in Open Hands. Chalice Christian Church San Mateo, California Named after the symbol for The Christian Church, Chalice Christian Church emphasizes the importance of Communion in the congregation’s life and the radical yet reconciling nature of Christ’s table. A “Congregation In Formation” in the Northern California–Nevada Region, this community came into existence as a result of a church split in which religious freedom was a major issue, specifically, the use of inclusive language in worship. Such commitments led the congregation to decide to publicly proclaim itself Open & Affirming. Pastor, Steve Haley, writes, “We are committed to active witness and service in the wider community through both community organizing and hands-on service projects.” OPEN AND AFFIRMING United Church of Christ New Community of Faith San Jose, CA The 60 members of this suburban congregation desire to provide a strong sense of a “welcoming church family” for all those coming to the church, regardless of background. This hospitality is expressed in its ministries, which include offering meeting space for a social/support group for transvestite and transsexual persons in the community. In the coming months, the congregation anticipates a time of remembrance and renewal as, after 27 years, it prepares to say a retirement “farewell” to its founding pastor, the Rev. Richard Taylor. North Congregational United Church of Christ Columbus, OH This vibrant, growing, diverse, metropolitan area congregation of 375 is building a new wing to accommodate its church life and expanding mission. Current outreach includes ministry with homeless persons, low income families, and refugees in need of resettlement. As part of its ONA witness, the church has begun “Rainbow Women,” a fellowship group for lesbians that involves women from the congregation and the Columbus area. North Church is also part of planning for a retreat for ONA churches in Ohio. For an eyewitness account of United Methodist pastor Jimmy Creech’s trial for blessing a same-gender marriage, see“Leadership.” Baptists Struggle Over W&A Churches Church of the Covenant in Palmer, Alaska, has been removed from fellowship in the Alaska Association of American Baptist Churches and Institutions because of their “commitment to the gay and lesbian brothers and sisters in your congregation.” It joins First Baptist of Granville, Ohio, and four California churches that have been disfellowshipped by their regional associations for their W&A stance. Because these churches are not in violation of the “Covenant of Relationships” for ABC churches, they currently remain in good standing within the denomination. A Commission on Denominational Unity, formed to develop ways to deal with divisive matters like the disfellowshipping of W&A congregations, has recommended 1) Common Ground Conferences to foster greater understanding; 2) acknowledgment that regions have the right to determine criteria for their own membership, and that churches disfellowshipped from one region may affiliate with another region; 3) the maintenance of the two current denominational resolutions on homosexuality—one declaring homosexual practice “incompatible with Christian teaching,” the other recognizing differences and calling for respect and dialogue. The report will be voted on during the June meeting of the General Board. Last November, the Northwest ABC Region Board took action to refuse standing to gay clergy. At the same meeting, it received bylaw changes, to be voted on in May, that would make possible the dismissal of University Baptist Church and Seattle First Baptist, its only W&A churches. UCC ONA Churches Issues Challenge All Open and Affirming (ONA) churches in the UCC have been invited to take part in “ONA 2000: Do A New Thing!” Inspired by Isaiah 43:19-21, this is to be a time of intentional outreach to increase awareness of and commitment to our ONA witness. Between February 1998 and the ecumenical “Welcome 2000” celebration in August of that year, each congregation is asked to do one new, creative program or event. These will be highlighted in the program’s newsletter, the ONA Communiqué. MLCN and PLGC to Vote on Merger The Steering Committee of the More Light Churches Network and the Board of Directors of Presbyterian for Lesbian and Gay Concerns have announced plans to merge the two organizations. If approved by the annual meetings of both groups, the new organization will be created on January 1, 1999. A challenge grant has been given to MLCN and PLGC for the employment of a staff person to help nurture new More Light Churches and support networks for gays and lesbians in those sections of the country in which the movement is less visible. Spring 1998 31 RECONCILING CONGREGATIONS The logo is absent here and on our masthead due to objections from the United Methodist Church to our incorporation of its logo. First United Methodist Church Long Beach, California First UMC, now 114 years old, was the old downtown church with 3,000 members in the 1930s. Now the congregation, rebuilding after a long period of decline, sits at the crossroads of two very different urban worlds—a redeveloped professional neighborhood and a barrio with active gangs. The 100-member congregation is multi-ethnic and sponsors a large youth program: 200 youth come to the church on Friday night for dancing, 40 on Sundays for Bible study. The congregation’s decision to become a Reconciling Congregation was a reflection of who its members and community are. First United Methodist Church Santa Cruz, California Celebrating its 150th anniversary this year, this 180-member congregation is in transition from a largely older membership to one mixed with younger members. It has initiated a youth program in cooperation with another nearby church, and participates in several mission projects, including staffing a homeless shelter one night a week and providing food for a food closet. Santa Cruz’s significant g/l population motivated the church’s RCP discussion and decision, which had more participation than any other recent project. The church hosts a g/l square dancing group and co-sponsored a performance of the musical drama “Caught in the Middle” this winter. Trinity United Methodist Church Seattle, Washington Trinity UMC is located in the Ballard community of northern Seattle, a community which was heavily Norwegian, but now is home to many younger families of different backgrounds. This intergenerational congregation of 140 active members seeks to be a truly neighborhood church and is in a period of renewal, recently welcoming nine new members— all under the age of 40. Trinity’s large building complex provides many opportunities for community ministry, including a newly-initiated recreational program in its gymnasium. Trinity has a long tradition of outreach and its members have been involved in food and shelter ministries as part of the North Seattle Cooperative Ministry. More recently, it has brought a variety of arts into worship, including a music program with both a traditional choir and a contemporary band. As the pastor notes: “We want God to be accessible to everyone.” University Temple United Methodist Church Seattle, Washington University Temple, with 450 members, is located in the University district of Seattle, across the street from the University of Washington. It dates to the turn of the century and has been at its present site since the 1920s. The church hosts the campus Wesley Foundation, and is involved in a variety of urban ministries, including a needle exchange program, tutoring, and a care team for persons with AIDS. A key aspect of the church’s identity is its female leadership. University Temple has an informal, family-oriented worship, as well as a more traditional service, on Sunday morning. Its music program is outstanding with a fine choir (which is preparing to perform in Italy) and a concert organist. The congregation sponsors Church of the Hi Fidelity, a monthly outreach to youth, students, and g/l/b/t persons, and participates in a newlyformed ecumenical dialogue of welcoming churches in the Seattle area, presently focused on making churches more accessible to teenagers. RECONCILING IN CHRIST Lutheran Church of Honolulu Honolulu, Hawai‘i This congregation of 375 members share the theme, “Loved by God to Love the World” and will celebrate the church’s centennial during the year 2000. Located in a high-rise neighborhood two blocks from the University of Hawai‘i, a half mile from Waikiki, and nine blocks from the beach, the church is known for its fine worship, tracker organ, Bach cantatas, children’s ministry, and social concerns. Its three Sunday services reflect diversity: early morning Folk Contemporary and Lord’s Supper, midmorning Choral Eucharist, and evening Compline in Candlelight with Gregorian Chant. MORE LIGHT Presbyterian Church of the Apostles Burnsville, Minnesota Organized as a new church development in the late ’50s, the Church of the Apostles organizes its congregational life around mission through participation in Apostle Groups. Located in a suburb of Minneapolis, the congregation is a liberal presence in its community, has a continuing ministry with the mentally challenged, and is involved in the development of transitional housing. The congregation’s study toward becoming a More Light congregation was largely motivated by interested laypeople. Center for the Prevention of Sexual and Domestic Violence 936 North 34th Street, Suite 200; Seattle, WA 98103 USA phone 206/634-1903; fax 206/634-0115 e-mail cpsdv@cpsdv.seanet.com Rev. Marie M. Fortune, Executive Director An interreligious, educational ministry and training resource for religious communities in the U.S. and Canada. Upcoming Gatherings (Check the Winter issue for previously listed summer gatherings.) July 31-Aug. 2 Second National Gathering of Welcoming & Affirming Baptists, Berkeley California. An event for members and friends of W&A Congregations. Rev. Dr. Edwina Hunter, preaching. Workshops include: Becoming a W&A Congregation, Music as an Inclusive Ministry, Sexual Ethics, Same- Sex Commitment Ceremonies, Ecumenical Connections, Being an Out Pastor, and more. Contact Esther Hargis, First Baptist Church, 2345 Channing Way, Berkeley CA 94704- 2201, phone 510/848-5838, e-mail Ehargis@aol.com QTY BACK ISSUES AVAILABLE ___ Be Ye Reconciled (Summer 1985) ___ A Matter of Justice (Winter 1986) ___ Our Families (Spring 1986) ___ Our Churches’ Policies (Summer 1986) ___ Images of Healing (Fall 1986) ___ Minorities within a Minority (Spring 1987) ___ Sexual Violence (Fall 1987) ___ Building Reconciling Ministries (Spring 1988) ___ Living and Loving with AIDS (Summer 1988) ___ Lesbian & Gay Men in the Religious Arts (Spring 1989) ___ The Closet Dilemma (Summer 1989) ___ Images of Family (Fall 1989) ___ Journeys toward Recovery and Wholeness (Spring 1990) ___ The “Holy Union” Controversy (Fall 1990) ___ Youth and Sexual Identity (Winter 1991) ___ Lesbian/Gay Reflections on Theology (Spring 1991) ___ The Lesbian Spirit (Summer 1991) ___ Our Spirituality: How Sexual Expression and Oppression Shape It (Summer 1992) ___ Aging and Integrity (Fall 1992) ___ Reclaiming Pride (Summer 1994) ___ The God to Whom We Pray (Spring 1995) ___ Remembering…10th Anniversary (Summer 1995) ___ Untangling Prejudice and Privilege (Fall 1995) ___ Same-Sex Unions (Spring 1997) ___ Creating Sanctuary: All Youth Welcome Here! (Summer 1997) ___ From One Womb at One Table (Fall 1997) ___ We’re Welcoming, Now What? (Winter 1998) ❑ Please send me the back issues indicated ($6 each; 10+ @ $4). ❑ Send me Open Hands each quarter ($20/year; outside U.S.A. @ $25). ❑ Send Open Hands gift subscription(s) to name(s) attached. Enclosed is my payment of $ _______ OR Charge $ _____________ to my VISA MASTERCARD (Circle one) # __________________________________________ Expiration _____/_____. Name on Card ____________________________________________________ Signature ________________________________________________________ My Name ________________________________________________________ Address _________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip _____________________________________________________ Daytime Phone (______) _____________________ Local Church _____________________________________________________ Denomination _____________________________________________________ Send to: Open Hands, 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 Published by the Reconciling Congregation Program in conjunction with More Light, Open and Affirming, Reconciling in Christ, and Welcoming & Affirming Baptist programs. A Unique Resource on Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual Concerns in the Church for Christian Education • Personal Reading Research Projects • Worship Resources Ministry & Outreach Selected Resources (Check authors’ bio’s for additional book listings.) Biblical Ethics & Homosexuality - Listening to Scripture, edited by Robert L. Brawley. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996. A collection of essays from nine contributors, three on methodology of biblical ethics, six on the Bible and human sexuality. Body Theology by James B. Nelson. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1992. A gay-positive, feminist, straight author explores body theology and human sexuality, with special sections on male issues and medical issues. Essential Guide to Lesbian and Gay Weddings, The, by Tess Ayers and Paul Brown. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1994. A secular guidebook to the details of having a same-gender ceremony. Equal Value: An Ethical Approach to Economics and Sex by Carol S. Robb. Boston: Beacon Press, 1995. The interrelationship of economic and sexual ethics. Fierce Tenderness - A Feminist Theology of Friendship by Mary E. Hunt. New York: Crossroad, 1992. A Catholic lesbian theologian suggests friendship as the paradigm for all relationships, including sexual ones. Intimate Connection, The - Male Sexuality, Masculine Spirituality by James B. Nelson. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1988. Not just for men, an exploration by one of the leading Christian body theologians on how embodiment has shaped theology. Just Good Friends: Towards a Lesbian and Gay Theology of Relationships by Elizabeth Stuart. UK: Mowbray, 1995. An articulate resource on theological bases for lesbian and gay relationships. Love Between Women - Early Christian Responses to Female Homoeroticism, by Bernadette J. Brooten. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996. Parallel in stature and rigorous academic research to John Boswell’s Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality, but ferreting out the ancient roots of female relationships and why early Christians resisted them. Love Does No Harm: Sexual Ethics for the Rest of Us by Marie Fortune. New York: Continuum, 1995. A further amplification of a sexual ethics of “least harm” delineated in the author’s article in this issue of Open Hands. Redefining Sexual Ethics: A Sourcebook of Essays, Stories, and Poems edited by Susan E. Davies and Eleanor Haney. New York: Pilgrim Press, 1991. A diverse collection of useful materials. Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe by John Boswell. New York: Villard Books, 1994. Exciting discoveries of Christian liturgies to unite same-gender partners that pre-date Christian marriage. Sexuality and the Sacred - Sources for Theological Reflection edited by James B. Nelson and Sandra P. Longfellow. A collection of intriguing and scholarly essays from a virtual “who’s who” of thirty body theologians. Touching Our Strength - The Erotic as Power and the Love of God by Carter Heyward. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1989. This best-selling book has become a classic in l/g/b body theology, written by a lesbian feminist theologian, priest, and professor. 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 Open Hands Vol 13 No 4 - Treasure in Earthen Vessels: An Exploration of Sexual Ethics https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/52280cd01d55019cb5a04867135ce712.pdf 3a65af8ce49d89f7f48db48251d91979 Issue An issue of a recurring publication. Volume Number The volume number of the issue 14 Issue Number The number of the issue (within a volume) 1 Publication Year The year the issue was published 1998 Publication Date The date the issue was published Summer Text Any textual data included in the document Both/And Rather Than Either/Or BISEXUALITY Vol. 14 No. 1 Summer 1998 What Might Jesus Think? Test Your “Bi-Q” Personal Stories How Little Gender and Orientation Tell Us 2 Open Hands Vol. 14 No. 1 Summer 1998 Resources for Ministries Affirming the Diversity of Human Sexuality Open Hands is a resource for congregations and individuals seeking to be in ministry with lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons. Each issue focuses on a specific area of concern within the church. Open Hands is published quarterly by the Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (United Methodist) in cooperation with the Association of Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (American), the More Light Churches Network (Presbyterian), the Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ), the Open and Affirming (United Church of Christ), and the Reconciling in Christ (Lutheran) programs. Each of these programs is a national network of local churches that publicly affirm their ministry with the whole family of God and welcome lesbian and gay persons and their families into their community of faith. These six programs—along with Supportive Congregations (Brethren/Mennonite), and Welcoming (Unitarian Universalist)— offer hope that the church can be a reconciled community. Open Hands is published quarterly. Subscription is $20 for four issues ($25 outside the U.S.). Single copies and back issues are $6. Quantities of 10 or more, $4 each. Subscriptions, letters to the editor, manuscripts, requests for advertising rates, and other correspondence should be sent to: Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773 / 736-5526 Fax: 773 / 736-5475 Member, The Associated Church Press © 1998 Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. Open Hands is a registered trademark. ISSN 0888-8833 Printed on recycled paper. BISEXUALITY Both/And Rather Than Either/Or Toward a Christian Understanding of Bisexuality 4 BEN ROE Definitions, science, faith, and the imago Dei. How Bisexuality May Shape Queer Theologies 7 ROBERT E. GOSS Bisexuality as “transgressive metaphor” in doing theology. The Holy Leper and the Bisexual Christian 8 AMANDA UDIS-KESSLER Jesus’ holiness dissolves categories, boundaries, and divisions. PERSONAL STORIES Capable of Monogamy With Either Gender 11 BENTLEY DE BARDELABEN Lesbian—NOT! A Christian for Gender Independence 12 DONNA RILEY No Tidy, Carefully Labeled Box 13 KATE A Bisexual Couple’s Story 14 JOHN AND MARY Twenty-Five Years With a Woman 15 Followed by Twenty Years With a Man EUGENE BRINK Pastoring Bisexual Men on Line 16 JIM WOLFE Parable of the Good Lesbian 17 Cultural and Political Bisexuality LAURIE AUDE Test Your “Bi-Q” 18 A Sexual Orientation Worksheet BEN ROE Using the all-encompassing Klein grid, how bisexual are you? Summer 1998 3 Publisher Mark Bowman Interim Editor Chris Glaser Designer In Print—Jan Graves Program Coordinators Mark Bowman Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (UMC) 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 773/736-5526 www.rcp.org Allen V. Harris Open & Affirming Minstries (Disciples of Christ) 1010 Park Avenue New York, NY 10028 http://pilot.msu.edu/user/ laceyj/ Ann B. Day Open and Affirming Program (UCC) P.O. Box 403 Holden, MA 01520 508/856-9316 www.coalition.simplenet.com Bob Gibeling Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran) 2466 Sharondale Drive Atlanta, GA 30305 404/266-9615 www.lcna.org Dick Lundy More Light Churches Network (PCUSA) 5525 Timber Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 612/470-0093 http://www.mlcn.org Brenda J. Moulton Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (ABC/USA) P.O. Box 2596 Attleboro Falls, MA 02763 508/226-1945 http://users.aol.com/ wabaptists Editorial Advisory Committee Howard Bess, W&A Ann Marie Coleman, ONA Dick Hasbany, MLCN Bobbi Hargleroad, MLCN Dorothy Klefstad, RIC Susan Laurie, RCP Samuel E. Loliger, ONA Tim Phillips, W&A Lisa Ann Pierce, SCN Dick Poole, RIC Caroline Presnell, RCP Paul Santillán, RCP Margarita Suaréz, ONA Stuart Wright, RIC RCP Movement News ..................................... 29 Welcoming Communities ....................... 31 Selected Resources .................................. 32 Next Issue: A HOUSE DIVIDED Made in God’s Image 20 Re-Thinking Constructs of Gender and Orientation ANN THOMPSON COOK Embracing our call to live as if there were “neither male nor female.” Common Ground 22 Excerpts from Unplugged, A Novel in Process PAUL MCCOMAS The land heals a woman coming to terms with her bisexuality. MINISTRIES Connections Enough Already: Distractions to Justice 23 MARY E. HUNT Leadership Never Retired From Justice 24 EDWIN E. REEVES Children Children of God and the Big Lie 25 TIMOTHY TUTT Welcoming Process As Maine Goes, So Goes the Nation? 26 MARGARET MACDONALD & DOTTY KAY STILLMAN Youth Youth Suicide and the White Ribbon Campaign 27 TIMOTHY BROWN SUSTAINING THE SPIRIT Super-Moral-Legalistic-Conformation-itis 28 A Camp Song for the Movement BETH GREGG AND JOHN GREGG Call for Articles for Open Hands Spring 1999 First We Listen! Voices Around the Globe Theme section: We want to hear firsthand from l/g/b/t people around the world, listening to different understandings of both sexuality and spirituality and their interrelationship in people’s lives. Do you know someone we may approach for an article? We are also interested in articles from those with experience or expertise in a culture or cultures other than the dominant majority culture of the United States and Canada. Ministries section: We are seeking columns describing practical experience and suggestions in the following areas: Welcoming Process, Connections (with other justice issues), Worship, Outreach, Leadership, Youth, Campus, Children. These brief articles may or may not have to do with the theme. Contact with idea by November 1 Manuscript deadline: February 1 Chris Glaser, Phone/Fax 404/622-4222 or e-mail at ChrsGlaser@aol.com 4 Open Hands What is Bisexuality? Bisexuality doesn’t exist,” said someone to me a number of years ago. I have heard other statements, too: Bisexuals just can’t have stable relationships. Bisexuals live in a “no one’s land.” Bisexuals are really gay people who just haven’t come all the way out of the closet. Bisexuals are really confused about their identity. Bisexuals are indiscriminate in their sexual partners. The only way to be “truly” bi is to be sexually active with partners of both sexes equally. Bisexuals are incapable of monogamy. Bisexuality “doubles your chances for a date on Saturday night.” Perhaps some of these statements are familiar to you. The reality of bisexuality is often denied by gay, lesbian, and heterosexual communities alike. And yet to understand bisexuality and the complexity of sexual orientation might help make sense out of some of the claims of the “transforming” or “exodus” ministries. My purpose here is to encourage a broader understanding of the complexity of sexual orientation, particularly as it is seen in bisexuality, and to encourage theological reflection which includes the experience of the range of sexual orientation. Myths and stereotypes, like the ones listed above, are a problem for bisexual folk, just as they are for gay/lesbian people. Individual bisexual persons may fit or believe one or more of these myths and stereotypes. Yet just as there is not just one homosexual lifestyle, there is not just one bisexual lifestyle, but rather, a whole range of possibilities from which each individual makes her or his own choices and decisions. Looked at in the context of the whole of what we know about human sexuality, sexual orientation is much more complex than simply the two commonly used heterosexual-homosexual categories. It is even more complex than Toward a Christian Understanding of Bisexuality J. Benjamin Roe adding a third category of “bisexual;” yet, to talk about certain realities, labels sometimes make things a bit clearer. Defining just what is meant by the word “bisexuality” is not easy. A definition that I like is: bisexuality is the presence of significant degrees of erotic attractions, erotic fantasies, and emotional preferences for members of both genders, with some recognition of their significance. Note that behavior is not a necessary part of the definition, and that recognition, or self-identification, is important. This is not a precise definition (if one were even possible), but it will do for the purpose of this article. It is important to note that bisexuality is not a discrete category, but roughly fits the middle range of scales that measure sexual orientation, such as the Kinsey scale and the Klein Grid (See the article “Test Your Bi-Q” on page 18). Research on Bisexuality The Kinsey scale is a zero to six continuum which was designed by the Kinsey researchers in the 1940’s to describe the reality they were discovering that there were not just “two kinds of people” (heterosexual and homosexual), but in fact a whole range of behaviors and “psychologic reactions” from homosexual to heterosexual and all points in between. The scale runs from zero, exclusively heterosexual, to six, exclusively homosexual, with three being equal components of both. An affirmative approach to research on bisexuality or bisexual persons has been a recent development. Ron Fox has an excellent review of this research in an article in the exceptional text, Bisexuality; The Psychology and Politics of an Invisible Minority.1 One early study not in his review I find particularly interesting. This study pointed out some of the ways bisexual persons are different from heterosexual and homosexual persons. Pat Saliba asked self-identified heterosexual, homosexual, and bisexual persons to rank themselves on three separate Kinsey scales: physical sexual activity, affectionate relationships, and erotic fantasy. Saliba sums up her research: “Sexual orientation is complex, not simple.”2 She found that people almost never rated themselves at the same point on all three scales. Within each self-identified group, there is diversity of ratings: all the homosexual persons and all the heterosexual persons weren’t exclusively so, and all the bisexual persons weren’t perfectly equal in gender preference. She found that, among the bisexual group, affectionate relationships and erotic fantasies were “almost as important as sexual activity in their decision to self-identify as bisexual.” This group also was quite diverse in the combinations of ratings among the three scales: some had only incidental sexual activity with persons of the same sex, some had only incidental sexual activity with persons of the other sex. While affectionate relationships were frequently ranked equally, “erotic fantasies were as diverse as those for sexual activity.” Saliba found “tremendous variability, in all areas” among all groups, “And yet the bisexuals are much more like one another than they are either the heterosexual or homosexual groups, and the same is true for each group.” She also found that the way sex and affection are dealt with is more related to whether one is male or female. “Sexual orientation is not only much more than who you sleep with…but it is also where your affections lie, and even more importantly, how you integrate those affections into your sexual identity.” There are different kinds of bisexuality, as well. One typology by Fritz Klein3 identified transitional, historical, sequential, and concurrent types. Transitional bisexuality can be understood as a stage in coming out homosexual, and is primarily a behavioral reality, “ Summer 1998 5 though attractions and fantasies can shift. Historical bisexuality is seen in the long sweep of a person’s life, with greater or lesser mixes of heterosexual and homosexual components. Sequential bisexuality is also seen over a period of time, with relationships being first with one and then with the other gender. Concurrent bisexuality is the maintenance of relationships with persons of both genders at the same time. Bisexual Self- Identification In my experience and that of others who self-identify as bi, bisexual persons often feel some confusion at sometimes being attracted to one and then the other gender. The either-or myth contributes greatly to this confusion. Sometimes the confusion is simply the changeability of their attractions from day to day, or week to week. It is the homosexual part of being bi that usually gives the most difficulty, so bisexual people usually need the support of gay/lesbian people, and so often are reluctant to identify as bi in gay/ lesbian circles. This seems to be changing somewhat, at least in some gay groups, but homophobia will continue to make it difficult to “come out” bi in the general society, and biphobia will make it difficult to come out in both groups. Bi people are often particularly sensitive to the importance of self-identification, growing out of the common experience of others denying their existence or defining sexuality for them. Bisexuals may come for counseling to become more comfortable with a wide range of sexual options. They may want to feel more comfortable in fantasy or behavior or both, with men and women. They may want to be monogamous. They may want to be nonmonogamous and still have a viable primary relationship with either a woman or a man. They may want to be comfortable with multiple relationships (while practicing safer sex). They may want to be more comfortable defining their own sexual options, apart from partner, peer, or society pressure. They may want to be comfortable not being sexually active with both sexes, while having feelings and fantasies about both. Bisexual persons are often more concerned about relationships than gender. The daughter of a friend of ours said she couldn’t imagine using the shape of a person’s genitals to decide whether to have a relationship with the person. This expresses well the perspective of bi people I have known. Bi folks are concerned, too, with the capacity to express relationships genitally if it is fitting, desired, and mutual. Bi persons are also often concerned about managing these relationships not only in caring ways for their partners, but also in ways that honor their own self-understanding. Bisexuality is a complex reality, and highlights the complexity of sexual orientation itself. In my opinion, the experience of bisexual persons helps illumine the wide range of the gift of sexuality, and will continue to challenge our understandings and assumptions about sexuality. Christianity and Bisexuality Christian faith communities and theological traditions, with a few exceptions, have been ambivalent about affirming that sexuality is a good gift of God. Even while affirming its goodness, they have usually attempted to silence the testimonies of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered Christians. And they have largely ignored emerging scientific consensus in their theological and ethical reflections. If people of faith were to commit to hearing the voices of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered Christians, and to honor insights and understandings of scientific research, what would be some useful possibilities for Christian theological reflection? There are some really fine treatments along these lines which often focus only on gay/ lesbian voices and experience. When the reality of bisexual and transgendered people is included, the picture of human sexuality immediately becomes more complex. What resources are there for this kind of breadth in theological reflection? There are a number of publications that could be useful for theological reflection from a perspective that includes the reality of bisexual and transgendered persons. Some of these references are listed in “Selected Resources” on the back cover. One approach to reflecting theologically on bisexuality could be to focus on the community of the church, the silencing, the judgments, the sacraments of baptism and Eucharist, and the call for just and humble actions, such as Marilyn Alexander and James Preston do in their book We Were Baptized Too.4 The emphasis of this approach is God’s inclusive grace, known through creation (the image of God),5 welcome of the stranger,6 and the sacraments of baptism and holy communion.7 Another approach is in James Nelson’s landmark book, Embodiment. It is to do “sexual theology,” that is, a twodirectional movement that takes seriously the embodied human experience, that recognizes the religious dimension of sexual questions and the sexual dimension of religious questions.8 This approach emphasizes the constellations of meaning around sexuality rather than mere sexual acts, the wholeness of human-embodied selfhood, rather than the dichotomous spiritual and sexual dualism.9 Using the Imago Dei A third approach is to use a central concept of theology such as the imago Dei, that is, that we are made in the “image of God.” As an illustration of this approach, I have chosen a recent work that focuses on lesbian and gay persons. I am unaware of a book that deals with bisexual persons that is comparable to Larry Graham’s Discovering Images of God.10 Though there is bisexual experience related in some of the interviews, there is no awareness (except in one important parenthetical remark11) of anything but a dichotomous view of sexual orientation in the book, due largely, I suspect, to his ethical accountability to those he interviewed who had this view. However, his discussion of the theological issues can be very helpful in theological reflection from a broader 6 Open Hands perspective. Out of many rich interviews and experiences, he concludes: We have seen how the intensity of erotic love in relationships of mutual sharing and commitment have healed deep wounds and opened hearts in gratitude to God for such a wonderful gift of life.12 Further, he saw something that could be said of the experience of some bisexual Christians: A sense of God’s gracious participation in life has emerged through involvement in novel forms of partnerships and families that in turn have contributed to fuller personal experiences and to richer communities.13 Graham suggests that the doctrine of the imago Dei is “central to developing a theological foundation for positive care with lesbian and gay persons.” He brings considerable insight to a position which he says “appears to represent the current prevailing position of American Protestantism toward lesbian and gay persons.”14 The main point of this position is that the image of God is heterosexuality, even as it also affirms the key place of relationships of mutuality and intimacy.15 His critique of this tradition is extensive and convincing. He notes the exclusion from consideration of “Christian tradition beyond the Bible” as well as “the concrete experiences of lesbian and gay persons,”16 to say nothing of scientific research. He outlines five inadequacies of this “current prevailing position”: First, it assumes that the materials from the tradition are given rather than creatively constructed by the best (and worst) judgments of human individuals and communities over time. Second, it assumes that its interpretations of the biblical texts are unassailable and accurately represent the selfunderstanding of the original writers. Third, it assumes that the church has always held the position they represent, rather than offering diverse interpretations of the same materials they so confidently draw on. Fourth, it assumes that the contemporary experiences of real persons cannot challenge, correct, and expand inherited traditions. Finally, it tends to “proof text” specific biblical passages for its authority, rather than placing the discussion within a larger theological horizon or context of meaning within the Bible and beyond.17 Graham discusses four additional “plausible alternative interpretations of the imago Dei.” These include the image of God as “an asexual disembodied status,” an embodied male/female existence with the male dominant, a sexless spiritual existence of male/female equality with male-dominance, and “an egalitarian partnership and fellowship” based on Phyllis Bird’s thought.18 None of these, he says, fits directly the experience of the people whom he interviewed. Instead, the work of John Douglass Hall provided the most attractive and appropriate understanding. Hall found “a subordinated strand of reflection…that sees the imago Dei as a quality of relationship instead of an essential human trait or characteristic.”19 He goes on, using this part of Hall’s work: To be in the imago Dei means to be fully ourselves— rather than living according to something externally imposed— in relationships characterized by God-like involvement in all the dimensions of our relational web: with God, our ground and source, with our fellow humans, and with the natural order. Full, authentic humanity in the imago Dei means to be with, for, and together in communion with all of these dimensions of our relatedness.20 Graham concludes with this summary: To be in the image of God is ultimately about the qualities of lovSummer 1998 7 ing communion that come into being in the universe…When reflective of the imago Dei love is…embodied, sensual, mutual, unifying, wholistic…The imago Dei is characterized by creative and just relationality in a context of accountability and mutual concern. 21 It seems to me that these insights apply as well to the experience of bisexual people of faith who, perhaps more than others, may be able to love fully without regard to gender. Contrary to the stereotype that bisexual people cannot commit to relationships, there are many who have the kinds of relationships Graham says are “reflective of the imago Dei.” There are marriages and extended marriage-like relationships in which at least one of the partners is bi. And there are intimate friendships where these qualities exist. Just as the experience of gay and lesbian people is calling the church and culture to broaden understanding of sexuality, so too is the experience of bisexual and transgendered people calling for a similar enhancement of understanding of God’s gift of human sexuality. An earlier version of this article was originally published in The New Voice of Nebraska, Vol 4, No. 3, May 10, 1987. Ben Roe, D.Min., has been married to Maggie for 29 years and has self-identified as bi for 20 years. He does computer programming and maintains the World Wide Web site for the Reconciling Congregation Program. He is active in the Reconciling/ Welcoming Church movement, Affirmation: United Methodists for Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Concerns, and Warren United Methodist Church, a small innercity church in Denver. Notes 1Fox, Ronald C, “Bisexuality in Perspective: A Review of Theory and Research,” in Beth A. Firestein, ed., Bisexuality; the Psychology and Politics of an Invisible Minority, (Thousand Oaks: SAGE, 1996). 2Saliba, Pat, “Research Project on Sexual Orientation,” The Bi-Monthly, newsletter of the Bisexual Center, San Francisco, Vol 6, #5, Sept.-Oct. 1982, pp. 3-6. 3Klein, Fred The Bisexual Option: A Concept of One Hundred Percent Intimacy (New York: Arbor House) in Fox, p. 22. 4Alexander, Marilyn Bennett, and Preston, James, We Were Baptized Too; Claiming God’s Grace for Lesbians and Gays (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996). 5Alexander & Preston, p 22. 6Alexander & Preston, p 46ff. 7Alexander & Preston, p 73f. 8Nelson, James B., Embodiment; An Approach to Sexuality and Christian Theology (New York: Pilgrim, 1978), p. 14-15. For another sexual theology that contrasts with Nelson’s, see Carter Heyward’s Touching our Strength; the Erotic as Power and the Love of God (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1989). 9Nelson, p 25ff; Chap. 3 & 4. How Bisexuality May Shape Queer Theologies Robert E. Goss Excerpts from an unpublished paper, “Queer Theologies as Transgressive Metaphors: New Paradigms for Hybrid Sexual Theologies.” One of my undergraduate students at Webster University had announced to a gay group that he was a “bisexual gay.” A veteran gay activist who had grown up in the Stonewall era told him emphatically, “You can’t be both. You’ve got to be one or the other.” For that activist, my student was uttering nonsense, messing up his conceptual category of gay identity. My student muddied the category of “gay” with its fixed markers and normative boundaries by not conceptualizing in either/or dichotomies but affirming his identity within “both/and” categories of bisexual and gay. His inclusive queerness questioned established gay boundaries; it transgressed fixed identity templates of straight, bisexual, and gay. Is identity so easily confinable to fixed markers that frame the self, body, desire, and actions? Or may it be more fluid, hybrid, or contestable than we ever imagine? Can ambiguity, liminality, and diversity be included in a new queer discursive shift and subsequently in a queer theological discourse? …Bisexual theologies will certainly undermine gay/lesbian and heterosexual theological discourse. Both gay/lesbian and heterosexual theologies subscribe to the politics of otherness with an either/or paradigm, while bisexual theologies represent a subversive alternative to either/or thinking. They stress a “both/and” method that undermines either straight or gay methods of theological reflection and promote mediating methods to bridge hetero and gay theological discourses. …The development of bisexual and transgendered theologies will offend some by their inclusiveness, moving beyond binary thinking of hetero/homo and deconstruct rigid gender boundaries. Bisexual and transgendered theologies will threaten far more those gays who want to assimilate into mainstream society. …Rather than assimilate, future queer theologies will mainstream and celebrate sexual/gender diversities, shifting theological practice into new uncharted intersections of sexual, gendered identities. Robert Goss, Th.D., is the author of Jesus ACTED UP (Harper- SanFrancisco, 1993) and co- editor of Our Families, Our Values: Snapshots of Queer Kinship (Haworth Press, 1998). Goss was ordained as a Jesuit in 1976, but in 1996, transferred his clergy credentials to UFMCC. He lectures at Webster University in St. Louis and serves on the staff of the local MCC. 10Graham, Larry Kent, Discovering Images of God; Narratives of Care Among Lesbians and Gays (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1997). 11Graham, p 151. 12Graham, p 145. 13Graham, p 145. 14Graham, p 150. 15Graham, p 152. 16Graham, p 154. 17Graham, p 155-6. 18Graham, p 156-60. See Phyllis A. Bird, “Sexual Differentiation and Divine Image in the Genesis Creation Texts,” in Image of God and Gender Models, ed. Kari Elisabeth Borreson (Oslo: Solum Forlag, 1991), 16, 17. 19Graham, p 167. See Douglas John Hall, Imaging God: Dominion as Stewardship. (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1986). 20Graham, p 168. 21Graham, p 178. 8 Open Hands The Way of Jesus Jesus’ life calls to me in many ways, inviting me to love God, myself and my neighbors, to trust God utterly and relinquish my fear, to give myself in service and to strive for a justice that would do justice to God’s mercy. Jesus offers me a model of what it means to be a teacher, a healer, a servant, a prophet, a martyr. I could spend the rest of my days trying to learn from him and striving to follow him in the particularities of my own life circumstances. One lesson I draw from Jesus’ life is that God meets us where we are and welcomes us into abundance, not by demanding that we abandon our deepest selves but by offering the kingdom to us at precisely those most sad and joyous, most broken and healing, most vulnerable places. If I am to take this lesson seriously, I must ask what Jesus has to say to me as a bisexual person, capable of emotionally and sexually loving both women and men, often mistrusted and sometimes rejected by both heterosexuals and lesbian/gay people. If I am to find God in the life of the Rabbi from Nazareth, what word of hope is there for my sexual identity? Can that identity draw me closer to God, through Jesus, in some way? The gospels, of course, do not record any sayings of Jesus on homosexuality, let alone bisexuality, and it is impossible to know from the available biblical scholarship whether he was attracted to women, men, both or neither (though I would tend to doubt the last possibility). However, there is another level at which I can seek answers to my questions, one that both draws on plentiful gospel materials and goes beyond them The Holy Leper and the Bisexual Christian Amanda Udis-Kessler into mystery and silence. Jesus was not merely a teacher, preacher, healer and prophet; he was also, and centrally, a shatterer of boundaries, destroyer of margins, and dismantler of statuses in the name of God’s boundless, all-inclusive love. It is this facet of Jesus’ commitment which threatened the authorities of his time and brought him to the cross, and it is in this work of his that I find my own potential for loving beyond gender boundaries welcomed and sanctified. Questioning Traditional Values of Status Biblical scholar Marcus Borg, author of Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time : The Historical Jesus & the Heart of Contemporary Faith,1 among others, has detailed the status-driven politics of holiness and purity among Jews in Jesus’ culture. Today’s commonly recognized forms of social inequality— racism, sexism, class inequality, heterosexism, ageism, ableism and the like— derive largely from what we might call hierarchical dualisms, value systems in which two opposite social categories are defined, one of which is valued (white, male, rich, heterosexual, adult, healthy, ablebodied) and one of which is devalued (person of color, female, poor, lesbian/ gay, very young or very old, ill, disabled). Social inequality in Jesus’ time depended similarly on hierarchical dualisms, with related but differently conceived categories. At the core of what Borg calls the politics of holiness was the question of whether a given individual was pure or impure, clean or unclean; the answer meant the difference between social welcome and social disapproval, even ostracism— which, in such an honorand- shame-based culture, amounted to social death. On the pure/clean/valued side of the equation were rich (or at least economically solvent) Jewish men in good health and in a position to count themselves among the righteous by following the extensive Jewish laws in their entirety. Among the impure, unclean and devalued were the poor, Gentiles, women, the sick, and those Jews considered sinners for not being able to keep the laws (usually by virtue of being poor, women, sick or some combination of all three). Jesus’ frequent references to whores and tax collectors should be understood in this context; whores (unchaperoned women, some of whom were actually prostitutes) and tax collectors (seen as shills for the occupying Roman empire, forced to handle “profane” money, trusted about as much as young African- American men are trusted by security guards in stores today) were among the biggest “sinners” in the purity system. It is not a coincidence that Jesus welcomed them over and over again, told stories in which God’s love for them was clear, and told the purveyors of the purity system that tax collectors and prostitutes were getting into the There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus. Galatians 3:28 If Jesus is holy, then clearly holiness is not about separation. Mike Riddell, Third Way, 12/96; quoted in The Other Side, May-June 1997, p. 57 Summer 1998 9 kingdom of God before the so-called righteous. Jesus could offer this welcome to outcasts because of his own experience of God’s love and welcome, which Jesus translated into a call to be compassionate as God is compassionate (Lk 6:36)— that is, beyond boundaries. He spoke of a gracious Father who sends rain on the just and unjust, urged his followers to love not just neighbor but enemy as well, and instituted a new social structure for eating, a table fellowship in which rich and poor, righteous and sinner, men and women were at the same table in total violation of the purity rules.2 He treated women, Gentiles, the poor and the sick with dignity and respect (with one interesting exception, Mt 15:21-28, in which he came around at the end), and he welcomed children, considered nobodies in his culture.3 He challenged his culture’s hierarchical family structure in ways that would horrify today’s “family values” crowd if they paid attention to it,4 and he skewered wealth,5 piety, and prestige6 as marks of status. He also engaged in what AIDS activists would call a direct action against Purity Central (the Temple, heart of the politics of holiness). Jesus apparently saw God’s graciousness as shattering boundaries and understood the appropriate human response as right relationship with God, others and self, which likewise required boundary shattering. Jesus offered us/ called us to liberation from legalisms into love, from class into compassion, from status into solidarity. (My best understanding of the realm of God today is that it is simply life in love, compassion and solidarity with self, others and the Holy.) Jesus as Holy Unclean Perhaps Jesus’ most awesome boundary destruction took place in his healing work. Sickness was a mark of uncleanness, and many of the people he healed were doubly unclean, such as Gentiles, or the woman with a “bleeding problem,” since Jewish law defined menstrual blood as an unclean substance. 7 Jesus also healed on the Sabbath, breaking the temporal boundary between sacred and profane (Mt 12:10- 13; Lk 13:10-17). While the story about the demoniac in the graveyard (Mk 5:1- 17) is probably not historically accurate, it fits what we know of Jesus that he would enter a graveyard (unclean) inhabited by a man with unclean spirits (worse) and send them into a herd of nearby pigs (the most unclean animal, according to Jewish law). Crossing the barriers between healthy and sick people allowed Jesus to offer people with little hope a chance to cross back into the world of the well, but he was only able to do this by himself crossing into the world of the sick and, therefore, the world of the unclean. Most of the time, when Jesus healed lepers, he touched them (Mt 8:2-4, Lk 7:22). Touching a leper meant that Jesus took on leprosy himself, both in the sense of risking exposure to what we would today call an eczema or psoriasis condition, and in the sense of socially becoming a leper for all intents and purposes. Jesus, beloved of God, chose uncleanness to offer healing, but rather than simply becoming a leper, he sanctified leprosy. Lepers in Jesus’ culture lost any status as clean that they might have had earlier once their condition became public. Jesus, however, appears to have been able to interact with lepers without losing his “clean” status, perhaps due to his healing ability or the authority with which he taught. At least, there is no evidence that he either behaved as an unclean person was supposed to or that he was treated as unclean by those around him. Thus, Jesus became what we might call a holy leper or a God-filled outcast. He was somehow simultaneously clean and unclean, an impossibility in the face of the dualism at the heart of the politics of holiness. His impossible status did what no political protest of the time could have done: it collapsed the core of the dualism undergirding the politics of holiness. In other words, by becoming a holy leper, Jesus demolished the categories of “holy” and “leper” as hierarchical opposites, freeing lepers to be holy and enabling those people defined as pure (e.g. the Pharisees) to encounter their own “uncleanness.” 10 Open Hands At-One-Ment Without Bloodshed This perspective on uncleanness is, I suspect, an uncommon way to think about Jesus’ gift to humanity. Christians are more likely to focus on Jesus’ bridging the gap between humanity and divinity by the way he died, or to argue (as René Girard) that Jesus undid the “scapegoat mechanism” of human culture and religion, revealing that God had no thirst for sacrificial blood.8 However much these characterizations of Jesus’ work may speak to me, I am most awed and humbled by his willingness to become unclean and his resulting conquest over “uncleanness” and the “pure/impure” dichotomy which has fueled so many hierarchical dualisms. For this work of Jesus offers me hope that my bisexuality, far from being a sin, disease, or case of confusion, might be God’s way of working gracefully in me against exclusivism and categorization, on behalf of God’s joyful and inclusive commonwealth. Different people, of course, have different gifts, challenges and life missions, and I don’t mean to suggest that being bisexual is in any way better than the alternatives, or that everyone must become bisexual in order that “Thy kingdom come” (that would require a miracle beyond any we see in the scriptures!). It does seem to me, though, that Jesus the holy leper is well-situated to welcome Amanda the “neither gay nor straight/both gay and straight,” to challenge me and to reassure me. Jesus the holy leper speaks to my bisexuality by offering me a model for life outside the boundaries of destructive hierarchical dualisms. Jesus does not appear to have spent much energy worrying about the impossibility of his status, since there was too much kingdom work to do and since his experience was that nothing was impossible with God. If I am to follow Jesus in this way, I can and must relinquish my concerns and anger about people who deny the existence of bisexuality. Let them believe what they believe; in the meantime, I’d rather work on bringing the commonwealth a little closer than wrangle over the “truth” of my sexual identity. If bisexuof God’s realm, part of the solution rather than part of the problem (as the street evangelists would have it). The “symptom of sin and alienation” so derided by biblical literalists can actually be a gift of grace to draw me closer to God the Great Lover, as I seek the kingdom through my bisexuality and offer that bisexuality back to the kingdom again. I pray in Jesus’ spirit that this work may give shape to my days, I offer thanks for a God who won’t let mere human boundaries stop love, and I praise the Rabbi whose love took him beyond all such boundaries in God’s service. Amanda Udis-Kessler is a Unitarian Universalist writer, musician/ composer, sociologist and anti-oppression educator, living in the Boston area. She is currently working on a sociology dissertation on inequality, and hopes to attend seminary in a few years. This essay originally appeared in the Nov./ Dec. 1997 issue of Whosoever, a website (www.whosoever.org) edited by Candace Challew, and will appear in updated form in a book of writings by bisexual people of faith currently in process. Notes 1Marcus Borg, Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time: The Historical Jesus and the Heart of Contemporary Faith (New York: Harper Collins, 1994), Chapter 3. Also see his Jesus, A New Vision: Spirit, Culture and the Life of Discipleship (New York: HarperCollins, 1987), Chapter 5. 2Mt 9:10, Mk 14:3-9, Lk 11:37-38, 14:1, 19:1- 10 3Mt 18:1-6, 10; 19:13-14; Lk 9:46-8, 10:38- 42, 21:1-4; Jn 4:5-42, 8:1-11 4Mt 8:21-2, 10:34-7, 12:48-50, 23:9; Lk 11:27-8, 14:26 5Mt 6:19-21, 24; 19:21-4; Lk 4:13-14, 6:20, 24, 30, 34-5; 12:15-21, 14:33, 16:19-25 6Mt 6:1-6, 16-18; Mk 9:35, 12:38-9; Lk 14:7-11, 18:10-14 7Mt 8:5-13, 15:21-8; Lk 17:1-19; Mt 9:20-22 8René Girard, Violence and the Sacred. English translation by Patrick Gregory (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1977). ality really is a threat to the gay/straight dichotomy, if it challenges people overly invested in the status quo on both sides of the equation, perhaps that’s because it is supposed to do so. In the meantime, says Jesus, I’m free to stop worrying about rejection and to offer such healing as is mine to give by crossing boundaries in love. He challenges me to do this work in remembrance of him, and if the boundaries I cross are somewhat different than the boundaries he crossed, so be it (though the people defined as unclean today include sexual minorities of all stripes). Bisexuality as Living Atonement I suspect that, in addition to my being called to feed the hungry, attend to the sick, visit the prisoner and house the homeless as much as anyone else on the planet, I’m also called to find ways to use my bisexuality, my form of “holy leprosy,” in the service of inclusivity and welcome. I can, for example, strive to make God’s love manifest in all of my relationships, sexual and nonsexual, regardless of the genders involved. I can refuse to behave as though men were superior to women (traditional sexist values) or as though women were superior to men (a common response to sexism, but not, I think, the ultimate word about who we can be as human beings). I can offer particular encouragement to others who cross boundaries of gender, sexuality, race, and class, by word and by example, and I can try to be alert to the unique, wonderful and surprising gifts of individuals without either disregarding or idolizing their gender identities. These kinds of work are not limited to bisexual people, of course, but my bisexuality can help me carry them out. Undoubtedly, there are more tasks ahead which I cannot envision now, but for which my bisexuality will also be a gift. Finally, then, Jesus does offer a word of hope for my sexual identity. Jesus’ example, if “translated” as I have tried to do here, reassures me that if I live my bisexuality with such kingdom values as love, compassion, honesty, integrity and forgiveness, my sexual identity can and will be used in the service Summer 1998 PERSONAL STORIES 11 I am an African-American, bisexual, male. For me, a bisexual is a person who is capable of having a monogamous, loving, respecting, mutual, sexual relationship with either a male or a female. My definition does not offer license for one to have two simultaneous relationships with both genders. The morals on which I was reared and the tenets of my faith do not permit me anything that is not a one-to-one relationship. Anything outside of this for me would serve either as deception, polygamy, or adultery. As a young lad growing up on the east coast, I knew very early on that I was attracted to both girls and boys, women and men. Even while watching television or going to the movie theater I was enchanted by the sexual presence and charm of both Doris Day and Rock Hudson or Pam Grier and Fred Williamson. I would not discover until my teenage years that I was actually very different than most other boys in my neighborhood. Playing contact sports with some of the fellas was always extra stimulating. In addition, I was more sensitive to things in my world that most teenage boys would ignore. Once my classmates began to get wind of this, I became the target of much ridicule and harassment. I felt much guilt and shame. My saving grace was that I had a gift for academic excellence which provided me many scholastic opportunities. But it did not erase my feelings of marginalization. I did not fit into the dominant culture’s perspective of how a “normal” teenage boy was to behave. I attempted to hide my true feelings for as long as possible. I dated the girls in my class to whom I was attracted, but I would only fantasize about boys of whom I was enamored. In college the rules out of which I operated began to change. I was able to know gay and lesbian students and faculty on campus. Now I could finally date both men and women. Wow! There were times when I thought that I was in heaven and other times when I was in hell. I was in heaven because I was now free to date other men. I was in hell because in many of my social circles it was unacceptable. It was quite a chore trying to understand the nuances of my sexuality. Many of both my gay and straight friends with whom I would share my secret insisted that I choose one preference or the other. But in my heart of hearts, I knew that I was physically and mentally attracted to both. I fell in love with a young man who would eventually break my heart. One day he told me that he was engaged to be married after graduation. He said that being in a homosexual relationship was not an option for him. I was crushed. A couple of years later I fell in love with a beautiful single mother with one young son. Eventually, we married. Our union lasted for many years, and together we had another son and a daughter. As time passed our paths drifted apart and our marriage ended. Soon thereafter, I entered into a homosexual relationship which would also last for many years. But it too eventually came to an end. Currently I am laying the foundation for a wonderful longterm relationship with a handsome, creative, witty, and sexy young man. I have often heard that the third time around is the charm. All I know to do is trust in God and hope for the best. I feel as if the heavens are smiling down upon me. This one is definitely a keeper! Praise be to God! My present relationship unfolds in the same way that it would if I were in a heterosexual union. We respect each other. We love each other deeply. We uphold the fidelity of our covenant. We are committed to one another. Lastly, we bring to one another integrity and grace as it is liberally given to us by our Creator in the heavens above. Though this journey as a bisexual continues to bring new challenges, I would not trade it for any other. I realize that I would not be who and what I am today without having had these experiences. Today, I live my life as an out bisexual male. In doing so, there is much liberation and joy. But as life sees fit, there are also times of struggle and pain woven into the fabric of this bold declaration. Some people are extremely bigoted, and hate language tears down the spirit and soul. Yet I believe that what I do and how I live out my life is God’s will for me and not my own. To openly live my life while acting as an agent of change eventually makes life easier, not only for myself but for others who will come after me. My hope is that my story will uplift at least one who is feeling hopeless, without love or compassion, one who will realize that life is worth living and that God loves and meets him or her wherever his or her journey has led. Within the next year I will be leaving seminary to begin a call to pastoral ministry. I believe that Jesus would be pleased with the way that I have responded to his call. The road that I travel is jammed with those who have been marginalized, brokenhearted, disenfranchised, sick, abandoned, and weak. Yet the mission of the church is to care for “the least of these.” By doing so, I trust that God will allow me to bring God’s healing love into God’s global community, one person at a time. All of this I have come to know through the love of Jesus Christ, the savior of my soul. With each day’s end, I am offered a new beginning to become more like Christ, to become more human. Fully accepting my sexuality and my call to ministry. Fully loving myself and neighbor. Fully out of the closet. Bentley de Bardelaben was born in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and received his B.A. from Columbia College in Chicago. He left a conservative denomination to join the UCC, and is currently an M.Div. student at Eden Theological Seminary in St. Louis. He is a member of First Congregational Church of Memphis. He is the father of two boys and a girl. Capable of Monogamy With Either Gender Bentley de Bardelaben 12 PERSONAL STORIES Open Hands My experience of being bisexual in the church isn’t very different from my experience outside the church; I find the same invisibility, stereotypes and assumptions, even in a church that’s welcoming. For example, in an adult Sunday school class, a longtime advocate for gay and lesbian concerns expressed his discomfort with including bisexual and transgender people in the movement. He repeated some common misconceptions about promiscuity as the behavior that defines bisexuality. While I appreciated his honesty, his statement drove a wedge between us and our work for justice in the Presbyterian Church. Invisibility also remains a problem for me in my congregation. When the person coordinating a discussion on sexual orientation for our high schoolers asked me to speak about what it was like to grow up lesbian, I reminded her that I am bisexual and offered to discuss my experience. She canceled the discussion topic, saying she felt it was better not to “confuse” the youth. I was annoyed that she found bisexuality confusing (though it is better than believing that bisexuals are confused). What frustrated me more, however, was that I had previously come out to her. My congregation prefers to see me as a lesbian because my partner of three years is a woman. For them, my behavior defines my identity. Bisexuality, like most ambiguity, makes church people very uncomfortable. Bisexual people cannot be determined or limited by the gender of a present partner. Imagining “bisexual behavior” is likely to conjure images of sordid threesomes from bad porn movies. Consider commentary from the Presbyterian Review’s website1 on last year’s Amendment A, which would have required “fidelity and integrity in all relationships of life” of ordained officers. “How does one maintain ‘fidelity’ in all the relationships of life?” wrote one contributor. “It’s an oxymoron. It runs contrary to simple definitions. Can one act with fidelity in a bisexual relationship? [Presbyterians for Lesbian & Gay Concerns] seems to argue that this is moral sexual behavior.” The writer’s “simple definition” is too simple, because there is no single type of “bisexual relationship.” For some, a monogamous opposite-sex relationship adhering to fidelity in the covenant of marriage constitutes a “bisexual relationship,” while others choose less conventional relationships. Moreover, many bisexuals can and do practice fidelity in our relationships, conventional and unconventional, monogamous and polyamorous. At least bi people are now visible to the church’s right wing; I had previously maintained that injunctions against ordaining “self-affirming, practicing homosexuals” did not apply to me. When monosexual people get beyond the stereotype that all bisexuals need to have both sexes at once (or “anything that moves”), then it occurs to them that bisexuals have a “choice” about being with a man or a woman (read: a choice to be gay or straight if you define identity by behavior). This notion of choice gives those who obsess over what we do in bed fodder for their control fantasies (and false hope for their change ministries). Bisexuality uniquely challenges all of us concerned about sexual justice to move beyond the debates about “choice” to a liberation in which we value samesex and mixed-sex expressions of love without shame or apology, without valuing one over the other. When bisexuals will not be defined in terms of our primary relationships, it raises uncomfortable questions for the church, like what other qualities might determine sexual identity? We must ask about our feelings and fantasies, about the possibility that there are different kinds of relationships that we experience as affectionate, sensual and even sexual to varying degrees. What then is our sexual ethic? My own denomination, which cannot seem to approve a sexual ethic more profound than “just say no,” has a lot to learn from the bisexual community. While there is no agreement among bisexuals about complex issues like monogamy, the bisexual community has pondered sexual ethics for years and has held up ideals of mutuality, respect, honesty, trust, and consent. Nonmonogamy gets projected onto bisexuals, but we must remember that many monosexuals are non-monogamous. As a feminist, bisexuality means to me that gender is not a defining factor in my choice of a partner. Bisexual feminist Rebecca Kaplan notes that bisexuality is defined in terms of gender (as opposed to, say, one who dates lefties and righties) because gender is a primary division in our society. When gender can be seen as a continuum and when gender-role expectations are relaxed, misogyny and gender discrimination will begin to subside, transgender people will be freer to be and become who they are, and the church will be less transfixed on the genitalia of our partners. This is how feminist, gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender concerns interrelate. I am, as Hal Porter, retiring pastor of Mt. Auburn Presbyterian Church, puts it, a “Presbyterian for gender independence.” The church isn’t bi-positive, even in the most progressive congregations, and it won’t get there unless more bi people— myself included—become more outspoken and take risks. As the overall movement for sexual justice in the church progresses, bisexual people must continue to be visible so that we can challenge the church to develop a sexual ethic that speaks to the realities of our relationships and our lives. Donna Riley serves on the executive board of Presbyterians For Lesbian & Gay Concerns and is the group’s “Webspinner”: http://andrew.cmu.edu/~riley/PLGC.html Note 1http://www.frii.com/~mvpc/gaweb/updates/ sep15.htm Lesbian—NOT! A Christian for Gender Independence Donna Riley Summer 1998 PERSONAL STORIES 13 The summer I turned 20, I met a woman. I was home from college and working a summer job at an art museum. She worked in another department at the museum and somehow we started having lunch together every day. That summer I was dating a boy from home, and writing to a boy from college, on whom I had a major crush. I need to tell you that I went to an evangelical college where you sign a pledge not to drink or dance, and there’s daily chapel. Anyway, this woman was about 15 years older than me, from a different race and culture, and she was amazing— creative and beautiful and outrageous. She was the free-est person I’d ever met. Even now, almost 20 years later, I smile when I think of her. In the course of this friendship she told me that she was bisexual and that there were rumors about us at the museum. I was perplexed. I dated boys in college and was desperately attracted to them—and to her. Eventually I realized that our relationship was based on romantic feelings, and I had to decide: was that OK? One day she said something I knew was true but didn’t know I knew until she said it: she said that when she fell in love with someone, she fell in love with the person and the gender didn’t matter. I thought, Yes, that’s the way I feel. It made so much sense to me then. It felt so true. It still does. As it turned out, though we were friends for many years, we only were romantically involved that summer, and it was pretty tame. But it was the first time I acknowledged a fundamental truth about myself. My attachments didn’t have to fit in a specific, tidy, carefully labeled box. I had a glimpse then of what I now firmly believe: people are terribly complex, and human sexuality is complicated and wonderful and messy and big— bigger than I had been led to believe by my church and my teachers. I don’t always understand sexuality and how it’s expressed by others, and that’s OK. I don’t have to always understand. I take it as a mystery, a gift, a present from God. I take it as part of the abundant life we’re promised in Christ. I take it as good. Before that summer, I dated several men. After that summer, my interest in and attraction to maleness and particular men didn’t change. But I was attracted to femaleness, too, and attracted to particular women. I decided to accept it. I didn’t talk about it— it wasn’t safe at that college. In retrospect, I haven’t often felt like it was safe. Three things kept me from being really conflicted about my sexual orientation. First, my parents were very calm and sane about sexuality in general. They were not religious and they had a ‘live and let live’ mentality about other people, so I did not grow up hearing negative things about homosexuality. Second, I joined an Episcopal church where there was a lot of acceptance of people who were different. And third, most of my pals in college were theater types who were rebels and seekers, open to just about anything. I came to the conclusion that sex is wonder and challenge and joy and connection and healing and struggle— and fun. Since then, I’ve had relationships with men and women (although never at the same time— that never felt honest to me). I’ve said that I’m attracted to a person first and gender is secondary. I’ve learned that gender is a big part of who a person turns out to be. I find certain things about men to be exciting and endearing. I find certain things about women exciting and endearing. I’ve learned and enjoyed different things in different relationships, things that couldn’t be predicted by the gender of the other person. For nearly 20 years now I’ve been a member of an Episcopal church that is welcoming of gay and lesbian people. It was there that I met the man who is my life partner. It surprised some of my friends that I decided to get married. I have no way to explain it except that I deeply love this person. He and I share common values and dreams and affection. He’s wonderful. I fell in love; it wasn’t on purpose. We were together for a couple of years before we decided to have the benefit of “holy matrimony,” as it says in the Book of Common Prayer. We both come out of a very liturgical spirituality; it made sense and felt right to express our relationship in a sacramental way. My partner knows about my previous relationships. We made a commitment to be faithful to each other, just like other people do. We struggle with it, just like other people do. While I did not choose to be bisexual, I choose how to act on my sexuality. I decide to be faithful to my spouse day after day—no matter to whom I’m attracted. I’m not saying that it’s easy, because anyone in a long-term relationship knows it’s not. But it’s the choice I keep making. Because of my situation I sometimes feel invisible. It’s uncomfortable when straight people just assume I’m straight. It’s a fair assumption, but it feels dishonest not to say something. Yet I’m wary of self-disclosure. I’ve also encountered some apprehension from gay and lesbian people. Some people seem to think bisexuality is not a real orientation— they think that someday I’ll “really” come out. Or imply that I was just experimenting in my youth, as if the previous 10 years were just some sort of phase. And some folks think that being bisexual means that I must have multiple simultaneous relationships, which has never been true for me. Because my sexual orientation may be interpreted to reflect on my spouse— who is in a line of work in which this relationship can have implications for his credibility—I’m not very open about my sexuality. It’s because of this—and because of my own employment for a national church body— that I’m not signing my name to this article. This pains me; it feels like cowardice. On one hand, I say that my sexual/affectional orientation is a gift, and I yet I’m afraid to disclose it. What kind of gift is that? I hope someday to live in a world where this would not be an issue; or to be a person who could take that kind of risk. Until then, sign me— Kate Kate works for the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and worships with her husband of many years in an Episcopal Church. No Tidy, Carefully Labeled Box Kate 14 PERSONAL STORIES Open Hands It’s been over twenty years since we met one spring weekend. We are a man and a woman who happen to be bisexual and who have been together over two decades. In that time, monogamy has never been a dimension of our relationship. Indeed, the weekend we met and became lovers, we compared stories of our past sexuality and each found in the other an amazingly kindred spirit. The mid ’70s were the height of the counterculture. We were both peace activists, and that weekend we were visiting a collective household of other activists. We were all seeking to live a simple lifestyle apart from the war-making U.S. government and profit-driven multinational corporations. Feminism was an even stronger point in our ideology (and remains so). Many of us felt that capitalism, racism, sexism and all of the other trappings of traditional U.S. society had to go— including traditional marriage. Both of us had been recently divorced, following tumultuous “open marriages.” Despite the disastrous endings to our earlier attempts at open relationships, both of us were convinced that sexual possessiveness was among the ills of which society needed to be cured. At the time, I was an explicitly non- Christian attender of Friends meetings. Mary attended meeting as well, but described herself as a “feminist Christian,” a term I told her was an oxymoron on the same level as “military intelligence.” Despite the teasing, it was clear to each of us that we were called to our countercultural stand, called to be prophetic voices for social change and justice. Soon our relationship expanded to embrace another equally-minded young man. The three of us shared our activism, our income, and our bed. We bought a home together, and lived together happily for over five years. About the time he left, we got involved with another woman who was our partner for another five years. After she moved on, more and more people were seeing us as a couple, and soon we announced our partnership in a ceremony we wrote ourselves. Several ordained ministers officiated. The word marriage was never mentioned, and the ceremony included no marriage license, no vows of sexual fidelity, and no exchange of rings. It was, in short, a commitment service, not a wedding. Because we are of the opposite sex no one raised any question. This heterosexual privilege is something about which we continue to feel some guilt. It is very easy for us to pass as straight. Yet in our private lives we are living out a sexual identity that would not be easily understood or accepted. Often we have chosen not to reveal it. In some respects this article is a coming out to those of our friends who recognize us in it. Church friends, we are not as straight as we may appear! A couple of times each month we attend parties where like-minded couples meet. Many couples in our group have been married for twenty years or more, and some have been lovers for many decades. These “alternate lifestyle” clubs have few rules, but one is cardinal—“no” means no. All sex is consensual, mutual, and responsible— meeting, we believe, all the criteria for ethical sexual behavior discussed in the last issue of Open Hands. We only party with friends we meet through the lifestyle, and would never dream of recruiting either our straight or gay friends to this. Interestingly enough, though female bisexuality is widely accepted in the lifestyle, male homophobia is rampant. A few have been actively working against this homophobia, and we both now help lead a workshop on “bisensuality” each year at a national lifestyle convention of 500 people. Gradually we are breaking down the stereotypes, and men are learning to be sensual with one another. In all this we are out as Christians. Most Sunday mornings we are in church. We have supported one another in our ministries and spiritual development even as we have explored our sexuality separately and together. As our sexual life has grown, so has our spiritual life. When my congregation began studying the issue of homosexuality, we began to openly claim “bisexual” as an identity for this checkered sexual life we share. People are quick to say “being bi doesn’t mean you’re promiscuous.” And indeed, many bisexual people are faithful to one person while acknowledging the potential of attraction to others. But others are nonmonogamous and feel that to be otherwise would be to deny an important part of ourselves. It seems to me that many people are willing to accept those who are not straight so long as their relationships mimic those of heterosexual couples. Yet we believe that to identify oneself as bisexual is to accept ambiguity in life, a blurring of gender roles socially and in intimate relationships. In our view, bisexuality opens up the possibility of choice not just of a sexual partner but of a style of relationship. Recently a local pastor offered a brief meditation on the resurrected Jesus appearing to his disciples as they fished and advising them where to cast their nets, a story found in John 21. She noted that verse 11 says the net held 153 fish— that is, every species of fish known to humanity at the time. And the net held them all. The church is a net, she concluded, and it too can hold every kind of fish without tearing. Mary and I are pretty strange fish, but we believe God made us that way, and we join God in saying, “It is good!” John and Mary (pseudonyms) live in a southeastern city and are active in two different welcoming congregations. Mary sings in the choir. John regularly leads Bible study. Mary is on the staff of another welcoming congregation as well. You can reach them at BiChristians@juno.com A Bisexual Couple’s Story John and Mary Summer 1998 PERSONAL STORIES 15 I am convinced that it is not possible to change our sexual orientation. At the same time, I know that many people fall between the ends of the sexual spectrum. There are bisexuals who, when they meet the right person, can have significant relationships with either men or women. And there are bisexuals who can move from a homosexual to a heterosexual “lifestyle” or, for that matter, from a heterosexual to a homosexual pattern. My own life is a case in point. I grew up in an era when the only sexual education was the crude jokes heard from adults and peers. I fell in love and married when I was 21 years old. It was several years later that homosexual feelings began to manifest themselves. My wife died of cancer after 28 years of a good marriage. Several years later I fell in love with another man and began a relationship which lasted 20 more years before he also died of cancer. I am sure that there are those who would say that my marriage was just a cover-up to enable me to do ministry in a society and church that are homophobic. I have heard that said of others. But that was not the case for me. I found myself capable of physical and emotional love in both cases, which is what the term bisexuality describes. My experience is not unique. A great many men who are married to women carry on active sexual activities with other men. The ease with which people confined in a same-sex environment (such as the military and prisons) adopt same-sex activities is further evidence that many of us, perhaps most of us, are capable of bisexuality. As James B. Nelson puts it: Though it appears clear scientifically that sexual orientations are seldom if ever “either-or”— either completely heterosexual or completely homosexual— we are still so rooted in the dualisms of sharply distinguished opposites that we find it almost impossible to deal with the pervasive realities of bisexuality.1 I am convinced that the neat division of people into two classes, straight and gay, heterosexual and homosexual, simply does not describe human beings adequately. Many people would classify any person who has had any sexual experience with persons of the same gender as homosexual. There even seems to be great reluctance in the gay community to admit that there are many people who are bisexual. Yet I believe that sexual “purity” may be as rare as racial purity. God seems to delight in variety, not uniformity. We human beings may pride ourselves in our ability to create, for example, an endless number of Coke bottles, all identical. God, on the other hand, enables endless diversity, from snowflakes to fingerprints to sexual natures. This should be a cause for celebration, but our human tendency is to fear diversity. Conformity is more comfortable. Our lives may become difficult when we discover that diversity exists not only outside of us, but within us. I am not the first to suspect that much of the passion behind homophobia is fueled by unrecognized or unacknowledged homosexual feelings. The homophobic individual seeks the destruction of homosexual persons as a way of denying or destroying his or her own homosexual feelings. My hatred of “them” gets mixed up with my hatred of parts of myself. Thus one of the potential poisonous fruits of human bisexuality is homophobia. But it need not be so. Understanding the variety of human sexuality in the human family and within ourselves can lead us to a new appreciation of the divine creativeness and our human potential. Eugene Brink was born in Tampa, Florida, and reared in Michigan and Texas. He was educated at Rice and Texas Christian Universities, earning B.A., M.Div, and D.Min. degrees. He was baptized and later ordained at Heights Christian Church in Houston. He served Disciples of Christ congregations in Louisiana, Texas, and Colorado. He has two sons, a daughter, and a foster son. He has retired and lives in Colorado Springs. Note 1 James B. Nelson, Body Theology (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1992), p. 17 Twenty-Five Years With a Woman Followed by Twenty Years With a Man Eugene Brink 16 PERSONAL STORIES Open Hands As the Shakers sung, lots of folks are blessed with the gift of simplicity: to be simply heterosexual or homosexual. It is not so for those of us with the “mixed blessing” of being in the middle range of the Kinsey scale (or the more complicated Klein grid). Our lives are further complicated if we are married. It has been my privilege to participate in an on-line bulletin board for bisexual married men and more recently in an offshoot for such men who are out to their wives. In so doing, I have observed how various men handle their other-than-simple lives and how they seek freedom to be themselves while minimizing hurt to those they love. Most of the older men were less than fully aware of their bisexual orientation at the time of marriage. Many of the younger men knew their orientation but did not accept it or thought marriage would cure them of the urge for male-male intimacy. A few had lived in a gay relationship before falling in love with a woman (sometimes to their own surprise). Many shared that they had been “the best little boy in the world,” excelling in school, participating in church, serving as altar boys. They continued to meet the expectations of others by launching illustrious careers, getting married, and raising families. Most kept their bisexuality a guilty secret and suppressed their wish for male-male sex; an awful lot also suffered from low self-esteem and even clinical depression. The sense of liberation was palpable for many when discovering others like themselves on-line. Many men refer to life as a roller coaster in the period following coming out to their wives. The wife’s first reaction is likely to be bafflement and denial. She may be pleased by his forthrightness, a welcome relief from his previously distant attitudes. The man who had been tied up in knots may suddenly be more affectionate. Intimacy may be enhanced. She may be curious and even turned on by the disclosure of his sexual adventures. As Amity Buxton puts it, when the gay/bisexual husband comes out of the closet, the wife goes in. She is confronted by a reality which she may have hardly suspected or thought had been overcome, which might change her status in the community if known, and she may know of no one to turn to for support. The wife may endure selfblame, crushed dreams, and a crisis of faith. She may feel cheated (even if he is not “cheating”) because the man she is living with is not the man she thought she married. And if she cannot depend on the man she knows best being as he appears, the whole world becomes less reliable. While some couples go on for years without resolving issues definitively, many come to a rather stable resolution in time. Some husbands preserve their marriages by agreeing to be faithful but feel good about acknowledging who they are. They may decide to live out their homosexuality only in their fantasy life. They may cultivate gay friends or frequent the gay scene. One man found that exploring new ways that he and his wife could relate sexually relieved him of his need for men. There are those who revise their marriage vows to take into account the man’s bisexual orientation and reforge their understanding of fidelity to include some form of same-gender expression. One man married a man as well as a woman (his wife took part in the ceremony), and the three of them live under the same roof. One man shares time equally with a man and a woman. One couple has found a man they both like with whom they share sexual intimacy. In a couple in which both are bisexual, each has a partner of the same sex. One man finds having several male friends fulfilling for him and less threatening to his marriage. How does one pastor to men such as these? Sympathetic listening is part of it. I try to counteract bad religion. I undercut self-loathing rooted in biblical misinterpretation. I seek to counteract the anti–body and anti–erotic biases of inherited Hellenistic Christianity with the earthy and lusty affirmations of Judaism and from other spiritual paths. I assert the good news of the gospel. I affirm our creation by God. I remind them of the need for self-love; for example, I advised one man to consider himself and his wishes rather than abandoning a satisfying male-male relationship in a noble self-sacrifice for the sake of an unsatisfying marriage. I favor a healthy degree of honesty and encourage negotiation toward a win-win outcome— making and remaking and keeping promises. I champion the power of love to heal and satisfy. My motto: the more loving I do, the more loving I am. The Shakers achieved simplicity by giving up sex altogether. But the gift of celibacy is a rare gift indeed. However, if we elevate love as our only norm, that can also be a source of simplification. Jesus pioneered this move when he invited us to love God and love neighbor as oneself, letting everything else depend on these two commandments, and Paul echoed this sentiment when he advised love as our only obligation (since love fulfills the law) in Romans 13:8. Bisexual married men and women have often been ashamed of themselves and their urges and have often found their marriages to be a place of pain, but if they keep turning under the guidance of love, they may achieve a true simplicity despite their complicated lives and come down where they ought to be: the valley of love and delight. Jim Wolfe holds a Ph.D. in Religion and Society and teaches sociology at Butler University. Pastoring Bisexual Men On Line Jim Wolfe Summer 1998 PERSONAL STORIES 17 I was lying on the tile floor of the church when it hit me. Our United Church of Christ association was doing an experiential Bible study on Luke 10, so we were told to imagine ourselves as the wounded traveler left by the roadside. After mentally watching pastors and good church people pass me by on the other side, I was surprised to see that my Good Samaritan was a lesbian! But, on second thought, it made sense. I am a married woman with a young child, living an apparently straight life. I have served on church committees, played worship music, and taught Sunday School for children and adults. So has my husband. Yet I have come to consider myself bisexual and have benefitted immensely from the richness of lesbian culture and politics, which reflect and nurture this part of my identity. I discovered “women’s music” while recovering from some medical tests. An African-American group, In Process, comforted with, “Oh my God, won’t you rock your children, rock them in your great big arms.” Aya, a Canadian trio, encouraged perseverance with, “Hold on to what is good…Hold on to what you believe…Hold on to what you must do.” Alix Dobkin favorites, like “Lesbian Code” and a Yiddish tonguetwister about a tailor, infused humor, and the chants of Libana nurtured my spiritual side. “Women’s music” can be feminist, lesbian, spiritual, political or all of these. Affirming and women-centered, it lifts my spirits when I’ve had too much of a world which devalues women and our experience. This year I even joined a feminist chorus in my area to sing harmonies with women of all orientations who hold similar values. The quintessential example of lesbian culture is women’s music festivals. While Michigan is most famous, my favorite is in Indiana. Besides women’s music in all genres, they also showcase the other arts— comedy, film, theater, writing, dancing, drumming, painting, sculpture, jewelry, clothing, and crafts— as well as hundreds of workshops on sexuality, relationships, racism, politics, spirituality, creativity, healing, finances, and legal concerns. I attend as many as I can because it’s guaranteed to challenge and empower me. One memorable workshop focused on recognizing types of discrimination and becoming allies with other oppressed groups. An exercise of listing human characteristics either in- or outside the favored circle demonstrated that we all knew the feelings of both experiences. A panel of participants was drawn up on the spot so that we could hear women speak from different perspectives about their strengths and difficulties. We heard openly and honestly that day from a woman in a wheelchair, a woman with a hidden disability, a woman of size, a woman with a mental illness, an older woman, a lesbian, a Jewish woman, a pagan woman, and a blue-eyed Indian. It helped me to view positively some of the work I am doing in my own community, such as buying materials and being an advocate for our town’s Spanish-speaking population, or urging compassion for the homeless mentally ill. It makes me sad, however, that a recent attempt to bring such concerns to my faith community in a church newsletter article was rejected for having too much of a “political tone,” as if the Christian faith were not about seeking more justice and respect among people. A third example of lesbian culture is creative, beautiful, and fun. The craft booths always display a variety of wellmade jewelry, some with lesbian symbols, women symbols, gay pride colors, motifs from nature and others. I have collected earrings, pendants and other things that have symbolic meaning to me, and by wearing them in daily life, represent my own support of and connection to the lesbian community. At her own level, my five-year-old enjoys them, too, by borrowing a necklace of colorful freedom rings, a string of beads for her hair or an ear cuff for her finger, or by begging me to wear the necklace (a labrys) with the “purple diamond,”or the little bitty triangle earrings in her favorite color. Across the country, women’s music festivals are a celebration of lesbian culture and politics. They provide valuable time and space apart from the sexist and heterosexist world, allowing lesbians and other women to be ourselves openly and honestly and express ourselves freely. Discovering these women has helped to relieve my sense of isolation by connecting me with others who have something in common, and also by connecting me to a stronger sense of my own self and the complex person I am. The lesbian community could serve as a model for the church in the way it struggles mightily to include the diversity of all women, and nurtures us all with attention to spirituality, creativity, and politics, encouraging a balanced and integrated life. While the church preaches inclusivity, love, and putting one’s faith into action, the lesbian community brings those ideals into reality, even if only for a few days. By the time I leave I feel affirmed and refreshed, encouraged and empowered. I’ve been surrounded by a new kind of beauty and strength, and I am a better person for the experience. Laurie Aude, (pictured with her husband, Dan Gehring and daughter Heidi) has an M.Div. from McCormick Theological Seminary. She works as a reference librarian and lives with her family in Aurora, IL. Parable of the Good Lesbian Cultural and Political Bisexuality Laurie Aude 18 Open Hands Test Your “Bi-Q” A Sexual Orientation Worksheet Ben Roe Explore your own sexual orientation using this simple research instrument that was developed by Fritz Klein and others. It is a refinement of the Kinsey Scale which ranked behavior and “psychologic reactions” on a scale from zero to six, with zero being exclusively heterosexual, six being exclusively homosexual, and three being equally homosexual/heterosexual.1 Klein wanted to test his idea that sexual orientation was a “dynamic, multi-variable process,” so he developed the Klein Sexual Orientation Grid. He thought that an individual’s sexual orientation was composed of sexual and non-sexual variables which differed over time.2 There are three variables which directly describe the sexual self (attraction, fantasy, and behavior), three which describe aspects considered crucial to the composition of sexual orientation (emotional preference, social preference, and heterosexual or homosexual lifestyle), and also the variable of self-identification.3 A. Sexual Attraction In this grid, you will be choosing three numbers from Scale 1, one for each of three aspects of your life: your past, your present, and your ideal. Beginning with your past (up to a year ago), ask yourself where you fit on this scale and select the number that best describes you. Write this number in the corresponding box marked “past” on the line for Variable A (Sexual Attraction) on the grid. Then select a number that describes your present sexual attraction using the preceding year as the time period you consider. For a number of people it is the same number; for others it is different. Write this number in the box marked “present” on the line This form can be used privately for your own reflection, with a partner, or in a group.You may make a copy of the grid with the scales and explanatory text and then fill it out. Following the presentation of the instrument is a series of things to think about or explore with a partner or in a group. (The following closely follows the Klein article, and is used by permission.) for Variable A. Now ask yourself which number you would choose to be if it were a matter of choice or will. Remember there are no right or wrong numbers. When you finish writing this last number in the box marked Ideal for Variable A on the grid you should have completed the three boxes for Variable A. B. Sexual Behavior Here we look at actual behavior as opposed to sexual attraction. With whom do you have sex? Use Scale 1 to rate yourself. As with the previous scale, choose a number for past, present, and ideal sexual behavior, then enter the numbers on the grid, this time under Variable B. C. Sexual Fantasies The third variable is sexual fantasy. Whether they occur during masturbation, while daydreaming, as part of our real lives or purely in our imaginations, fantasies provide insight. Rate yourself from Scale 1, entering the numbers on the grid. D. Emotional Preference Our emotions directly influence, if not define, the actual physical act of love. Ask yourself if you love and like only the opposite sex or if you are also emotionally close to the same sex. Find out where you fit on the scale; rate yourself from Scale 1. Enter the numbers on the grid. Klein Sexual Orientation Grid Variable Past Present Ideal A. Sexual Attraction B. Sexual Behavior C. Sexual Fantasies D. Emotional Preference E. Social Preference F. Self- Identification G. Hetero/Gay Lifestyle Scale 1: Other Other Other Both Same Same Same sex sex sex sexes sex sex sex only mostly somewhat equally somewhat mostly only more more 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Scale 2: Hetero Hetero Hetero Hetero/ Gay Gay Gay only mostly somewhat gay somewhat mostly only more more 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Summer 1998 19 As you reflect on any fluidity in your own ratings (or those shared with you), consider how your particular self-identification and self-understanding was valid for you at each particular time of your life. Also note how one’s community of support (or lack thereof) can influence one’s self-identification or identity. Someone may identify as homosexual or heterosexual, for example, where there is no support for being bisexual. Some may identify as heterosexual where there is no support for being bisexual or homosexual. One of the main outcomes of using this grid can be to illustrate that there is not just one sexual orientation: heterosexual; that there are not just two sexual orientations, heterosexual and homosexual; and even that there are not just three sexual orientations, heterosexual, homosexual and bisexual; but indeed, a whole range of complex, interacting, and fluid factors in our sexuality. Ben Roe was an educator with Ministry in Human Sexuality from 1981-1988 and taught the human sexuality class at a community college in Lincoln, Nebraska, for several years. He is bisexual. Notes 1Kinsey, Alfred C, Pomeroy, Wardell B., and Martin, C. E. Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders, 1948). 2Klein, F, Barry Sepekoff, Timothy J. Wolf. “Sexual Orientation: a Multi-Variable Dynamic Process,” in Klein, Fritz and Timothy J. Wolf, ed., Two Lives to Lead; Bisexuality in Men and Women (New York: Harrington Park Press, Inc., 1985), p. 38. (Also published as Bisexualities: Theory and Research, by Haworth Press, 1985.) (See also http:// www.bisexual.org/BiOptBook.html) 3Klein, p 46. 4Keppel, Bobbi, and Alan Hamilton, “Using the Klein Scale to Teach about Sexual Orientation,” brochure published by the Bisexual Resource Center, P.O. Box 639, Cambridge, MA 02140. (http://www. biresource.org/klein_graph.html) 5Keppel and Hamilton, ibid. Bobbi Keppel is a social worker who has used this grid in educational workshops. She and Alan Hamilton write, “New concepts and new research offer opportunities to change the way people understand and conceptualize sexual orientation.”4 They have found that using this type of exercise has helped people “to ask questions and discuss sexual orientation more easily.” In their paper, they present the grid as a set of scales which form a 3-dimensional stack of cards or block. (She also adds “Political Identity,” “Physical Affection Preference,” and “Community Affiliation” as additional scales, replacing “Hetero/Gay Lifestyle.”) They write that it is helpful to start with an introduction of the Kinsey Scale as the first opportunity to reconceptualize sexual orientation. The element of time is more explicit in the Klein Grid, and the addition of the Ideal allows consideration of intention and the future. Taking all of the scales or grid locations as a whole gives a picture of one’s sexual orientation over time and can be helpful in discussing the concept as well as “identifying commonalities and differences.” If you are doing this exercise with a spouse, friend, or group, reflect on how your “constellation” of ratings differs from that of the other(s). It will become clear that even those who share the same self-identification differ in their makeup in interesting ways. Similarities will also emerge, not only among those who share self-identifications but among those who identify differently. Keppel and Hamilton write, “Sexual identity (how people think of themselves) sometimes has little to do with their sexual behavior. Three different people may have the same distribution of sexual behavior in the past and/or present, but have three different sexual identities: homosexual, bisexual, or heterosexual.”5 Those who identify as heterosexual may not have the exact same behavior, or those who identify as bisexual may not have the same lifestyle, as another example. Be observant of how people’s identity, behavior, or fantasies may change over time. Research such as Klein’s plus the experience of many people show significant fluidity in self-identification. Keppel and Hamilton observe, Many people were sure that they would be, for instance, heterosexual all their lives, but discovered later that they no longer were. It therefore behooves one to treat others as one would like to be treated, regardless of one’s current sexual identity, as one’s sexual identity may change. (One hears an echo of Jesus in this statement.) E. Social Preference Though closely allied to emotional preference, social preference is often different. You may love only women but spend most of your social life with men. Some people, of all orientations, only socialize with their own sex, while others socialize with the opposite gender exclusively. Where are you on the scale? Choose three numbers as you have before from Scale 1, entering them on the grid. F. Self-Identification Your sexual self-definition is a strong variable since self-image strongly affects our thoughts and actions. In several cases, a person’s present and past self-identification differs markedly from their ideal. Choose three numbers on Scale 2 and fill in the numbers on the grid. G. Heterosexual/Homosexual Lifestyle Some heterosexuals only have sex with the opposite sex but prefer to spend the majority of their time with gay people. On the other hand, homosexual or bisexual persons may prefer to live exclusively in the gay world, the heterosexual world, or even to live in both worlds. Lifestyle is the seventh variable of sexual orientation. Where do you tend to spend time and with whom? Choose three numbers from Scale 2 as before and enter them on the grid. 20 Open Hands Are You a Boy or a Girl? When I was growing up, I heard society telling me what was normal for a girl, and I knew I was out of synch. For one thing, I had no idea how to “play house.” In my young mind, that came to epitomize my deficiency as a girl. I finally screwed up my courage and asked a friend to teach me how to play house. She tried, and I pretended, but I never really got it. It worried me. I tried to hide my deficiency. I have several male friends, on the other hand, whose childhoods were completely in synch with our culture’s stereotype of girl. They loved to play house, play dolls, dress up, put on make up and nail polish, etc. As you can imagine, their “deficiency” was more difficult to hide, and they got a lot of namecalling and disapproval. Consider for a moment that our definitions of girl and boy are created, that gender is a construct, something humans make up to explain and categorize the world, to make it predictable. The construct begins with identifying something most people have in common— distinctly male or female genitals. But from the beginning, the construct is difficult to maintain. Some people are born with ambiguous genitals and/or atypical chromosomes, making it difficult for doctors and parents to “designate” them. Often, to make such babies conform to our bipolar construct of sexual identity—everyone shall be male or female—surgery is performed, and a decision is made as to how the child will be raised. The construct is further challenged because some children—with or without this problematic beginning—just don’t show up as typical for their gender. For example, the child begins to articulate very early that he is really a girl or she is really a boy. Or the child is simply more comfortable being or behaving in ways that are considered typical for the other. Made in God’s Image Re-Thinking Constructs of Gender and Orientation Ann Thompson Cook In either case, the child is more comfortable being/doing what comes naturally, but the family and public usually are not. Parents get all kinds of advice to do whatever is necessary to get such kids to conform, to “act like a girl (boy)” because otherwise, the child will be maladapted, won’t be accepted, and therefore won’t be happy. So you can see how we completely merge the concepts of gender—the physical package a person has—and gender role—what is acceptable behavior for people with a particular package. First, we require that everyone be either male or female, despite variations at birth. Second, we set about to teach everyone how to be the right kind of male or female. Once taught, we reward conformity to gender role standards and punish non-conformity. Just ask any little boy who likes to play dress-up in high heels and lipstick past the age of four, or a girl who refuses to wear a dress to her eighth grade graduation. You can see that in order to keep the reward-punishment system in place, we have to know which gender someone is. Recreating Our Understanding of Gender When my son, Nate, entered high school, he played a game of confusing people about whether he was a boy or a girl. He had grown his wavy auburn hair to shoulder length, and was wearing several earrings and soft, loose clothing. In the evening, he would often report his experiences to me with a twinkle in his eye. Most people, it appeared, were so discomfited by the ambiguity of his presentation that they would finally come up to him and ask or demand, “Are you a boy or girl?” These were people he didn’t know, with whom he had no particular business or transaction pending. He was even approached with this question on the subway platform. Why was it so important to know? Well, if we can’t tell by looking which genitals a person has, we won’t know anything about them! We won’t know how to treat them, and we certainly won’t know what to expect of them, what standards to hold them to. As we acknowledge the preposterousness of those agendas, the question then emerges: Since we ourselves (humans) invented the concept of gender as two poles, what would happen if we discarded it? What if instead, we invented a concept of gender as a continuum or as a series of intersecting continua? In her book, Apartheid of Sex, Martine Rothblatt proposes to replace what she terms sexual dimorphism with a “rainbow lexicon of sexual continuity,” in which individuals identify themselves according to degrees of three elements in their makeup: aggressive (yellow), nourishing (blue), and erotic (red).1 For example, a person who understands himself to be nonaggressive, highly nurturing and highly erotic would identify himself in this lexicon as a deep purple. Over the Rainbow of Gender Continuity But if, as Rothblatt suggests, we recreated gender as a continuum, what would happen to our concept of sexual orientation? Doesn’t it then become problematic to talk about sexual orientation based on bipolar notions of “same” sex and “other/opposite” sex? Consider the possibility that our view of sexual orientation, like gender, is also a simplistic reduction. To know a person’s sexual orientation, as currently understood, the only information you need is the gender the person is attracted to. But in real life, gender tells us only what genital package a person has, if that, yet many more factors figure into our sexual orientation. Summer 1998 21 Try this experiment for a moment. Close your eyes, and line up all the people to whom you’ve ever—in your whole life—been attracted. Slowly scan them in your mind’s eye and look for similarities. Because it’s automatic to do so, you will probably notice first whether your line-up is comprised of all males or all females, or a combination. But look beyond that. You may notice that almost all of them share certain characteristics. Pay attention to patterns: their body build (height, weight, muscularity, angles, etc.), the quality and quantity of hair, their temperament (shy, bold, funny, analytical), the coloring of the skin and hair, their interests (artistic, mechanical, philosophical, people-loving, musical, intellectual, hands-on). Also consider Rothblatt’s three elements: degree of aggressiveness, eroticism, and nurturing. Do you find your lineup has a lot of greens or browns or oranges? I’ve found that most people do begin to notice patterns. They see that many of the people they’ve been drawn to over the years have some combination of distinguishing characteristics in common—they may tend to be stocky or natural comics or drama queens or handy-persons or musical or shy and cautious or… For some people, of course, physical package is a critical factor. We all know people who are attracted only to people with the same genital package, and other people who are attracted only to people with the other package. But for many people, other characteristics may actually be more important than the particular physical package. So what we have here is construct layered upon construct. We start with bipolar gender—male and female— and then build a definition of sexual orientation that leaves out a lot of information that’s important to most people. The Gender Composition of Couples Now look even further. Once we see that our old distinctions aren’t particularly meaningful in giving us information about who individuals are, or whom they’re attracted to, it gets even more complicated when we think about couples. If you know what physical package the two people have, what do you know? Does knowing the physical package of the two people tell us what they like to do together? Whether each person is supported in pursuing their dreams? Does it tell us how they handle disagreement? Whether they will want to have children? Whether they will grow to love, or barely tolerate, each other’s families? What being faithful means to them? How they would care for each other if one became injured or seriously ill? How they will use whatever money comes their way? None of these. Consider, however, that if we’re truly interested in creating strong relationships, characterized by love and support, these are critical questions. Yet just as my attention was distracted, as a young girl, to whether I was being the right kind of girl, we are distracted as a society from exploring these questions. Why? Because our rigid focus on gender role conformity has diverted our attention, has blinded us. Resisting Conformity to this World As a community of faith, we are fond of saying that each of us is made in the image of God, yet I and countless others are sidetracked early in life trying to re-make ourselves to some other image, some human-designed image. Those who can’t or won’t play along are taunted, ostracized, often either directly or indirectly killed off. As a community of faith, we go along with a system that re-makes people into our own image of male and female, rather than enjoying, appreciating, and nurturing what God has placed in front of us. Consider the possibility that what God wants more than anything is for each of us to be fully who we are, for each of us to develop our God-given talents full-out and have that be our contribution to the world. What if, as faith communities, we stopped assuming that we can design God’s image better than God? What if we emptied ourselves of our sex/gender constructs and simply took in each child, each person, as they are, and looked for that of God in each of them? And what if we took on supporting and nurturing whatever love emerged in our communities and laid aside the question, “Is this kind of love okay?” Perhaps then all our labels would disappear— they would be of no further value, no longer needed. © 1998 Ann Thompson Cook, Insite Ann Thompson Cook is the founding director of Insite, which seeks to change the public conversation about sexuality and gender, particularly to empower parents to be effective sex educators of their children. She was a key mover behind Dumbarton United Methodist Church (Washington, DC) becoming a Reconciling Congregation in 1987 and has served on the national Reconciling Congregation Board. Note 1Martine Rothblatt, The Apartheid of Sex: A Manifesto on the Freedom of Gender ( NY: Crown Publishers, 1995). 22 Open Hands Following a failed suicide attempt, Dayna Clay, a young bisexual woman suffering from major depression, takes off cross-country to figure out whether or not her life is worth living. She picks up a stranger, a woman name Shelly, who needs a lift to the nearest town. Eventually the conversation leads to: “You seein’ anyone? Romantically?” Shelly asked. “I…I was.” Dayna was cautious. A particularly maudlin country song was playing on the radio, as if in perverse accompaniment. “We broke up recently.” “How come?” “It was my fault. I drove…” Dayna paused, wondering how to proceed. A pronoun was needed: candor indicated one, discretion another— but then, discretion had never been her strong suit. “I drove her away. I got impatient, gave up, started doing and saying things I knew would make her want to leave me.” The song ended, replaced by a jarringly loud supermarket commercial; Dayna turned the radio off. “We weren’t…I don’t think we were in love. Maybe we could’ve been, in time. Who knows?” She looked over at her passenger, who was staring straight ahead— and who had shifted a good three inches away. “Jesus! Don’t freak, OK? You’re not even my type.” Shelly looked at her. “I don’t see how you could get the same feeling from another woman that I do from Jake.” “I don’t. It’s different. Not better, not worse…” “How would you know?” “I’ve had boyfriends; I like guys. I’m attracted to women and men; always have been.” Dayna smiled grimly. “I’ve had twice as many opportunities for failure as other people, and believe me, I’ve made the most of them.” This seemed to put Shelly somewhat at ease. “How is it different?” “It’s hard to explain. These things don’t really lend themselves to…” “Try.” Dayna thought for a moment. “With a guy it’s, you know, a joining of opposites. So there’s this feeling of…completing something. Each other, I guess. And when it’s right—when he’s the right guy— that can be really powerful.” Shelly nodded. “Yeah.” “But with another woman it’s a joining of…well, not opposites, but equals. A celebration of common ground. The feeling’s more one of echoing each other…reinforcing each other.” A string of images rose unbidden before her mind’s eye— memories from a not-too-distant past that she was, as yet, in no condition to revisit. Let it go, she told herself. Forget her. Dayna forced herself to continue speaking. “So Common Ground Excerpts from Unplugged, A Novel in Process Paul McComas there’s a symmetry to it, a sense of balance, and a basic, physical kinship that’s…” Her throat caught. “…that’s…” “That’s what?” She grabbed her sunglasses off the dash, slid them on and pointed to the road sign up ahead. “That’s your exit.” As week follows week in Dayna’s travels, the land teaches— and heals— her in ways that challenge and surprise her… While walking beneath a prairie cottonwood, she glimpsed a flash of crimson fluttering down from above; reaching up, Dayna surprised herself by actually catching the leaf in mid-fall. Studying her prize, she pondered the symmetry of nature. The leaf’s intricate network of veins mirrored, in miniature, the branches from which it had dropped—not to mention the other, unseen tributaries anchoring the trunk to the earth below. The realization made her gasp: the veins were the branches were the roots; from high in the air to deep underground, the tree emphatically asserted its treeness throughout. Here, she thought, was the best evidence yet of a divine plan. But how did she herself fit into that plan? Dayna sat down on the ground and leaned back against the trunk, turning the leaf over in her hand. She’d seen it a hundred times in a hundred different ways: the land embraced male and female in equal measure, engaging and sustaining both sexes with an unerring— and unerringly even-handed— devotion. And what, finally, was “God” if not the life-growing, love-sewing spirit flowing through that land: through bison and bighorn, pine tree and prairie grass, mountain and canyon and— and Dayna as well? Looking up, she saw the vista before her as if for the first time. She’d just begun, really, to believe in a higher power. But now, already, she understood what it meant— for her, anyway— to have been made in that higher power’s image. Any lingering trace of guilt connected to who she was and whom she loved vanished the moment Dayna understood that her Creator felt the very same way. Paul McComas is a fiction writer who recently published a book of short stories, Twenty Questions (Fithian Press, P.O. Box 1525, Santa Barbara, CA 93102). He and his wife, Chris, an M.Div. student at Garrett Evangelical Theological School, are both active members of Garrett’s RCP advocacy group, Sacred Worth, and of Wheadon United Methodist Church, a Reconciling Congregation. Summer 1998 MINISTRIES 23 CONNECTIONS Enough Already: Distractions To Justice Mary E. Hunt I am struck by the fact that in religious circles sexuality sticks on our agenda like old food on a dirty plate when so many more pressing issues need our attention. Witness: the recent Methodist trial of a clergyman alleged to have presided at the marriage of two lesbians. While a wise jury of his peers aquitted him, most such cases do not have such happy outcomes. Besides, is this kind of work the most pressing agenda for religious groups when planetary survival, the well being of people who are poor amid a robust economy, and the education of children deprived of basics all beg attention? I think not. There are three explanations for the current agenda. First, to my mind, sexual ethics are dealt with by churches in micro terms, when the injustices of our society are really macro problems, because churches can’t handle the big issues. Sexual issues are those about which people can venture opinions without really knowing very much. It is easy to mouth platitudes about fidelity and chastity, marriage and singleness, sodomy and celibacy without really being informed about the latest biological and psychological findings. It is easy to sound smarter in the pulpit than a talk show host (competition being what it is) without having to take a course in contemporary sexology. Heaven forfend, it is possible to counsel people about relationships in pastoral settings with the most minimal preparation and the most deeply rooted prejudices. Rather than seeing sexuality in global economic and political terms, most discussions in churches focus on sexuality in the most individualized and privatized way. Sex has become a kind of cottage industry in church circles. It is hard to imagine what churches would do if this were not part of their portfolio— indeed, if people looked to them for guidance on responsible investing, how to stop sexual harassment, or what to do about inequities in the job market. A second reason why sexuality is so central is that few people look to churches for moral guidance on much of anything any more. Older Roman Catholics and Protestants remember when bishops and pastors spoke and people listened—indeed, when church officials had political clout, when their views could influence war and peace and the market place. Unfortunately, we need some moral guidance, though not from them, as the stock market creates not the rich and the poor but the invested and the divested, when the death penalty is applied “liberally” even to women in a show of faux feminism in Texas of late. Alas, professional, progressive religious voices seem to have less and less volume, and even less influence. Where are the religious leaders, Peter Steinfels asked in a recent New York Times article on alleged presidential sexual misconduct. Of course Mr. Steinfels focused his attention on why religious leaders did or did not condemn the sexual matters, finding most wanting in judgment. But I would ask, why are religious leaders not setting a helpful example by passing over the sexual issues as such and looking at the relationship between consent and power which, regardless of the guilt or innocence of President Clinton, needs to be discussed. Our epidemic of clergy sexual abuse and the recent spate of teachers and students carrying on might all be better constrained with educational offerings. None are forthcoming. Why? Because even the media has boxed religious leaders into the sexual corner, inviting them like trained circus animals to respond on cue to the most microscopic concerns when the larger questions of justice go unanswered. Those of us on the progressive end of things are equally boxed in when, in our best efforts to make change, we keep the same dynamic in motion. I do not mean to blame victims here, or to suggest that we abandon our efforts to bring about sexual justice. But I do mean to caution against the very same problem that mainline churches have when we become the Jane and Johnny One-Notes on matters sexual. It is hard to avoid, but I think we fall into the trap of a massive distraction from the larger justice agenda when we limit our foci to a single issue. Again, I know that denomination by denomination this has had to be the case or we would have no progress on matters of ordination, covenants and even proper burials for those who love in a same-sex fashion. I cannot help but wonder what price we have paid when it comes to anti-racism, economic justice, rights for people who live with disabilities, international solidarity and the myriad issues which in the final analysis are deeply interwoven with our sexualities. What colleagues have we offended along the way, what opportunities have we overlooked because we have all been so busy peering microscopically at sexuality that we have missed other forms of suffering around us? The third reason for the disproportionate emphasis is because sexuality is finally, still and unfortunately, the purview of women in our culture, and kyriarchal control is exercised first and foremost over women. Despite decades of feminist, womanist, mujerista and other progressive women-led theological work, we are still in a situation where sex means women, where pleasure is evil, and where equality is a distant dream. One has only to read most glossy magazines, watch a little MTV, shop in most stores and otherwise live in everyday globalized culture to reach this conclusion. One has only to speak with single women who are raising children on low or no salaries, inquire of inner city teens, or look at the growing number of women and dependent children being infected by HIV/AIDS to realize how much sex is still gender-typed. ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ …Sexuality sticks on our agenda like old food on a dirty plate when so many more ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ pressing issues need our attention. 24 MINISTRIES Open Hands In the churches, matters of sexuality fall disproportionately to women as if the women’s movements had never taken place. With the possible exception of gay men upon whom so much is projected, in virtually every other matter sexual it is women who continue to carry the moral and ethical burden. For example, where are the church programs urging vasectomies? How often have you heard the word “vasectomy” from a pulpit or discussed it in adult education settings? What if every time we heard the A word for abortion we changed the topic and said, “Let’s talk about the V word for a bit.” I predict that suddenly sex would take on global proportions and practical solutions would go up in the smoke of abstractions. We have allowed the sexual agenda to rule in our churches even in the name of changing things. Frankly, I have had enough already as the expression goes, and I think it is time to look afresh at what we might construct as an ethical agenda for the future that will do justice in the largest sense of the word. Mary E. Hunt, Ph.D., feminist liberation theologican and ethicist, is co-founder and codirector of WATER, the Women’s Alliance for Theology, Ethics, and Ritual, which is celebrating its 15th anniversary this year. This article first appeared in the Spring, 1998 (Vol. 11, No. 1) issue of Waterwheel, WATER’s quarterly newsletter. Both author and organization may be reached at 8035 13th St., Silver Spring, MD 20910 USA; phone 301/589-2509; fax 301/ 589-3150; E-mail: water@hers.com; Internet: http://www.hers.com/ water LEADERSHIP Never Retired from Justice Edwin E. Reeves I have been retired as a United Methodist minister so long that I am not known to most active ministers and lay members. I am 86 years old. My appointments have all been within the California Pacific Annual Conference over a span of 50 years. I have served as District Superintendent and on boards and agencies of the conference and national church. I am the father of three children. As a Boston University seminary student in 1936, I attended General Conference and listened to the debate that ultimately established the “Central Jurisdiction,” a segregated jurisdiction for African-Americans nationwide. This indeed was a sad experience for me. But, in 1964, I chaired our delegation to General Conference. Our delegation unanimously favored abolishing the Central Jurisdiction. During the debate, there was vigorous opposition to integrating annual conferences, particularly in the South. Nevertheless, the conference voted to dissolve the Central Jurisdiction and merge black and white annual conferences located in the same geographic regions. I had the privilege of making the motion that the pension rate for all African-American ministers be brought up to the level of all other ministers residing within the merging conferences. The same action was taken regarding ministerial salaries. It was a great joy to be involved in passing this legislation, which had taken 30 years to accomplish. Just as I was actively involved in the civil rights debate, especially as it related to our Methodist churches, I am as intensely concerned about the debate on homosexuality. Five years ago, on Palm Sunday, I became involved in an Open and Affirming, as well as Reconciling Congregation. I have a personal relationship with innumerable homosexual Christians who have taught me so much about being loving and inclusive. I covet this experience for us all. My own Christian experience has been enriched: my personal relationship with an inclusive, diverse, loving and Christ-centered community has strengthened my faith. My concept of God has grown immeasurably under the preaching and teaching of its ministers and lay leaders. Some of the testimonies of these new friends of how they have been recipients of condemnation, hate, and discrimination has given me a keen awareness of their pain and suffering. William Sloane Coffin has said, “The problem is not how to reconcile homosexuality with scriptural passages that appear to condemn it, but rather how to reconcile the rejection and punishment of homosexuals with the love of Christ.”1 Our condemnation by language in the Social Principles of the United Methodist Church is an affront to all homosexual Christians. Former Bishop Stanley Olson of the Pacific Southwest Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America wrote an article which has been widely circulated among clergy and lay leaders in which he concludes, “The ELCA will eventually change its teaching on the subject of homosexuality. Of that I am confident. We are admitting the need to restudy the few clouded verses of scripture that we have assumed were about homosexuality. We will probably conclude that we have distorted the Gospel with our preoccupation with sexuality, an understandable error for heterosexuals. “It will come too late! By the time we finally take a stand, the field of science, the business community, and the society around us will have settled the issue. We will be left trying to extricate ourselves from entanglements with fundamentalists and political extremists.”2 Pray God that in the year 2000, delegates to the General Conference shall take us into the 21st century as a Reconciling Church. I hope that I can live long enough to see it. Edwin E. Reeves, a self-described “avid reader” of Open Hands, participated in the recent debate of the California-Pacific Conference to become a Reconciling Conference. It did not— yet. But it did adopt a compromise statement of “welcome” to l/g/b persons. Notes 1Quoted from “The Prophetic Fire of William Sloan Coffin,” Summer/ Fall 1992 issue of The Spire, an alumni/ae publication of Vanderbilt University Divinity School. 2Bishop Stanley Olson, “Thoughts on a Sick Tree and Rotten Fruit.” Summer 1998 MINISTRIES 25 CHILDREN Children of God and the Big Lie Timothy Tutt I work in a profession that requires leadership, peacemaking skills, and a strong faith foundation which guides me in modeling the “golden” rules of unconditional love and respect for myself and those whom I’m called to serve. I am not a pastor, but a third-grade teacher (though similarities abound!). One similarity between elementary teaching and Christian ministry is the sense of fulfillment that can come from challenges. Such was the case a couple of years ago when my class amazed me by a response that has given me one of my favorite teaching stories. In the early months of 1996, the Des Moines Public School District, where I’ve been “called” to serve, was embroiled in a controversial quagmire. A district committee proposed curriculum and resource lists on homosexuality and lesbian and gay people that would help guide the district’s implementation of its nondiscrimination policy, which had been amended to include “sexual orientation” in 1990. Some negative public reaction was anticipated, but the district did not expect the vociferous expressions of ignorance, fear, and anger that it received: lewd gestures and shouts of rage made those who supported the recommendations fearful for their safety. One school board member, who bravely came out not only in support of the proposal but also as a gay man ended up wearing a bullet-proof vest whenever he left home, a direct response to death threats. Across town in a small elementary school, a gay teacher (I won’t mention my name here “in order to protect the innocent”) was attempting to blot out those external pressures as best he could by going about the daily routine of reading stories to his third-graders after lunchtime recess. For those who live and breathe church life, think of this time as a “reflective reading” in the midst of a 6-hour sermon. Usually, this is a time when students let their guard down as I read from what I consider a “good book,” just as ministers use The Good Book. The book I was reading aloud was The Big Lie, a children’s book by Isabella Leitner. It is an autobiographical account of a young woman’s struggle as she and her family were herded to the infamous Auschwitz concentration camp during World War II. Reading stories about the Holocaust may seem heavy for eight- and nine-year-olds who had just come from making snow angels and snow people, yet reading this particular book has become an annual rite of passage that not only sparks interesting discussion, but opens young minds. However, I was soon to have my mind opened a little more. I facilitated a discussion on concentration camps. While most students have no concept of such things, there are always a few who know enough to get dialogue going. I mentioned that while most people who were sent to the camps were Jewish, others were sent as well. That winter of 1996, while voices of hate, fear, and ignorance permeated our community, I thought I’d supplement this annual discussion with something new. I added “people that the Nazis thought were lesbian or gay” to the end of the list of communities that Hitler wanted to obliterate. For a moment there was sheer silence. Then Kelsey, a charming girl with whom all got along, angrily blurted out, “What? You mean Hitler sent gay and lesbian people, too? That is stupid! They can’t help it if they’re gay!” Now I was in sheer silence, totally absorbed by this eightyear- old’s precociousness, while anxiously awaiting what would happen next. Suddenly, Sam, another charmer who was the class athlete and leader that all my students admired, added, “Mr. Tutt, that is really dumb! There are a lot of great people who are gay, and this doesn’t make any sense!” The rest of the class (as far as I could tell) roared their approval of Kelsey and Sam’s words with a resounding “Yeah!” That was followed by quite a bit of chatter among the students, with a few of them mentioning uncles, aunts, neighbors, and parent’s friends who were lesbian or gay. Needless to say, I was so very proud of my class that I thought my overly-swollen heart would simply burst out of my chest. Once I regained control of my class and my heart rate, I mentioned that some people show hatred toward what they do not understand or cannot change. Then, holding back tears of pride and joy, I complimented them for doing just the opposite. I prided them for learning a lesson that no textbook can teach, and I told them that I was lucky to be their teacher. Proverbs 19:25 says, “Children make themselves known by their acts, by whether what they do is pure and right.” My hope for those children is that they will mature with not only those same thoughts of open-mindedness and compassion that they shared on that cold, winter day, but that their actions will continue to match. And who knows? Maybe more of us children of God can do the same as we continue to mature, too. Timothy Tutt is a member of the Council for the United Church of Christ Coalition for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Concerns. He resides in Des Moines, Iowa, where he teaches third grade and attends Plymouth Congregational Church, an Open and Affirming congregation. “Unless you change and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.” Matthew 18:3 “Kids Say The Darndest Things.” Bill Cosby’s TV program, attributed to Art Linkletter ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ 26 MINISTRIES Open Hands WELCOMING PROCESS As Maine Goes, So Goes the Nation? Margaret MacDonald & Dotty Kay Stillman “We recognize, and welcome into our fellowship persons of all sexual orientations, be they single, in committed partnerships, or families, including those which are nuclear, blended and extended. We affirm relationships and behavior based on mutual love, responsibility, trust and loyalty.” (From the “Open and Affirming Statement” of The Somesville Union Meeting House, United Church of Christ, a small, 70-member church on Mount Desert Island, Maine, and the first church of its denomination in Maine to vote to become Open and Affirming) The Open and Affirming movement in the Somesville Church evolved out of a six-week study group on homophobia, “Where Do We Go from Here?”1 which was led by our minister, Rev. David C. Stillman, and an active lay woman whose daughter is lesbian. At the completion of the study there was a nucleus of eight interested participants who wanted to continue to explore this issue, who subsequently asked for the sponsorship of the church council to continue our education with the future goal of voting as a church to become an Open and Affirming congregation. As our statement later declared, our congregation would be one that welcomes “all persons of every race, age, marital standing, economic status, nationality and sexual orientation into the full life and ministry of this community of faith, including membership, leadership and employment.” The council endorsed our goal, and we became the Open and Affirming Task Group. Realizing that this would be a significant faith journey for most members of the congregation, we needed to find out how they felt about becoming Open and Affirming before planning any educational programs, so we could include their questions and concerns. Everyone agreed that we already were an open congregation and that all were welcome. But our study had shown that there is a not-so-subtle difference between the status of being open and that of being affirming of all people. With this in mind, we showed and discussed the video “A Journey of Faith”2 to church members on four different occasions. We followed with several information-gathering meetings, varying the day and time to reach as many people as possible. A broad range of questions were raised at these sessions which guided our planning. We then designed a series of five panel discussions on the following topics: • Understanding Homosexuality – origins, including bisexuality • Biblical References and Interpretations – plus Church attitudes in history • Homosexuals and the Law – civil rights; the referendum proposed by Concerned Maine Families at that time; hate crimes • Why Do We Need to Do This? – personal experiences of gays and lesbians • Health Issues: Facts and Myths – mental health, depression, suicide, substance abuse, AIDS During the process we printed a newsletter— the Open and Affirming Task Group Update—keeping the congregation informed, announcing plans and programs to come, and reviewing programs we had already held. In our final issue we included “testimonies” from members of our congregation who were willing to share their thoughts publicly regarding why they would vote “yes.” The next step was to write our “Open and Affirming Statement.” The first draft was prepared after much discussion and prayerful consideration by three task group members and our minister. It was then reviewed by the entire task group and, after some rewording and more discussion, the final draft was presented to our church council. The statement received its full endorsement, and we were ready to present it to the congregation. This was done via a special edition of our task group’s newsletter. We held two more open meetings for further discussion which were attended by only a few. During the last eight months of our program we were in frequent communication with the United Church Coalition for L/G/B/T Concerns for support and guidance, including a draft of our statement sent for their comments, suggestions, and ultimately, their endorsement. Rev. Stillman preached on the subject on the first Sunday in January. His sermon, entitled “On the Side of Love,” was extremely well-received. After nearly two years of study and soul-searching, our vote took place at our annual meeting on January 28, 1996. Our “Open and Affirming Statement” was accepted almost unanimously, with only one dissenting vote. We were ecstatic! Following that meeting, Rev. Stillman said, “This is one of the most inspiring times in all my 21 years of parish ministry. The process, which was truly a journey of faith, has been very exciting to me, both as an observer and as a participant. It was successful because, from the very beginning, it found its energy, direction, and leadership from those who are at the very center of the life of our congregation.” Dotty Kay Stillman (left) and Margaret MacDonald (right) were co-chairs of the church’s Open and Affirming Task Group. Dotty Kay is church administrator and is active in “Maine Won’t Discriminate” and the “Maine SpeakOut Project.” She is also the pastor’s wife. Margaret is a professional educator and counselor and was also coleader of the original study group on homophobia. Notes 1Resource prepared by the ONA Task Team of the Massachusetts Conference and available from UCCL/G/B/TC, c/o Rev. Ann B. Day, P.O. Box 403, Holden, MA 01520. 2Copyright 1992, United Church Board for Homeland Ministries, 700 Prospect Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44115-1100 Summer 1998 MINISTRIES 27 YOUTH Youth Suicide and the White Ribbon Campaign Timothy Brown In memory of the 23 l/g/b/t youth who committed suicide in North America during the week that the 1997 UCC General Synod met I recently became aware of the White Ribbon Campaign. This campaign, similar to the red ribbons worn for AIDS awareness, is to call attention to suicides among gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered youth. There is a suicide of a lesbian or gay youth approximately every five hours in the United States and Canada. I plan to wear a white ribbon frequently, and hope you will consider wearing one as well. The story of 17-year-old Bill Clayton can be found on the Internet1 at and is used here with the permission of Gabi Clayton, Bill’s mother. Bill came out to his family as bisexual at age 14. They were relatively easy to tell, as his mother is a counselor. He was accepted and loved by his family. But he was not accepted by everyone. Bill was violently assaulted in a hate crime in the spring of 1996; he committed suicide a few weeks later by taking an overdose. After the UCC General Synod, I became aware of another tragic story carried in the Press and Sun Bulletin, Binghamton, New York. A gay 17-year-old ran away from home in Oconto, Wisconsin, to Binghamton, where a man lived whom he had met in a telephone chat room. The man was married, and when it became apparent that the relationship was not going to work out, Steve Hrabik committed suicide by jumping off the State Street Bridge into the path of oncoming traffic on North Shore Drive. An article which ran on Easter Sunday in the Cleveland Plain Dealer tells the story of 14-year-old Robbie, who committed suicide Jan. 2, 1997 by shooting himself with his father’s gun. He had made several attempts before and had run away to Chicago once. His family had canceled his Internet account after he ran up charges. He apparently met an adult on-line who mailed him pornography. After his death, “God made me this way,” was discovered written in one of his textbooks. Many of you are aware of the debate which began nearly two years ago at East High School in Salt Lake City over allowing l/g/b/t student groups. This fight was led by Jacob Orozco. I was sadden to learn of this 17-year-old’s suicide on Sept. 9, 1997. Was a support group too much to ask for? There are many other stories, but you get the point without further grief. The few I have told you have been of young men, who statistically are three times more likely to commit suicide than young lesbian women. But we are also tragically losing young women for similar reasons. As I contemplate each of these suicides, I wonder what the role of various faith communities was, could have been, or should have been. Why do l/g/b/t teens think that they have to resort to the Internet or telephone chat rooms to make connections into the l/g/b/t community? One probable reason is that they know of nowhere else to turn. How many of our church youth groups are safe spaces? At youth group or other church events is there a place for l/g/b/t youth to be themselves and invite their dates? Where were our churches when these youth were running away from home to nearby cities or faraway states? Since most gay-bashers quote the church to explain their actions, how might our faith communities have saved the youth beaten while simply walking along the street with two friends? Where will life-saving support come from? The lack of response to these situations makes me furious. I hope others of you will become angry, too— enough to take action, as I intend to do. So put on your white ribbon and, when asked, tell people what it’s for. But don’t stop there. Talk about these issues in your local congregations. Organize safe housing for runaways, safe from predators. For those of you who are l/g/ b/t: be out enough yourself that you can be a positive role model and provide support for a struggling young person. Finally, encourage your youth group, your local congregation, and your regional church unit to offer workshops on these issues. Timothy Brown was officially installed on May 31, 1998, as a Commissioned Minister of the United Church of Christ (a form of lay ministry) at Community UCC in Boulder, Colorado, to work with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth. This article originally appeared in the Nov., 1997 issue of Waves, the newsletter of the UCC Coalition for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Concerns. He may be contacted at 1005 East Ninth Avenue, #102, Broomfield, Colorado 80020; phone 303/439-2698; fax 303/438-1208; e-mail Timothy_Brown@ceo.cudenver.edu Note 1http://members.tripod.com/~claytoly/Bills_Story ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ I hope others of you will become angry, too— enough to take action, as I intend to do. So put on your white ribbon and, ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ when asked, tell people what it’s for. Summer 1998 28 Chorus 1 Super-moral-legalistic-conformation1-itis! You know it’s just as mean an ailment As appendicitis! Pills and surg’ry affect it not— Only Grace requitest! Super-moral-legalistic-conformation-itis! Interlude Um piddle2 piddle piddle, um piddle ay! Um piddle piddle piddle, um piddle ay! Verse 1 At our churchwide gathering, A thought occurred to me, A lot of right wing folk were talking Quite judgmentally. A diagnosis might help free them Of their malady; The first step is to name their ill In order to be free: Chorus 2 Super-moral-legalistic-conformation-itis! Though we know with all their might Those ill will try to fight us— Working to cure this disease Will certainly unite us! Super-moral-legalistic-conformation-itis! Interlude (See above) Verse 2 Condemning all translesbigays: A mean and vicious game, A lot of finger-pointing and A lot of nasty blame. “Exclusive knowledge of God’s will” The ailing people claim. We’d better take our medicine, Or we’ll end up the same. Chorus 2 Super-moral-legalistic-conformation-itis! Although opponents seem to feel That God should surely smite us, Their finger-pointing acts like An attack of colonitis! Super-moral-legalistic-conformation-itis! Interlude (See above) Verse 3 We won’t go unprotected, no, Not catch THIS dread disease. Our goal is to give THEM relief And then a life of ease, An end to their hypocrisy And all their hits-and-run— We’ll help them learn compassion now So they can have some fun. Chorus 3 Super-moral-legalistic-conformation-itis! You know it’s just as mean an ailment As appendicitis; Cure it, friends, so ne’er again Will we have it to blight us: Super-moral-legalistic-conformation-itis! Sustaining the Spirit John Gregg, a retired Presbyterian pastor, and his daughter, Beth, share a duplex in Milwaukee. John is a leader of Semper Reformanda, an agent for change in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Beth provides home care for a person with Alzheimer’s. And yes, they’re both as fun as the song suggests! Notes 1“Conformation” was originally “expiation.” “Procreation” may also fit here. 2Here the word is used in the sense of “to work or to act in a trifling, trivial, or petty way.” From your editor: Okay, okay—the usual ways we sustain the spirit in Open Hands are serious. But it is summer, and time for summer camp and summer fun. Beth Gregg and her dad John have written just the thing to uplift our spirits. Originally written for the Presbyterians for Lesbian & Gay Concerns celebration at the Presbyterian General Assembly this past June in Charlotte, this song has been adapted with their permission for our readers. We can’t identify the tune without paying megabucks for rights, but you should be able to figure it out. Since those who own the tune are under fire from those under the spell of “super-moral-legalistic-conformation- itis,” they might enjoy this version, too. Summer 1998 29 Movement News Reconciling Congregations Number 150; Record Growth in 1998 Thirteen United Methodist churches have publicly proclaimed a message of welcome to all persons regardless of sexual orientation so far in 1998, bringing the total number of Reconciling Congregations nationwide to 150. “There has been a quickening pace of churches and ministries becoming Reconciling in 1998—an average rate of three per month,” noted Reconciling Congregation Program (RCP) executive director Mark Bowman, “even as a loud clamor in some parts of the church is calling for strict enforcement of United Methodist policies which discriminate against lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons and their families.” The new Reconciling Congregations include the first in the states of Maine and Nebraska, as well as the first in four regional United Methodist conferences— Central Pennsylvania, Nebraska, North Central New York, and North Texas. The RCP has recently received a $10,000 grant from the Gill Foundation to support its work. Three Lutheran Synods Become Reconciling This June, three Synods of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America passed affirmations of welcome to gay and lesbian believers. The Southern California-West, Southwestern Texas, and Metropolitan New York Synods are the newest ones to join the Reconciling in Christ Program. The RIC roster now includes 13 synods, or 20% of the total of 65 synods. One effect of these actions is that local congregations will be encouraged to join the Reconciling movement as well. MLCN and PLGC Approve Merger; Spahr and Glaser Honored While the Presbyterian General Assembly resisted any further action on sexuality issues this past June in Charlotte, NC, the membership of both the More Light Churches Network and Presbyterians for Lesbian and Gay Concerns voted to merge, effective January 1, 1999. The new group will be called More Light Presbyterians. The merger is seen by both groups as a recommitment to the struggle to transform the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) into a true community of hospitality. Funds have now been raised to match a challenge grant which will enable the new group to employ a full-time staff person to nurture the growth of More Light Churches and support networks in areas of the country in which more visibility is needed. During its Celebration at the annual Presbyterian gathering, PLGC honored Chris Glaser, interim editor of Open Hands, author, and founder of the Lazarus Project, and the Rev. Janie Spahr, “lesbian evangelist” and founder of That All May Freely Serve as well as Spectrum (formerly Ministry of Light), for their more than twenty years of service to the g/l/b/t community in the church. Both Chris and Janie gave moving speeches in response to the question, “How has the decision of the church to bar the ordination of gays and lesbians affected your life?” ONA Churches Gather With 244 churches now listed as Open and Affirming (ONA) in the United Church of Christ, 4% of the denomination’s 6,100 churches now publicly and fully welcome l/g/b people. During the national gathering of the UCC Coalition for L/G/ B/T Concerns in Chicago in late June, people from 51 of these churches shared food for the body and soul at the annual ONA dinner, hosted by First United Church of Oak Park, IL. All churches which have joined this movement since July 1997 will be recognized at The Coalition Banquet at the UCC General Synod (Providence, RI) in 1999. Canadian Presbyterians Oust Church for “Out” Minister The Presbyterian Church in Canada expelled a congregation at the end of June because it refused to fire its gay pastor. A congregation of mostly older members, St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church in Lachine (near Montreal) voted to retain Darryl Macdonald as worship leader and pastoral caregiver, despite the denomination’s refusal to ordain him and the resulting pressure over a three-year period to let him go or lose their Presbyterian affiliation. Montreal Presbytery at first supported the ordination of Macdonald, who said from the start that he lived with a man. He is regarded by his parishioners as a compassionate minister. Since the church’s sanctuary will be taken from them, the congregation will now be forced to lease it. Bishop Says Same-Gender Unions Do Not Violate Church Law In a May 14th letter distributed to clergy and lay leaders of the California-Nevada Annual Conference of the United Methodist Church, Bishop Melvin G. Talbert has declared that a pastor’s celebration of a same-gender union does not violate church law. The counsel comes in the wake of the trial of the Rev. Jimmy Creech (see last issue under “Leadership”) in Nebraska for performing such a ceremony. Talbert reminded United Methodists that the church’s Social Principles “are not law” but “are intended to be instructive.” Rev. Creech was not reappointed by his bishop after being acquitted in his trial, and so has chosen to take time away from parish ministry to do some reflecting and writing. Two churches in the conference led by Talbert have performed same-gender unions. Bishop Tutu Calls WCC to Gay-Positive Stance Nobel peace prize winner and Anglican Archbishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa has called for the next World Council of Churches gathering to speak positively about lesbians and gay men, according to an exclusive interview with the news service ENI. The host country for the December assembly, Zimbabwe, is led by President Robert Mugabe, who has denounced homosexual people as unwelcome “pigs” and as a “Western perversion” alien to Africans. Mugabe’s statements have been supported by some Zimbabwean churches, according to Tutu. Already one Dutch Protestant church has said it will not attend because of Mugabe’s remarks. “It is a matter of ordinary justice,” ENI reported Tutu as saying. 30 Open Hands Welcoming Communities Rainbow Flags At Lutheran Headquarters The first “Gay, Lesbian, and Straight People Working Together Week” was held at the churchwide offices of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America in June. Rainbow flags adorned posters on each floor of the 11-story building in Chicago announcing the week to employees. It was sponsored by the ELCA Interunit Staff Team on Diversity, a group whose charter includes sexual orientation as well as racial, ethnic and gender diversity. The activities were planned to celebrate the gifts of gay and lesbian people in the church, educate staff on the history of lesbian and gay people, and demonstrate that the center is a welcoming place. Speakers included Bob Gibeling, Program Executive for Lutherans Concerned/North America, parents and spouses of gay people, and members of Reconciling in Christ congregations. Millenium March on Washington Rev. Troy Perry, founder of the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches, and Elizabeth Birch, executive director of the Human Rights Campaign, have announced plans to hold another March on Washington, this time on April 30 in the year 2000. Initially the plan was criticized for not emanating from either the grass roots or even a coalition of leadership, but more individuals and organizations are endorsing this fourth march on the nation’s capital, including minority groups. Because of the lack of religious speakers at prior events, religious groups are pushing to be better represented at this one. And because of extremely lengthy delays for contingents awaiting their place in the last march, the primary event may take the shape of a rally on the capitol mall. Intermediate “Equality Begins at Home” actions in all 50 state capitals will be planned for 1999, organizers say. For further information, call the March on Washington at 818/891-1748 or e-mail MMOW2000@aol.com Global Gathering of Anglican Bishops Wrangles Over Homosexuality Religion New Service has reported that there’s little chance of agreement on homosexuality among the 750 Anglican bishops gathered for the historic, once-per-decade Lambeth Conference in Canterbury, England in July. Bishop Duncan Buchanan of Johannesburg, South Africa, chair of a study panel on human sexuality, told reporter Robert Nowell that he was “pretty shocked and traumatized” by expressions of anger by those opposed to ordination of gays and lesbians. Two-thirds of his sixty-member panel rejected hearing from openly gay and lesbian priests and members. The opposition was led largely by African and Asian bishops. One African bishop called homosexuality “the white disease” and another suggested that next they’d be hearing from those who practice child abuse and bestiality. The UK’s Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement distributed rainbow ribbons for participants to show support. Bishop Richard Holloway, primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church, defended gay people by declaring, “In Christ there are no outcasts.” More Churches Declare Welcoming Stance Erratum: In the annual listing of welcoming congregations in the Winter issue, Family of Christ Presbyterian Church in Greeley, Colorado, was mistakenly identified as Family of Christ United. OPEN AND AFFIRMING Plymouth United Church of Christ Syracuse, NY This downtown church of 300 members is Open and Affirming, a Just Peace congregation, and a Sanctuary church which provided safety for Central Americans fleeing to this country. It carries out its “building ministry” by making its facility available to numerous community groups seeking meeting space. The congregation’s local and global mission projects include: a food pantry, Heifer Project, and support for two missionaries in Nigeria. The congregation is currently in a search process for a long-term interim pastor. Their former pastor (of seventeen years) is now retracing the path of slavery on the year-long walk, Interfaith Pilgrimage of the Middle Passage. Friends Congregational Church, UCC College Station, TX The 175 members of this church are drawn from throughout the community around Texas A&M University. With many members in their 40s, a growing youth presence, and lot of babies, the church is a lively and hopeful place. Members are currently considering these mission objectives for the next few years: education on non-violence, ministry with diverse families, and continuing ministry to marginalized persons, including those who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender. The church helps sponsor g/l/b/t campus programs and provides meeting space for the local PFLAG chapter. RECONCILING CONGREGATIONS Christ United Methodist Church Columbia, Maryland Christ UMC was founded in 1975 in the growing “planned community” of Columbia, Maryland. After ten years of meeting in different places in the area, the congregation planned and built an interfaith center with a Unitarian congregation. Discussion about becoming a Reconciling Congregation began in the fall of 1995. Being a multi-racial congregation set the context for considering inclusion of gay and lesbian persons. After two years of study and dialogue, the congregation officially declared itself a Reconciling Congregation. Significant membership growth in recent years has brought the congregation to almost 200 members. Summer 1998 31 First United Methodist Church Campbell, California First UMC Campbell was founded 110 years ago in the midst of vast orchards and now finds itself in the heart of the Silicon Valley. This 900-member, middle-class congregation has a history of active service. First UMC initiated what is now a community wide CROP Walk and has sponsored refugees, held English as a Second Language classes, supported missionaries and participated in the development of Wesley Towers, a 12- story housing complex for elderly and disabled persons. First UMC members participate in food distribution programs and address affordable housing issues. The church has an extensive ministry with children, a strong music program, and supports a new Christian fellowship developing in the Salinas area. The church has always prided itself on being an open congregation, providing the impetus for becoming a Reconciling Congregation and continuing its efforts to become more reflective of the ethnic diversity of its community. RECONCILING IN CHRIST Gift of Grace Lutheran Church Seattle, Washington Gift of Grace Lutheran Church is a warm congregation with a sense of humor, firm dedication to evangelical outreach to the unchurched, and commitment to worship as an authentic celebration. The Bible as it reveals Jesus as Lord is the basis for the church’s thought, and all opinions are welcomed and encouraged. Church members value self-expression through the arts. They believe that human beings are defined by God’s Word, which calls them as precious children— not by sexual orientation, level of self-esteem, or religious beliefs. University Lutheran Church of Hope Minneapolis, Minnesota University Lutheran Church of Hope is an urban congregation of 1200 members. Its mission statement says: “The people of Hope are a Christian congregation receiving and sharing the gospel with open hearts, open hands, and open doors.” Hope adopted an Affirmation of Welcome in 1990 and, after intensive discussion, has now clarified that welcome in relation to the Reconciling in Christ program. In keeping with its broad interest in issues of social justice, Hope is currently hosting the Twin Cities joint synod task force’s program for families and friends of gay and lesbian people, entitled “Caring Families and Friends.” The group meets monthly for support and inspirational speakers. OPEN AND AFFIRMING MINISTRIES Bethany Christian United Parish Worcester, Massachusetts During their annual meeting in May, 1998, Bethany Christian United Parish voted to become Open and Affirming, believing that all people are always welcome. A 1988 merger of three congregations from three denominations—American Baptist, Disciples of Christ, and the United Church of Christ— the parish has worked to create an inclusive and diverse community. Baptisms, confirmations, infant dedications, and Communion are shared in the midst of denominational diversity. Lively intergenerational worship is celebrated, with many warm friendships developing between children and senior citizens. Youths are recognized as equal members, serving on committees and serving communion, and helped guide the parish in its process of becoming Open and Affirming. Lesbians or family members of gays and lesbians have recently joined. Rev. Cynthia Maybeck celebrated a commitment ceremony with her partner, Elaine Fadden, in 1995, and the church’s leaders supported her and provided leadership in the congregational discussion that followed. She writes, “Today Bethany Christian offers other gay and lesbian people the same warm welcome and love which Elaine and I have received.” WELCOMING CHURCH LISTS AVAILABLE The complete ecumenical list of welcoming churches is printed in the winter issue of Open Hands each year. For a more up-to-date list of your particular denomination, contact the appropriate program listed on page 3. BISEXUAL RESOURCE GUIDE New 1999-2000 edition now available. Full of useful information: articles, listings of groups in 30+ countries, Internet resources, film guide, bibliography, merchandise, and lots of other information. This is THE place to begin. To order: $11.95 (US) to: BRC, PO Box 639, Cambridge MA 02140, USA 32 Open Hands QTY BACK ISSUES AVAILABLE ___ Be Ye Reconciled (Summer 1985) ___ A Matter of Justice (Winter 1986) ___ Our Families (Spring 1986) ___ Our Churches’ Policies (Summer 1986) ___ Images of Healing (Fall 1986) ___ Minorities within a Minority (Spring 1987) ___ Sexual Violence (Fall 1987) ___ Building Reconciling Ministries (Spring 1988) ___ Living and Loving with AIDS (Summer 1988) ___ Lesbian & Gay Men in the Religious Arts (Spring 1989) ___ The Closet Dilemma (Summer 1989) ___ Images of Family (Fall 1989) ___ Journeys toward Recovery and Wholeness (Spring 1990) ___ The “Holy Union” Controversy (Fall 1990) ___ Youth and Sexual Identity (Winter 1991) ___ Lesbian/Gay Reflections on Theology (Spring 1991) ___ The Lesbian Spirit (Summer 1991) ___ Our Spirituality: How Sexual Expression and Oppression Shape It (Summer 1992) ___ Aging and Integrity (Fall 1992) ___ Reclaiming Pride (Summer 1994) ___ The God to Whom We Pray (Spring 1995) ___ Remembering…10th Anniversary (Summer 1995) ___ Untangling Prejudice and Privilege (Fall 1995) ___ Same-Sex Unions (Spring 1997) ___ Creating Sanctuary: All Youth Welcome Here! (Summer 1997) ___ From One Womb at One Table (Fall 1997) ___ We’re Welcoming, Now What? (Winter 1998) ___ Treasure in Earthen Vessels—Sexual Ethics (Spring 1998) ❑ Please send me the back issues indicated ($6 each; 10+ @ $4). ❑ Send me Open Hands each quarter ($20/year; outside U.S.A. @ $25). ❑ Send Open Hands gift subscription(s) to name(s) attached. Enclosed is my payment of $ _______ OR Charge $ _____________ to my VISA MASTERCARD (Circle one) # __________________________________________ Expiration _____/_____. Name on Card ____________________________________________________ Signature ________________________________________________________ My Name ________________________________________________________ Address _________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip _____________________________________________________ Daytime Phone (______) _____________________ Local Church _____________________________________________________ Denomination _____________________________________________________ Send to: Open Hands, 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 Published by the Reconciling Congregation Program in conjunction with More Light, Open and Affirming, Reconciling in Christ, and Welcoming & Affirming Baptist programs. A Unique Resource on Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual Concerns in the Church for Christian Education • Personal Reading Research Projects • Worship Resources Ministry & Outreach Selected Resources With thanks to Robyn Ochs of the Bisexual Resource Center (Cambridge, MA) and to Ben Roe. CHURCH & FAITH: Coming Out While Staying In: Struggles and Celebrations of Lesbians, Gays, and Bisexuals in the Church by Leanne McCall Tigert. Cleveland: United Church Press, 1996. Discovering Images of God; Narratives of Care Among Lesbians and Gays by Larry Kent Graham. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1997. We Were Baptized Too; Claiming God’s Grace for Lesbians and Gays by Marilyn Alexander and James Preston. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996. Whee! We, Wee, All the Way Home; A Guide to a Sensual, Prophetic Spirituality by Matthew Fox. Santa Fe: Bear & Co., 1981. Unrepentant, Self-Affirming, Practicing: Lesbian/Bisexual/Gay People Within Organized Religion by Gary David Comstock. NY: Continuum, 1996. BISEXUAL REALITY: Barry and Alice; Portrait of a Bisexual Marriage by Barry Kohn and Alice Matusow. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1980. Bi Any Other Name: Bisexuals Speak Out, ed. by Loraine Hutchins & Lani Kaahumanu. Boston: Alyson Publications, 1991. 75 essays. Bisexuality and HIV/AIDS: A Global Perspective, ed. by Rob Tielman, et al. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1991. Bisexuality: The Psychology and Politics of an Invisible Minority, ed. by Beth A. Firestein. Newbury Park CA: Sage Publications, 1996. Bisexual Politics: Theories, Queries, and Visions, ed. by Naomi Tucker et al. Binghamton NY: The Haworth Press, Inc. (Order: 1-800/342-9678) Bisexual Resource Guide by Robyn Ochs. (US$11.95, postage paid) BRC, PO Box 639, Cambridge MA 02140. Books, films, groups, merchandise, etc. Closer to Home: Bisexuality & Feminism, ed. by Elizabeth Reba Weise. Seattle: Seal Press, 1992. Dual Attraction: Understanding Bisexuality, ed. by Martin S. Weinberg, et al. NY: Oxford University Press, 1994. Journal of Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Identity, ed. by Warren J. Blumenfeld. Human Sciences Press, 233 Spring Street, New York NY 10013. Quarterly. Annual subscription: $35/individual, $110/ institutional. Plural Desires: Writing Bisexual Women’s Realities, ed. by Leela Acharya, et al. Toronto: Sister Vision Press, 1995. Canadian/ U.S. anthology. Two Lives to Lead: Bisexuality in Men and Women by Fritz Klein and Timothy J. Wolf. NY: Harrington Park, 1985. Vice Versa: Bisexuality and the Eroticism of Everyday Life by Marjorie Garber. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995. Literature and culture. 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 Open Hands Vol 14 No 1 - Bisexuality Both/And Rather Than Either/Or https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/a896b77a79871a5797b196af17f8d67f.pdf 7abdee071f9e020d58aa9e301bddd471 Issue An issue of a recurring publication. Volume Number The volume number of the issue 14 Issue Number The number of the issue (within a volume) 2 Publication Year The year the issue was published 1998 Publication Date The date the issue was published Fall Text Any textual data included in the document l A H O U SE Dl VlDE D lrreconcilable Differences? A Broken Body Breaks Bread Gay and Catholic Gay and Republican and Christian Mammon’s Control of the Church Matthew Shepard’s Martyrdom Vol. 14 No. 2 Fall 1998 2 Open Hands Vol. 14 No. 2 Fall 1998 Resources for Ministries Affirming the Diversity of Human Sexuality Open Hands is a resource for congregations and individuals seeking to be in ministry with lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons. Each issue focuses on a specific area of concern within the church. Open Hands is published quarterly by the Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (United Methodist) in cooperation with the Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada), the Association of Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (American), the More Light Churches Network (Presbyterian), the Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ), the Open and Affirming Program (United Church of Christ), and the Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran). Each of these programs is a national network of local churches that publicly affirm their ministry with the whole family of God and welcome lesbian and gay persons and their families into their community of faith. These seven programs—along with Supportive Congregations (Brethren/Mennonite), and Welcoming Congregations (Unitarian Universalist)— offer hope that the church can be a reconciled community. Open Hands is published quarterly. Subscription is $20 for four issues ($25 outside the U.S.). Single copies and back issues are $6. Quantities of 10 or more, $4 each. Subscriptions, requests for advertising rates, and other business correspondence should be sent to: Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773 / 736-5526 Fax: 773 / 736-5475 Member, The Associated Church Press © 1998 Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. Open Hands is a registered trademark. ISSN 0888-8833 Printed on recycled paper. Publisher Mark Bowman Interim Editor Chris Glaser Designer In Print—Jan Graves With this issue, we warmly welcome the Affirming Congregation Programme of the United Church of Canada as a full ecumenical partner of Open Hands. A HOUSE DIVIDED Irreconcilable Differences? A House Divided 4 CHRIS GLASER So what’s new? Where the lines should be drawn. One Loaf, One Cup, One Body—While a Church Divided 5 AGNES NORFLEET Common meal as common ground. A Soul Divided—Rejecting a Gay Identity 8 JEFF MURPHY-HOLT Meeting “WasGay” on line. Can My Son Be Gay and Catholic? 9 Reconciling Teachings with Experience CASEY LOPATA A family undivided while practicing what the church preaches. Can You Be Gay and Republican? 11 RICH TAFEL As easily as being gay and Christian. ‘War of Ideas’—An Imbalance of Power 13 LEON HOWELL The moneyed interests we’re up against in the Body of Christ and the Body Politic. Purchasing Power of the Press—An Example 14 EUGENE TESELLE The long shadow cast by one churchman with money. Call for Articles for Open Hands Summer 1999 CREATIVE CHAOS Theme section: “Those who have turned the world upside down have come here also,” the religious authorities told the political authorities regarding Christians (Acts 17). How has the welcoming movement turned things upside down? What traditional constructs of the church have we questioned or “undone”? How may the soil that we have tilled—chaos—become fertile ground for creative thought and action? Ministries section: We are seeking columns describing practical experience and suggestions in the following areas: Welcoming Process, Connections (with other justice issues), Worship, Outreach, Leadership, Health (those related to lesbians and gay men, such as breast cancer and AIDS), Youth, Campus, Children. These brief articles may or may not have to do with the theme. Contact with idea by April 15, 1999 Manuscript deadline: June 15, 1999 Chris Glaser, Phone/Fax 404/622-4222 or e-mail at ChrsGlaser@aol.com 991 Berne St. SE, Atlanta, GA 30316 Fall 1998 3 Program Coordinators Mark Bowman Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (UMC) 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 773/736-5526 www.rcp.org Ron Coughlin Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada) P.O. Box 333, Station Q Toronto, Ontario CANADA M4T 2M5 416/466-1489 acpucc@aol.com Ann B. Day Open and Affirming Program (UCC) P.O. Box 403 Holden, MA 01520 508/856-9316 www.coalition.simplenet.com Bob Gibeling Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran) 2466 Sharondale Drive Atlanta, GA 30305 404/266-9615 www.lcna.org Dick Lundy More Light Churches Network (PCUSA) 5525 Timber Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 612/470-0093 http://www.mlcn.org Brenda J. Moulton Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (ABC/USA) P.O. Box 2596 Attleboro Falls, MA 02763 508/226-1945 http://users.aol.com/ wabaptists Open & Affirming Minstries (Disciples of Christ) P.O. Box 44400 Indianapolis, IN 46244 http://pilot.msu.edu/user/ laceyj/ Editorial Advisory Committee Vaughn Beckman, O&A Howard Bess, W&A Ann Marie Coleman, ONA Bobbi Hargleroad, MLCN Allen V. Harris, O&A Tom Harshman, O&A Dick Hasbany, MLCN Alyson Huntly, ACP Bonnie Kelly, ACP Susan Laurie, RCP Samuel E. Loliger, ONA Tim Phillips, W&A Lisa Ann Pierce, SCN Caroline Presnell, RCP Paul Santillán, RCP Margarita Suaréz, ONA Judith Hoch Wray, O&A Stuart Wright, RIC Movement News ..................................... 30 Welcoming Communities ....................... 30 Selected Resources .................................. 32 A Public Apology 15 GIL ALEXANDER-MOEGERLE Co-founder of Focus on the Family confesses complicity. Ecumenical Politeness Reconsidered 17 Transcending Denominational Divisions to Address Concerns of Justice MARY E. HUNT Miss Manners meets Ms. Justice. A Soulforce Response 20 MEL WHITE Responding non-violently to our opponents. Thoughts on the L/G/B/T Religious Movement 21 MARK BOWMAN Increasing our power and lift to overcome inertia and gravity. Walking in the Moonlight 23 RITA NAKASHIMA BROCK The challenge of faith: to live with ambiguity. MINISTRIES Outreach In Memory of Matthew Shepard (1976-1998) 25 The Need to Pray Always and Not Lose Heart CHRIS GLASER Health Discerning the Nearness of God 26 Lectio Divina and AIDS PATRICIA HOFFMAN Campus From Jeffrey to Angels 27 Education for Gay/Lesbian Advocacy in a Theological Seminary J. CY ROWELL Connections Homosexuality, European Churches, the Ecumenical 27 Movement, and the WCC Meeting in Harare ROBERT C. LODWICK SUSTAINING THE SPIRIT Believers, Here We Gather 29 A NEW HYMN BY THOMAS J. RITTER The artist-in-residence for this issue is Mary Callaway Logan, a United Methodist minister in Atlanta, who uses art in spiritual direction in her Seeds of Light Studio by encouraging individuals to visually express their spiritual autobiographies. For more information, contact her at 443 Sterling St. NE, Atlanta, GA 30307; 404/524-1427, ext. 4. Next Issue: Why Be Specific In Our Welcome? 4 Open Hands “And if a house is divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand,” Jesus told his detractors (Mk 3:25). He said it in reply to an accusation that he had cast out demonic spirits by the power of Satan, and he then condemned such blasphemy against the Holy Spirit’s work (3:28-30). Yet Jesus would later say of the disagreement his gospel would bring to households, “Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division! From now on five in one household will be divided, three against two and two against three...” (Lk 12:51-52). The church has been divided against itself since the early days when Jewish and Gentile Christians wrangled over circumcision. One could say that divisions of the church have served as much as a sign of strength as of weakness. For one thing, it offered a vitality of dialogue required of any true religion, as opposed to a cult that demands complete conformity. For another, it offered a collective and communal expression of faith that, while shaped by Jesus’ and the disciples’ teachings, took on its own life that was more than the sum of its parts, past or present. And for that reason, it was capable of adapting to new situations and new information just as any living being might be, thus better able to embrace more and more people, even if that occured within differing Christian traditions. In the present time, there seems no more divisive issue than homosexuality in the church, though bisexuality and transgendered issues are surfacing more and more as “cutting edge” issues, as the cliché with sacrificial overtones goes. I believe, as do some of the contributors to this issue of Open Hands, that homosexuality serves as a kind of Rorschach test of the true divisions that our various denominations have lived with more or less successfully in the past: disagreements of theological understanding, biblical interpretation, the meaning of church membership and of ordination. Of course, in the past, often the way the church survived was to divide up into various traditions and denominations and even sects. And though we may lament such divisions of the Body of Christ, “decentralizing” the church allowed for still more people to remain Christian. Many Christians today may be wondering if we must divide again. Of course, divisions are already in place, with the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches embracing l/g/b/t people whom other denominations have abandoned or rejected. And Open Hands represents more than 850 welcoming congregations and ministries that would collectively represent an even larger church body than UFMCC. Yet the welcoming programs that sponsor Open Hands have never been about schism. We have always been about dialogue and inclusiveness. The term dialogue comes from root words meaning literally “through the word,” and implies finding a common ground of belief and practice of the faith through words and, for us, common ground for people along the spectrums of sexuality and gender within the church. Our understanding of inclusiveness has meant we have never required the expulsion of our opponents in the church in the way that they have sometimes demanded our excommunication or simply invited us to leave, blaspheming against the work of the Holy Spirit within us. Dialogue, however, requires equity. Whether our churches simply “agree to disagree” or to carry on further “dialogue,” l/g/b/t people remain second class citizens, disabled by antigay polities from equal access to the policymaking or polity-interpreting church courts. We remain “out” while others are “in,” and, without equal opportunity to communicate, effectively “excommunicated.” Church historian Martin Marty has said that churches are being skewed more and more to the right, because, when liberals come to power, they encourage the continued participation of conservatives; but when conservatives come to power, they try to purge the church of progressives (see Mary Hunt’s article). That, plus the church’s basic inertia (the tendency to keep doing things the same old way) and the money behind our opponents (see the articles by Leon Howell and Gene TeSelle), make our work feel like that of Sisyphus, who perpetually rolled a stone to the top of a hill only to have it roll down again. I once worked in a church that prided itself on being inclusive. Then one day a person began attending who literally and persistently threatened individuals in the congregation, causing some to avoid church to avoid him. Violence was feared, and when it came, the elders accepted his offer not to return. We lost three other members, friends of his, because they felt we were behaving in a noninclusive fashion. But to be inclusive, we believed we had to exclude this angry man. In all my years as a gay activist in the church, I’ve never disputed the church’s right to define its boundaries in terms of belief and behavior. What I have disputed is where those boundaries should be drawn. Does the church really want to include someone who is intolerant of l/g/b/t people at the expense of excluding l/g/b/t people? Or wouldn’t it be more Christ-like to be intolerant of intolerance? Fall 1998 5 We are a church in great pain and conflict, and everyone here today knows it. We are a church divided, in Greater Atlanta Presbytery, and in our denomination. During the course of this meeting we will take a vote that will show how divided we are. On the surface of things the division appears to be about human sexuality, particularly homosexuality, and church leadership. But below the surface the division is even deeper than that. We are divided by different understandings of biblical interpretation, and Reformed theology; and by how we understand human sin and God’s grace. We are a church divided and the pain of our division runs deep. No matter how the vote goes today, not one person will go home a winner, because about half of us will go home feeling defeated, and when one part of the body suffers, we all suffer together. Parallels with Corinth The similarities between the church in Corinth and the church today are surprisingly real. Corinth was, like Atlanta, an international city. It was a large commercial port and trading center between East and West, a big city with big city benefits and problems— renown for its commerce, industry, wealth, luxury and immorality. Many came to the city for work with the military, in government service, and because of business with foreign traders. Business was dominated by an upper class of mostly Italians, and there was an influx of Greeks, Asians, and Jews who comprised a lower, working class. The eighteen months that Paul was in Corinth was sufficient time to begin several house churches, but not time enough to provide stability for such a diverse community of believers. All this diversity gave rise to conflict and tension which is evident in Paul’s letter to the church in Corinth. There were differing opinions about matters of human sexuality. Some had quit sleeping with their own spouses because of their commitment to Christ, while another was living with his father’s wife. Some thought they should break completely with the past, refusing meat that had been offered to idols, but others had no problem with that, after all, meat is meat. There were divisions about displaying the gifts of the Spirit in worship, about the role of women in the church, about freedom and communal responsibility, about the meaning of the resurrection.1 No wonder they wrote to Paul and said, “Help!” A Division of the House Paul wrote back, and in the center of the letter he gets to the heart of the matter (see 1 Cor 11:17-34). The Words of Institution of the Lord’s Supper are usually lifted out of this biblical context, and we lose sight of their impact. Paul is saying to a church he founded and a people he loved, “When you come together, there are divisions among you, and this is not the Lord’s Supper which you eat.” The central problem that Paul is addressing at Corinth is not a problem of sacramental theology. Rather it is a problem of social relations within a divided community. Remember the church met in people’s homes. Archeological study of houses from this period has shown that the dining room of a typical villa could accommodate about nine or ten persons who would recline at table for the meal. Other guests would have to sit or stand in the atrium which might have provided space for thirty to forty people. The host of such a gathering would invite a small elite group to dine in the dining room, while lowerstatus members of the church would be placed in the larger space outside. The higher-status guests in the dining room would be served better food and wine than the others. A number of surviving writings from this period testify to this custom. Roman scholar Pliny the Younger, describes his experience of dining as a guest in someone’s home saying: “The best dishes were set in front of the host himself and a select few, and cheap scraps of food before the rest of the company. He had even put the wine into tiny little flasks, divided into three This sermon was delivered during the opening Communion service of a meeting of Greater Atlanta Presbytery, February 28, 1998, that was to vote on whether to relax the denomination’s policy that essentially prohibits ordination of lesbians and gay men. A few specific references have been removed to universalize this article. We are a church in great pain and conflict, and everyone here today knows it. We are a church divided... 6 Open Hands categories. One lot was intended for himself and for us, another for his lesser friends (all his friends were graded) and the third for his and our freedmen.”2 This was the sort of hospitality that was being provided to the church by the wealthier Corinthian Christians. As patrons of the community hosting the gatherings, they were continuing to observe these class distinctions even when the Lord’s Supper was being served. Paul regards such practices— however “normal” in respectable Corinthian culture— as an outrage. He does not deny the right of the more prosperous to eat and drink however they like in their own homes, but he insists that the church’s common meal should symbolize the unity of the community through equitable sharing of food and drink. You who are rich are coming early and eating all the food, and getting drunk. The poor, who are day laborers and have less control over their time, arrive late from work and when they arrive—there is no food left; they are going away hungry! You are not making room for one another at the table, Paul is saying to the church. This kind of meal is hardly communal, much less the Lord’s Supper! In the church there is no hierarchy of status. The solemnity of the Words of Institution handed down from Jesus to Paul to us is a sharp contrast to the firstcome- first-served, me-in-you-out, kind of revelry described as characteristic of the Corinthian church. It was while he was being betrayed that our Lord Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it. In the divisiveness of the Corinthian church, the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper affirms a new covenant, and invites a new kind of community. A Surplus of Scholars and a Deficit of Peacemakers Garrison Keillor, one of America’s great storytellers, once told about two brothers who live in Lake Wobegon. They were members of a tiny fundamentalist bunch known as the Sanctified Brethren. There was in this group a spirit of self-righteousness among certain elders that defied peacemaking. They were, Keillor tells, “Given to disputing small points of doctrine that to them seemed the very fulcrum of the faith. We were cursed with a surplus of scholars and a deficit of peacemakers, and so we tended to be split into factions.” When he was a boy, a dispute arose between two men: Brother William Miller and Brother James Johnson, but of course they dragged others into it, too. Uncle Al had family and friends on both sides, and it broke Al’s heart to see these brothers become enemies. So one fine August day, Uncle Al tried to make peace between them, to restore the love that had been lost. He arranged for them to meet at his and Aunt Flo’s house one Sunday, a few Millers and a few Johnsons, not to discuss their difference in doctrine, but simply to enjoy a dinner of Aunt Flo’s famous fried chicken. It took weeks to arrange, but finally the two groups of brothers arrived—in separate cars, of course. Gaunt, flintyeyed, thin-lipped men in dark suits came into the house and sat in awesome silence until the call to dinner.They trooped into the dining room around the long table that had been extended with two leaves so they wouldn’t have to sit close. “House of Bread” God tells us, “Out of Bethlehem (“house of bread”) I will call my Beloved.” “We are all God’s bread, and the church is a community of bread of all kinds and shapes. When I began to make the steeple ‘splitting,’ my husband said, ‘It looks like a highway.’ I wonder, where will all of us go, on that highway?” Mary Callaway Logan Fall 1998 7 Now, prayer was a delicate matter. Brethren were known to use even prayer before a meal as a platform, and so Uncle Al, the peacemaker, concerned lest one brother take prayer and beat the others over the head with it, said, “Let us bow our heads in silent prayer, giving thanks for the meal.” They bowed their heads and closed their eyes and—a long time passed. The old clock ticked on the bureau. A cat walked in and meowed and left. A child snickered. Cars went by. There were dry sniffs and clearings. Soon it was clear that neither side wanted to stop before the other. They were seeing who could pray the longest. Brother Miller peeked through his fingers at Brother Johnson, who was earnestly engaged in silent communion with the Lord, who agreed with him on so many things. So Brother Miller dove back into prayer, too. Uncle Al finally said, “AMEN” to offer them a way out of the deadlock. He even said it again, “AMEN,” but it was no use. It was becoming the longest table grace in history. Then Aunt Flo slid her chair back, rose, went into the kitchen, and brought out the food they were competing to see who could be more thankful for. She set the hot dishes before them. In that moment, a kind of pointed, poignant truth settled among them and they could hardly bear it. Tears ran down Brother Johnson’s face. His eyes were clamped shut, and tears streamed down. A meal awaits us all this morning. lt will not deaden the pain we are experiencing as a church divided, but it has the power to melt our stony hearts. With their eyes closed, the smell of fried chicken and gravy made those men into boys again. lt was years ago, they were fighting, and a mother’s voice from on high said, ‘You boys stop it and get in here and have your dinners. Now. l mean it.’ And so was Brother Miller weeping. Keillor observes, “It’s true what they say, that smell is the key that unlocks our deepest memories. With their eyes closed, the smell of fried chicken and gravy made those men into boys again. It was years ago, they were fighting, and a mother’s voice from on high said, ‘You boys stop it and get in here and have your dinners. Now. I mean it.’ The blessed cornmeal crust and rapturous gravy brought the memory to mind. And the stony hearts of two giants melted. They raised their heads and filled their plates and slowly peace was made over that glorious meal.”3 A Meal to Meld Our Hearts I am a part of a group of ministers in this presbytery who share a meal together once a month. This group was convened just over a year ago before we had a similar vote. There are ten of us in it now. We serve different churches, large and small, urban, suburban, small town. What brought us together in the first place was our differences. We were, a year ago, evenly divided on the issues before us again today. Each month we gather in one of our churches, we have lunch, we talk, we laugh, we cry, we pray together. We call ourselves Common Ground. Part of me can’t stand these lunches because of our divisions. Sometimes when I go it takes me about a week to get over. My husband has reminded me that many evenings after one of these meetings I come home exasperated and exclaim, “I don’t understand why they don’t think like I do!” But we keep getting back together. Out of our understanding of scripture and deep convictions, some of our group come to this vote feeling very strongly that homosexual persons should not hold leadership positions in the church. Some of us, including myself, count among our richest blessings the colleagues we have in ministry, ministers, elders, deacons, friends, who are homosexual. In over a year of meetings, we have not changed our minds. We are still divided on this issue. But something important has happened. In the midst of our conflict and painful division, we have, by the grace of God, made room for one another at the table. A meal awaits us all this morning. It will not deaden the pain we are experiencing as a church divided, but it has the power to melt our stony hearts. When the tops are taken off those trays a fragrance is going to fill the air. And for a moment, by Christ’s body broken for us, we will share one loaf, one cup, and become one body. Agnes W. Norfleet is the pastor of North Decatur Presbyterian Church. Notes 1Fred B. Craddock, “Preaching to Corinthians,” Interpretation: A Journal of Bible and Theology, April, 1990, p. 160. 2Richard B. Hays, First Corinthians, Interpretation Commentary. Louisville: John Knox Press, 1997, p. 192 ff. 3Garrison Keillor, “Brethren”, Leaving Home, p 161. 8 Open Hands Not long ago, I had a discussion with a young man in an Internet chatroom named Ron (not his real name). His sign-on name, “WasGay,” captured my attention, and I could not resist the urge to talk with him about it. By using this name, he was proclaiming to have once been “sexually broken”—or, homosexual— but had been “repaired by the grace of God through Jesus.” While he was claiming to have been saved from eternal damnation, I sensed a sad and solitary soul deeply buried under an elaborate pretense. He struck me as perhaps the loneliest person I had ever encountered. Ron did not divulge much about his family history, but it was obvious that he came from a family with strong fundamentalist roots. Clearly he had been abused emotionally, which is not uncommon among fundamentalists. He had been asked to die to his true self. Because I was not Ron’s counselor, I did not have to be impartial and unbiased. I took great pains to treat him respectfully, but I was angry at what had been done to him, and what he had done to himself: Ron had been robbed of his spirit and told that it had no value. He had allowed himself to be convinced that God’s love is conditional, and he was certain that he had to somehow “change” in order to receive eternal salvation. He was so sure of this, in fact, that he was eager to prove to everyone that he had changed and was now “worthy.” He was suppressing and trying to leave behind the very soul of who he was, seeing it as something not only detachable, but evil. By pretending to be something he is not, Ron was buying what he thinks salvation is, not from God, but from those around him. Unfortunately, their God is one of retribution and fear, nothing like the loving God whose help we ask to “accept the things we cannot change, and the wisdom to know the difference.” Saying one “doesn’t agree” with homosexuality is like saying one doesn’t agree with rain. According to both the American Psychological Association and American Medical Association, it is now considered an ethical violation to try to change a person’s sexual orientation through counseling. Many people, who cannot conform to society’s biases, resort to pretending that they do— in effect, ceasing to exist as themselves. Ron effectively chose to cease to exist as one who is free to think and feel and reason and come to his own conclusions, thereby having his own unique relationship with God. And what is suicide, but choosing not to live under the circumstances with which you have been given? What else is it called but suicide when he feels he cannot go on living the way he is? Is it living when one believes that he is unworthy of love and acceptance from God and others unless he can somehow be something other than what he is, and if he can’t, pretend to be? Jesus came to give life, not take it away. When a fellow “chatroomer” asked me what I thought of WasGay’s proclamation of being “sexually healed” and if I thought I could learn from his “courageous” example, I responded that since gay people have pretended to be “straight” almost from the beginning of time I could see nothing miraculous about it. While talking with Ron, in fact, I realized that indeed I had been there myself, posturing myself as an “ex-gay,” or at least, a “non-gay.” I would daresay anyone who is lesbian or gay is an “exex- gay” in this regard; we have all come from a period of denial in our lives when we felt we had to pretend and tried to be something other than our true selves, something that society ’ would find more acceptable. While denying ourselves, we tried to be “just like everyone else”— to be what we were expected to be, regardless of the truth. Ron may have fooled many of those he spoke to that night. I was not among them. Having been there myself, I could see only too clearly his loneliness and longing for approval and validation. It was as if he was trying to say, “See? I have done this wonderful thing. Aren’t you proud of me now?” Unable to love himself, he was looking for someone to love him, still. In spite of the fact that Ron had made this major and miraculous conversion in his life for the sake of those around him, he still felt unloved and unworthy. Ironically, Ron showed up later in a gay and lesbian chatroom instead of one of the Christian chatrooms where we had met. My discussion with Ron ended when I spoke ironically of the good fortune of knowing God’s “requirements” about sexuality. Isn’t it fortunate, I asked him, that Christians can be so confident that they are not wrong about any of this? He did not respond. ▼ Jeff Murphy-Holt (left) is a graduate student completing a master’s degree in counseling psychology. He and his partner, Michael, are active members of Kairos United Methodist Church in Kansas City, the first Reconciling Congregation in Missouri. Fall 1998 9 Can Jim be gay and Catholic? That became the big question for me after I got over the initial shock and confusion of learning our son is gay. While Mary Ellen (my wife and Jim’s mother) rode the emotional guilt/doubt/grief roller coaster typified in many stories about parents’ journeys, I logically stepped my way through the theological mine field. That’s what you do when you’re a theology junkie (Vatican documents are beach reading) and nearly fall off the thinker side of those thinker-versus-feeler scales. “Dad, I’m gay.” Those words from Jim were unthinkable for me. All I could say was, “Are you sure?” I didn’t know any gay people (so I thought). I knew virtually nothing about homosexuality. And my vague understanding of church teaching was: homosexuality was wrong. Period. So wrong—you couldn’t even talk about it. Like osmosis, this silence surrounding homosexuality seeped into my consciousness and left me with the notion that no sin was worse than homosexuality. As a thinker, I was forced to bring some rationality to this irrational belief, and to the feelings that were there, though unacknowledged. I had to know: Can Jim be gay and be Catholic? My first logical step was to think back to the day when I decided whether I was going to be homosexual or heterosexual. I never made such a decision, nor did Jim, nor anyone else I’ve talked with about this. And I discovered that church documents support the unchosen, fixed nature of sexual orientation. The U.S. Bishops refer to “those persons for whom homosexuality is a permanent, seemingly irreversible sexual orientation,” 1 and their Committee on Marriage and Family says, “Generally, homosexual orientation is experienced as a given, not as something freely chosen.”2 Learning that Jim didn’t choose his homosexuality was a giant first step for me. But, I wondered, “Why does Jim have this orientation?” I readily dismissed a 19th century theory that said homosexuality was caused by the habitual drinking of English tea and the pernicious influence of Italian opera! How ill-informed we’ve been! Yet that’s understandable, considering that scientists didn’t start studying this concept until the mid 1800’s, and the Catholic church didn’t officially acknowledge sexual orientation until 1975. “OK, that helps,” I thought. But I was sure my next step was going to be into quicksand! Is homosexuality a sin? Surprise! The Vatican unequivocally states: “The particular inclination of a homosexual person is not a sin.”3 Of course! A homosexual orientation can’t be a sin if it’s not a choice. In fact, church teaching says sexuality is a gift, and “Sexual identity helps to define the unique persons we are, and one component of our sexual identity is sexual orientation.” 4 But what about what these feelings might lead to? What about homogenital acts? As I expected, the Vatican says: “It is only in the marital relationship that the use of the sexual faculty can be morally good.”5 And the U.S. Bishops say: “Homosexual activity…as distinguished from homosexual orientation, is morally wrong.” But, they continue: “Like heterosexual persons, homosexuals are called to give witness to chastity, avoiding, with God’s grace, behavior which is wrong for them, just as nonmarital sexual relations are wrong for heterosexuals.”6 Whoa! What hit me, probably because I’m heterosexual, is the part that says: “just as nonmarital sexual relations are wrong for heterosexuals.” This tells me if Jim has sexual relations outside of marriage, he violates church-established moral norms; just like my heterosexual son Andy, if he has sexual relations outside of marriage; just like my married daughter, Linda, if she uses artificial birth control; and just like me if I masturbate. OK, but logically I thought: “Since church law restricts marriage to a man and woman, doesn’t this mean homogenital behavior is always a sin?” Well, the Vatican says: “In fact, circumstances may exist, or may have existed in the past, which would reduce or remove the culpability of the individual [engaged in homosexual activity]…in a given instance.”7 Wow! The Vatican says homogenital acts are not necessarily always a sin! I recalled the old Baltimore Catechism— three things are necessary for mortal sin: 1) the thought, desire, word, action or omission must be seriously wrong 2) the person must know it’s seriously wrong, and 3) the person must fully consent to it. And only God knows how knowledgeable and how free we really are. Along with all this I learned the church recommends a pastoral approach. For example, a Vatican theologian and author of one of its documents, in a newspaper interview, said: “When one is dealing with people who are so predominately homosexual that they will be in serious personal and perhaps social trouble unless they attain a steady partnership within their homosexual lives, one can recommend them to seek such a partnership and one accepts this relationship as the best they can do in their present situation.”8 I later learned this is based on the moral principle that no one is obliged to do what is impossible for them to do. During my journey, I read that Catholic church teaching says six biblical texts clearly say homosexual behavior is immoral. But my journey also led me to Scroggs, Furnish, and other biblical scholars, who convincingly argue the Bible is not really so clear on this. So at this point in my journey—and it was a meandering 14-year process, not the series of logical steps I’ve presented here—I’d learned that it is not a sin for Jim to have a homosexual orientation, and that Jim can be gay and a faithful Catholic, just like any other faithful 10 Open Hands Catholic who struggles with objective moral norms established by the church. The U.S. Bishops say it well: “Homosexual [persons], like everyone else, should not suffer from prejudice against their basic human rights. They have a right to respect, friendship, and justice. They should have an active role in the Christian community.”9 Through this process, I also learned a thinker has feelings too! Since my son is gay, I’m personally affected by these teachings, and I would like some of them to change. I learned that’s OK too. Because none of this teaching is infallible… which means, of course, it can change. But will it? Change springs from unresolved tensions. Here are three: 1. The Catholic church says it’s OK for gay people to be gay as long as they’re celibate, yet the church also teaches that celibacy is a gift. Are all gay people gifted with the ability to live a celibate lifestyle? 2. Catholic church teaching considers homosexual orientation to be a sexual deviation, a “disorder.” The church also teaches there can be no conflict between faith and reason, yet the American Psychiatric Association and the American Psychological Association consider homosexual orientation to be a natural sexual variation. 3. Not only was church teaching formulated without the participation of openly gay and lesbian people, but the teaching doesn’t take into account the lived experience of many faithful, gay and lesbian Catholics— real people— made in the image and likeness of God, who, like all of us, struggle to do what God calls us to do. Change in church teaching is possible, but the official church tends to move very, very slowly. So, what do I do today? Well, that brought me to another teaching that surprises many Catholics—the primacy of conscience. The Catechism puts it very simply: “A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his [or her] conscience.” [My emphasis]10 “Wow!”, I thought, “That’s pretty clear!” Does that mean we can do anything we want? Theologian Charles Curran answered that for me—quite concisely: We must obey our conscience, but our conscience might be wrong. This led me to the concept of moral discernment in the Catholic moral tradition. The church suggests looking at experience, reason (including the sciences), tradition (church teaching), and scripture. Why all four? Because each has been wrong. Consider the flatness of earth (experience), the theory that babies came only from the man (reason), the excommunication of Galileo (tradition), or slavery (scripture). But what if church teaching and our conscience do not agree? Church teaching itself says we should start with the presumption that church teaching is right. Then, consider scripture, reason, and our experience, and return to the ultimate question: Are we responding to the God revealed in Jesus Christ? Bishop Thomas Gumbleton gave me an example of how to balance church teaching and conscience when he said, “I don’t make judgments about a gay person’s conscience any more than about the military man at a SAC air base or on a Trident submarine who would fire a nuclear weapon if ordered to. I think in some ways the church teaching on that is clearer than on homosexuality…Anybody who has the intention of using such weapons is, in my judgment, in a situation that is drastically evil. And yet I cannot judge another person’s conscience. If that person comes to communion, I cannot refuse.”11 Church teaching, personal sin, conscience, discernment. Intellectually, I found Jim can certainly be gay and Catholic. But this discovery was still in my thinker’s world of theology and homosexuality until I heard Bishop Kenneth Untener. Speaking to a largely gay and lesbian audience, he said: “When we die, and as a moral theologian I don’t say this lightly, the only thing that will matter is how we treated each other.”12 That’s when I realized the final step of my journey was getting to know and love many faithful Catholic gay people who like our son, Jim, are made in the image of God and are loved by God, who love God and love their neighbors as themselves. That’s how I really know Jim can be gay and Catholic. ▼ Casey Lopata, shown here with his son, Jim, is cofounder of Catholic Gay & Lesbian Family Ministry which advocates for and facilitates pastoral care for Catholic g/l persons and their families/households on behalf of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Rochester. A member of St. Mary’s Church, PFLAG, the Catholic Parents Network and the National Association of Catholic Diocesan Lesbian and Gay Ministries, he gives presentations with Mary Ellen, his wife, in parishes, high schools, and conferences. Notes 1National Conference of Catholic Bishops, Human Sexuality: A Catholic Perspective for Education and Lifelong Learning, U.S. Catholic Conference, 1991, 54-55. 2National Council of Catholic Bishops, Committee on Marriage and Family, Always Our Children, 3rd printing, revised June 1998, p. 6. 3Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons, 1986, #3. 4Always Our Children, p. 7. 5Letter to the Bishops, #7. 6National Conference of Catholic Bishops, To Live in Christ Jesus: A Pastoral Reflection on the Moral Life, 1976, #52. 7Letter to the Bishops, #11. 8Jan Visser, in The Clergy Review (London), 1976, v. 61, p. 233. 9To Live in Christ Jesus, op. cit. #52, and Human Sexuality, op. cit. 55. 10Catechism of the Catholic Church, U.S. Catholic Conference, 1994, #1790. 11Tom Roberts, He’s Not Disordered, He’s My Brother, National Catholic Reporter, Nov. 4, 1994, 6. 12Bishop Kenneth E. Untener, “Hallmarks of the Church” [Address delivered at a New Ways Ministry Symposium, March 28, 1992], in Voices of Hope, Eds. Jeannine Gramick & Robert Nugent,(New York: Center for Homophobia Education, 1995), 151. Fall 1998 11 enemies. Gays were told where we must live, where we should shop, how we should dress, where we should eat, how we should vote and how we could liberate ourselves from our pasts. Too often this “liberation” included throwing off the yoke of patriarchal churches and families. A movement founded in opposition to the religious right found little room within itself to say there were good religious people and bad religious people, or that there were good Republicans and bad Republicans, good families and bad families. In its fear of attack, it painted an uncomplicated world of black and white. It was deliberately the mirror opposite of the world painted by the growing religious right, but equally black and white. The anti-faith bias within the gay community has taken its toll. And I believe that the next phase of the gay movement will be a return to faith and spirituality. The rejection of faith has allowed for a pervasive moral relativism to permeate our side in the political debate. I believe that underlying this ethic is a deep-seated feeling among many gays that yes, in fact, in their quiet moments, they believe that being gay is bad and shameful. So the ethic evolved into the belief that whatever I do is my business and no one else’s. There is no right or wrong in any objective sense, just whatever feels good. Meanwhile, American society increasingly believes that the moral relativism it embraced a generation ago has not held up over time. We see kids killing kids, children having children, intensifying poverty, and new diseases unimagined in earlier times. In record numbers, the baby boomers are going back to church today. And at the same time, mainstream Protestant denominations that embraced therapeutic, moral relativism are watching their numbers drop, while fundamentalists churches grow dramatically. In the midst of America’s culture wars, the religious right has brilliantly and dishonestly become the loudest and most-quoted voice of concern for family ethics and morals. They have an increasingly appealing message to society. Their call for a return to an old-fashioned sense of right and wrong is tied to a nostalgic, mythical view of America of the 1950s. Their message sells because of the vacuum that has been left by the mainstream churches, and they have clear culprits for this chaos: homosexuals and feminists are at the top of the list. The gay community finds itself in the middle of today’s culture war. We are defended by liberals who, increasingly, find themselves on the margins of the cultural debate. We are attacked and demonized by a religious right that grows in size and sophistication and political clout. This is a crucial moment for gay people of faith. I believe that we must define our movement for what it is—a moral movement. Instead of talking about rights that we want or demand, we need to tell the American public that our movement is about a need to be honest, to not bear false witness. We are not only about sex, we are about people who want to love each other. We are not about shoving our agenda down people’s throat, but we do speak for many who remain silently in the closet. We are not about recruiting children, but are about saving kids’ lives. The gay movement, through its spiritual leaders, must articulate a message of morality, though it will not be the morality defined by those who have to date capitalized on this discussion. How can you be gay and Republican?” It’s the question I’m most often asked about my job as the head of Log Cabin Republicans. Many gays and straight liberals ask it with the sense that I’m some sort of a traitor. Republicans wonder because I don’t fit their caricature of what a gay person is. Since there isn’t much of a wall between church and state these days, as these same people find out I’m an ordained American Baptist minister, they always follow up: “How can you be gay and Christian?” Like the questioners of Jesus in Mark, chapter three, those on both sides see me as being, in today’s therapeutic language, a “self-hater” or “kidding myself.” In the language of Galilee in the time of Jesus, they might say I’m possessed by Satan. But a house divided against itself cannot stand, Jesus points out. Yet standing against conventional wisdom of who you must be looks to the world as a personal house divided, when in fact, it may be exactly the place that Christ calls us to be. The reality of politics today is that one in three gays vote Republican, a statistic both gay Democrats and the religious right would like to keep hidden. In issues of faith, I would suggest that a much larger percentage of gays are actively spiritual. But what’s exciting about today’s gay movement is that it’s maturing beyond its adolescence, where the gay establishment held power over the newly forming community. With a fear of outside attacks from political figures and religious figures in the culture wars, gay leaders who called for tolerance and trumpeted diversity ironically established a rigorous conformity within the community. Republicans, the church and even our families were at times posited as “ 12 Open Hands This is the most strategically important thing the gay movement can do right now. It doesn’t require us to pretend to be what we are not, simply to open the door of closeted people of faith within our community. The country needs to hear their story. The next step is where the Holy Spirit comes in. I believe that by employing the love of Jesus, we can change people’s hearts. This is not somesophisticated, focus-grouped political strategy—it is simple faith in the power of God. Two examples come to mind. At a debate with a leader of the religious right at a leading American university, my opponent started to falter in getting his message across. The audience, mostly sympathetic to my argument, began to pounce on my opponent with sarcastic, demeaning comments. Suddenly, I no longer saw my opponent as some jerk who threatened me. Instead, I saw a fellow human being who was under a vicious attack. My political instincts were overridden by my Christian l no longer saw my opponent as some jerk who threatened me. ...My political instincts were overridden by my Christian instincts. l asked the audience to respect his opinion and refrain from attacking him personally. Just as we began, a large band of counter protesters arrived. These men, in the name of Jesus, proceeded to call us every evil gay epithet I’d ever heard, and a few I hadn’t. Tensions grew high in the one hundred degree heat, but we managed to keep our cool. What disgusted me most about the opposition was that they cloaked all of their arguments in the name of God. As far as I was concerned, they were blaspheming God. At one point, I was encircled by the protesters, and I said: “I love you. I love you because God loves me, and only through His love can I love you.” One of the protestors responded: “God does not love you. He hates you. And you’re going to burn in hell if you don’t change.” Fortunately, we caught that moment on videotape. While I wasn’t effective in changing his mind that day, I’ve shown this tape to many Christians who are currently opposed to gay rights, and all have seen the dangers of the church’s rhetoric and they’re embarrassed by that manifestation of it. Slowly but surely through the power of God there will be change. As a gay Christian, I knew that it was nearly impossible for me to fulfill my call through work in a traditional parish. But I believe that my position as a gay Christian Republican, which has put me at the center of one of the most important civil rights battles facing the church and this country, is a call of its own. These are exciting times to be openly gay in America, and there has never been a more important time to be an out gay Christian. This is no time for us to hide any part of who we really are under a bushel, and the possibility to be part of God’s plan for change is tremendous. For information on the Log Cabin Republicans, write to 1633 Q Street N.W. #210, Washington, DC 20009, phone 202/347-5306, fax 202/ 347- 5224, or e-mail: info@lcr.org Visit the group’s website at http://www.lcr.org Rich Tafel, a graduate of Harvard Divinity School, is an ordained American Baptist minister and the executive director of Log Cabin Republicans. He is the author of an as-yet-untitled book, due next spring from Simon and Schuster. instincts. I asked the audience to respect his opinion and refrain from attacking him personally. I got a perplexed look from the audience and an even more perplexed look from my debate partner. When it came to be his time to speak again, he gave a rousing endorsement of me and agreed there could be some common ground on this issue, maybe domestic partnerships. After it was over, he reached over and gave me a hug and thanked me. Following the presentation, one politico in the audience observed to me, “You had him in your sites, but you couldn’t pull the trigger.” While this was intended as an insult, I realized it was actually a compliment in disguise. I do believe that the culture war over homosexuality will be won when we approach it from the perspective of Jesus, not politics as usual. Common ground can’t always be found, but we are called to love our enemy no matter what. I spoke at a rally in Ft. Worth, Texas, in opposition to the homophobic policies of the Texas GOP. “The House of Daily Bread” “When we ask for ‘our daily bread’ in the Lord’s Prayer, we could be asking for just enough ‘understanding’ for today. Life gives us countless experiences of dissonance, as the Psalms record. And yet we ask in return for some bread, some understanding to nourish us for this day.” Mary Callaway Logan Fall 1998 13 Ed. Note: The term “culture wars” used today by the religious right originated in Nazi Germany, when it was used to support “purifying” German culture. The idea of a culture war has been imbedded in our consciousness since James Davison Hunter’s 1991 Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define America and Pat Buchanan’s speech about “a religious war, a culture war” at the 1992 Republican convention. James Dobson, head of the powerful religious right group called “Focus on the Family,” wrote in his 1992 book (coedited with Gary Bauer), Children at Risk: Nothing short of a great Civil War of Values rages today throughout North America. Two sides with vastly different and incompatible worldviews are locked in a bitter conflict that permeates every level of society. Instead of fighting for territory or military conquest, however, the struggle now is for the hearts and minds of people. It is a war over ideas. Paul Weyrich, a key creator of institutions on the right, has said: It’s a war of ideology, it’s a war of ideas, and its a war about our way of life. It has to be fought with the same intensity and dedication as you would fight a shooting war. And Peter Steinfels, who writes a column on religion for the New York Times, wrote in Christianity and Crisis in 1982 about the: growth of a network of intellectual institutions that function to dampen outbreaks of fundamental social criticism. The theory behind this movement is by now well known: that a new class of educated and disaffected “brain workers,” infected with the “adversary culture” they imbibed in college courses or absorbed from a hundred toxic residues of the New Left and the counterculture, will sap the foundations of American foreign policy and domestic economy— unless, that is, this new class can be isolated, browbeaten, discredited, lured, or taught its true interest in a wellfinanced “war of ideas.” The effective strategists of such a war, or so Irving Kristol advised his business readers in the Wall Street Journal, would be dissident members of the new class— to begin with, former leftists like Kristol. Part of the intellectual framework for this activity has been provided by a band of intellectuals called the “neoconservatives.” They emerged from the New York intellectual debates of the 1930s and gained momentum after the Vietnam War. Such names as Jeane Kirkpatrick, Michael Novak, William Bennet, Richard John Neuhaus, Norman Podhoretz, Midge Decter, and George Weigel are associated with them. Many were Democrats. Many were involved in the civil rights movement. Many opposed the Vietnam War but by the 1970s were on a move to the right; they often were defined as hawks on foreign policy, New Deal on social issues. Part of the structure on the right for the war of ideas came from a traditional conservative, Paul Weyrich, founder of the Free Congress Foundation and its cable television arm, National Empowerment Television. Weyrich told me in some detail about how he, as a Senate aide, attended a meeting of liberals early in the Nixon administration. He was stunned at how well coordinated their attack on Nixon’s housing program was. And he departed determined to create similar coherence on the right. Soon he established the Heritage Foundation (where he stayed only a short time) and is given credit for helping to talk Jerry Falwell into heading an organization called the Moral Majority, which Weyrich named. At Heritage and then his own Free Congress Foundation he has raked in money from the Coors family and Scaife and many other corporations and foundations (the Brady Foundation has given $2 million to National Empowerment Tele- The recent demise of Second Stone (see Movement News) for lack of adequate financial support and the need for additional economic solutions to maintain Open Hands makes this article by the editor of the no-longer-published Christianity and Crisis all the more timely. ’ ’ Over the past 25 years corporate sources have funded a proliferation of think tanks and institutions to wage a war of ideas. 14 Open Hands Purchasing Power of the Press An Example Eugene TeSelle Several conservative Christian publications collectively are the lengthened shadow of one disgruntled Presbyterian, J. Howard Pew. According to the official biographical sketch of him (Faith and Freedom, published by Grove City College in 1975), he was the chief funder of three journals in succession. 1. Christian Economics, founded in 1950, championed the free market, limited government, and moral constraints on business activities. Already during the 1950s Pew was objecting to the social pronouncements of the Presbyterian Church, trying to limit the church’s interest in public affairs, and spreading the word that many members were withholding contributions to the General Assembly until it stopped meddling in secular affairs. This drew forth the famous riposte, “We trust that Mr. Pew will tell these friends in unmistakable terms that The United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. and its General Assembly are not for sale” (Presbyterian Life, May 15, 1960). 2. Christianity Today was founded in 1956, with Pew as chief financial backer. But he criticized its board in 1964 when the periodical seemed to take too soft a stance against the economic, social, and political statements of the Presbyterian General Assembly in Oklahoma City (this was the Assembly that elected its first black Moderator, Edler Hawkins, and responded to issues ranging from nuclear weapons to civil disobedience and the Civil Rights Act of 1964). 3. In 1967 the Presbyterian Layman was launched. Its first goal was to fight the Confession of 1967 with its theme of reconciliation and the theology behind it. The Presbyterian Lay Committee continues to receive money from the Pew estate. The reports of the Pew Charitable Trusts indicate that it was given $325,000 over two years in 1990, and $375,000 over two years in 1992. It is said of the intensely congregational Churches of Christ, that “they don’t have bishops, they have editors.” You get influence and power when enough people read your periodical. That seems to be what has happened in the PC(USA). Until the denomination decided last year to send out a new “every home” periodical, the Layman was the only channel of information about the church for many people. Eugene TeSelle, a graduate of Princeton Theological Seminary and Yale University, is Professor of Church History and Theology at Vanderbilt Divinity School. He is president of the Witherspoon Society, “Presbyterians working for peace and justice, caring for our earth, and helping our Presbyterian Church become more open and inclusive.” vision, part of Weyrich’s operation, which does cable television nationally featuring such people as Gingrich, Robert Novak, the NRA, and the Christian Coalition.). Using ‘Wedge Issues’ to Polarize People Both the neoconservatives and the conservatives have practiced a style of attack that often depends on wedge issues to polarize people. Michael Bauman said it bluntly at an Ethics and Public Policy seminar: The comments that are most successful today are those that are pointed, that are sharp, that are memorable, and that might make your opponent something of a laughingstock…Logical arguments don’t very often win the day…It takes rhetorical power and aggressiveness to mobilize people around your cause. Irving Kristol told his corporate readers to attack the integrity of critical journalists, not to argue with them. Listen to Weyrich use a wedge issue: Abortion is the symbol for a cultural cleavage between those with a sense of community and responsibility and the votaries of imperial individualism, between those whose sons fought in Vietnam and those whose sons chanted mantras for the victories of Ho Chi Minh; between those who worship in churches and those who desecrate them; between those who accept our culture and those who seek to tear it down. Soon feminism and homosexuality joined abortion on the list of wedge issues that divide people politically, religiously, and personally. The conservatives’ pleas for funding were heeded. Over the past 25 years corporate sources have funded a proliferation of think tanks and institutions to wage a war of ideas. The DeVos family of Amway has provided extensive funds for organizations on the right. The powerful Tele-Communications cable television company may start a Christian channel and has talked of supporting National Empowerment Television which so far has a weak group of cable stations. Domino Pizza’s Thomas S. Monaghan heads a foundation that gives away millions to right wing and charismatic Catholic groups. And several foundations have played a crucial part in this funding. The ‘Four Sisters’ I have spent some time recently looking especially into the “four sisters,” as they are called in the industry. These four industrial foundations— Bradley, Olin, Scaife, and Smith Richardson— have played a major and largely unknown role in the war of ideas. The four foundations have worked together to fund a variety of institutions and together created a new Philanthropic Roundtable that monitors the giving of other foundations and encourages cooperation among conservative foundations. Examples of their joint giving in 1993: $3.7 million to the American Enterprise Institute; more than $1 million to Weyrich’s Free Congress Foundation; $995,000 to the Center for the Study of Popular Culture (headed by erstwhile Ramparts editors, David Horowitz and Peter Collier, who spend most of their time attacking public broadcasting and progressive college curricula); the Manhattan Institute Fall 1998 15 A Public Apology Gil Alexander-Moegerle Co-Founder of Focus on the Family I recently heard the Jewish philosopher Dennis Prager say, “Civility requires that responsible members of the various groups that make up a culture have the courage to apologize to the rest of society for bad people within their group.” I have come to issue such an apology for certain actions and attitudes on the part of the Christian right in general and James Dobson and Focus on the Family in particular: First, I apologize to the women of America for the sexist attitudes all-too-often displayed by James Dobson and the organization I helped found. I apologize to African Americans and other ethnic minorities who are concerned by the continuing vestiges of intolerance in the land and by the dangerous role James Dobson, a wealthy, powerful, white, heterosexual male, plays in promoting intolerance. I apologize to lesbian and gay Americans who are demeaned and dehumanized on a regular basis by the false, irresponsible, and inflammatory rhetoric of James Dobson’s anti-gay radio and print materials. I apologize to Jewish Americans as well as Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, and atheist Americans who are also victims of the dangerous words and divisive political actions of James Dobson, who claims quite falsely that this is a “Christian nation” that should be “ruled” by fundamentalist Christians and their doctrines. I apologize to the American media, specifically to radio, television, and print reporters, who have been ridiculed and demonized by Dobson and his staff and guests. I am ashamed of my former colleagues for their attacks on you and for their pattern of slamming the doors of reasonable access in your face. And I encourage you to bang those doors down, to investigate, and to report the truth about the threat James Dobson and other religious extremists pose to the American tradition of tolerance, inclusivity, and the separation of church and state. And I apologize to my fellow Christian Americans, many of whom have been misled by a man I once loved and trusted. ...I apologize to any American who has felt the sting of James Dobson and the Christian right wagging their holier-than-thou fingers in your face, shrieking that because your views differ from theirs, you are ungodly, evil, and unworthy of the rights of full citizenship. Please don’t let extremists confuse you about the life and teaching of Jesus. He spoke in love. I regret that Jim [Dobson] and Focus [on the Family] do not. From a statement to the press on August 15, 1997, at the Gay and Lesbian Pride Center of Colorado Springs, Colorado. for Policy Research— Mayor Rudolph Giuliani’s most helpful think tank—got $515,000. The National Association of Scholars, conservative faculty, received $840,000. By now you must be thinking that I’m either bitter— in spite of hard work the most the late lamented (I hate the word defunct) Christianity and Crisis ever got in one year from foundations was $50,000—or a conspiracy theorist. So let me quote from the Wall Street Journal (Oct. 12, 1995), which was concentrating on Richard Mellon Scaife but its comments could be extended to the four foundations: (Scaife) is nothing less than the financial archangel for the (conservative) movement’s intellectual underpinnings…Current GOP proposals to restrict government regulations, set term limits, revamp welfare and limit civil liability awards all have some roots in Scaife-funded groups. Infiltrating the Church As Peter Steinfels put it in the 1982 article quoted above, it took some time for the sponsors of the “war of ideas” to locate their condottieri—hired guns—in the field of religion. But they did. And these four foundations—who unlike foundations such as the Lilly Endowment and the Pew Charitable Trusts had never shown any funding interest in matters religious— began to support agencies created to fight the war of ideas within the mainline churches. One of the first indications of this new development arrived with the publication in 1979 of a tendentious tract called From Amsterdam to Nairobi: The World Council of Churches and the Third World. It accused the WCC, among other things, of arming communist terrorists by its humanitarian gifts to the African National Congress in South Africa and the Southwest Africa Peoples Organization in Namibia. (History has since validated the WCC involvement.) The tract was written by Ernest Lefever, a former staff member at the National Council of Churches who had started the Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC) two years earlier. Lefever later ran into trouble in 1981 when President Reagan nominated him to head the State Department’s Human Rights office. He was not confirmed because it turned out that the Nestle corporation, fighting the boycott of its formula, had given considerably more money to Lefever’s center— which it considered an ally— than he had made public. The EPPC adopted a broader agenda under George Weigel. It received $760,390 from the four sisters in 1993. The current president is Elliott Abrams, assistant secretary of state for Latin America affairs during the Reagan administration who was convicted of lying to Congress on the Iran-Contra matter. Two years later a new bolt. A sensational article in Reader’s Digest and two pieces on CBS’s 60 Minutes red-baited the WCC and the NCC. A new organization, with 89 percent of its funding from three of the four sisters, called Institute on Religion and Democracy (IRD) got credit for provoking the attack. The IRD’s creators featured Roman Catholic Michael Novak, then Lutheran now Catholic Richard John Neuhaus, new Methodist David Jessup and his former SDS colleague, Penn Kemble, not a church member. These Washington insiders made Edmund Robb, a United Methodist evangelist from Texas, president. Finding a New Wedge Issue: ‘Radical Feminism’ Until communism disappeared as a wedge issue, the IRD pounded away at the churches for their “leftist” tendencies and created denominational variations within the Presbyterian, Episcopal, and United Methodist denominations. IRD has never really been a mem16 Open Hands bership organization; it has continued to receive most of its funding from the four sisters and a few other foundations, $448,000— 80 percent— in 1994. It continues to follow a strategy of media assaults on the mainline churches. And it appears to have bumped into its new wedge issue, “radical feminism,” with the advent of the Re-Imagining women’s conference in Minneapolis in late 1993. (For a detailed account of the origins of IRD, see my article, “Old Wine, New Bottles: The Institute on Religion and Democracy,” Christianity and Crisis, March 21, 1983, reprinted in Ethics in the Present Tense [Friendship Press, 1991]). A third organization, the Institute on Religion and Public Life (RPL), is headed by Neuhaus, now a Roman Catholic priest and longtime protagonist in the church’s war of ideas. His RPL is based in New York and publishes a neoconservative journal, First Things. In it he engages in lively polemics against more liberal religious expressions. RPL got $690,000 of its $893,500 budget in foundation grants in 1993 from the four sisters. Together with Michael Novak and George Weigel, Neuhaus forms a sort of Catholic triad that engages in a variety of matters, including personal visits to the Christian Coalition annual gathering to urge moderation and cooperation. All three have been on the IRD board for its lifetime. Two other organizations deserve brief mention here. One is Good News, a bi-monthly magazine published out of Asbury College in Kentucky. It criticizes its own United Methodist Church primarily, but will use material generated by IRD. Most of its money appears to come from individual donations. About 65,000 people receive the magazine free-of-charge, a tactic learned from the Presbyterian Lay Committee (PLC), with its primary office just outside Philadelphia. PLC publishes the bi-monthly Presbyterian Layman which goes to an estimated 500,000 readers free. It is noted for its harshly slanted journalism. It is particularly strident on gay and lesbian issues. The PLC was formed in 1965 by several Presbyterian businessmen unhappy with the Confession of 1967 adopted by the then northern branch of the Presbyterian Church. Key among them was J. Howard Pew, for almost 50 years the dominating figure of Sun Oil. Long after his death, the PLC gets an average of $187,500 a year from the J. Howard Pew part of the Pew Charitable Trusts as a “historic family interest.” It received $3.758 million from Pew from 1968- 1984. Note that IRD, Good News, and the Presbyterian Layman were the primary purveyors of a negative reading of the Re-Imagining Conference. Once the story reached the major media months after the conference, the issue had already been framed by these three. Neither Illegal nor Immoral, but Imbalanced This final thought: none of the above support for groups involved in the war of ideas, including within the churches, is illegal or immoral. But IRD, EPPC, and RPL would not exist without the foundation money. And it is important that we know what is at stake. An estimable organization called the Churches Center for Theology and Public Affairs housed at Wesley Theological Seminary struggled in 1994 to fund a budget of $115,000. The Institute on Policy Studies, clearly on the left of the political debate, has a budget of no more than $1.5 million. Compare that with Heritage’s $23 million in 1993 and American Enterprise Institute’s $13 million. Never mind corporations. Foundations on the more moderate or progressive side have never made the commitment to funding liberal think-tanks that the conservatives have. The reasons are several. But until they do, the war of ideas— cockamamie as some of them are— will go to those on the right by default. And unchallenged, the agencies created to roil the churches will continue to exact their toll. Leon Howell was the editor of the “late lamented” Christianity and Crisis, and currently is a free-lance writer based in Washington, D.C. This article is excerpted from a presentation at the National Cathedral, February 20, 1996. A gay Roman Catholic priest speaks out for what he believes— “John McNeill is one of my heroes. He will be remembered as the gay saint in the twentieth century who initiated a Catholic Stonewall while the Church in fear tried to closet him and finally expelled him because he believed that Christianity is fundamentally about kindness and inclusion.” —Rev. Dr. Robert Goss, author of Jesus Acted Up and co-chairman of the Gay Men Studies in Religion Group of the American Academy of Religion At your bookstore, your Cokesbury bookstore or call (800) 227-2872 • www.wjk.org Both Feet Firmly Planted in Midair My Spiritual Journey John J. McNeill Paper $18.00 Fall 1998 17 Ecumenical politeness is a hallmark of contemporary Christianity. It is a virtue or a vice, depending on your perspective, that keeps denominational lines intact and boundaries clear. The phrase covers a multitude of sins: for example, when and whether to receive the Eucharist in a church other than one’s own (a quaint theological notion or an oxymoron, again, depending on one’s point of view), whether and how to comment on the inner workings of a denomination other than one’s own. Such matters require a certain theological delicacy, what I think of as the etiquette of theology. Etiquette is clearly socially constructed— customs differ dramatically in regions, cultures, language groups and traditions. Hence, it can and must be deconstructed. Like all etiquette in the late twentieth century, theological manners are changing because the presuppositions on which they were predicated have changed already. Like most manners, ecumenical politeness is taught early, ingrained deeply, and hard to change. It is relied on to keep the theological peace and to keep the Christian community in pieces. A wholesale rethinking is in order as the increasingly globalized, pluralistic religious scene takes shape. Otherwise, ecumenical politeness runs the risk of devolving into irrelevancy. My attention is drawn to this matter when I, a Roman Catholic feminist theologian, watch from the sidelines as my Protestant sisters and brothers engage in exercises that remind me of the Coliseum. Ecumenical politeness, not to mention time and energy, constrain me from writing to church officials, attending denominational meetings and otherwise joining the fray. Progressive and conservative forces in the Presbyterian and United Methodist churches, for example, do battle (the bellicose image is unfortunate but warranted) over the ordination of out and proud homosexuals, an issue dear to my heart. Yet I reserve my theological opinions, though they are obvious and well known in some circles, because somehow I reason the struggle is for “them,” not for me. Entering into someone else’s matters is simply not done, at least not by people with my upbringing, or so I have thought. However, I am reconsidering my previous assumptions and invite others to do the same. A concrete case prompted this reconsideration, a case so obviously egregious that it reminded me of my own repressive denomination. A Case in Point: The Termination of Eunice Poethig The Rev. Dr. Eunice B. Poethig served as the first director of the newly created Congregational Ministries Division (CMD) of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). In the fall of 1997, toward the end of her first term, the CMD Committee voted not to renew her contract based on the recommendation of the General Assembly Council’s End-of- Term Review Committee. Personnel decisions are made every day in churches, but this one caught my eye because the Rev. Poethig is more than a Presbyterian official, indeed she has been an active participant in ecumenical, academic and social change circles. Despite the fact that the last Presbyterian in my family was my maternal grandfather, “Be Opened” Mary Callaway Logan Jesus’ command to open the ears of the one who could not hear applies equally to the church, which turns a deaf ear to the radical claim of the gospel to “Be Open.” 18 Open Hands Archibald L. Campbell, I realized that she had not only been dismissed from her parochial post. Rather, she had been effectively removed as a church official with portfolio from a much larger arena, that of feminist Christian women, in which her presence spoke loudly the support of at least some officials of at least one mainline church. Eunice Poethig, like so many dedicated, competent, savvy women who work as church bureaucrats, was able to straddle the wide divides between and among church members and still get the job done. So many such women labor quietly to “do it all”— fulfill the heavy demands of their jobs, thread their way through the minefields of denominational politics, and still find ways to support the fledgling efforts of progressive women to make change. My experience is that such women do not agree with all that progressive groups would urge, an irony when they pay high prices for their support, but that they are supportive in principle because they know that it is such efforts “out there” that help to make change within structures. Of course this was the problem— Rev. Poethig attended, and I daresay probably enjoyed, the first Re-imagining Conference in 1993. It was, after all— as history will record against the shrill shrieks of its opponents— a quite respectable, serious conference. Having a Ph.D. in Old Testament from Union Theological Seminary, she participates in the annual American Academy of Religion/Society for Biblical Literature meeting. She has been clear about her personal position in favor of lesbian/ gay/bisexual and transgendered people as full members of church and society. She is a supporter of the rights of women to minister in all Christian denominations. In essence, Eunice Poethig embodies all that conservatives worry about in church circles, and she does so with a style and grace that make her, like most powerful and sensitive women, unmanageable. That she got a new Division off the ground, that she is a well qualified church bureaucrat with eight years of experience as the Executive Presbyter of the Presbytery of Western New York, all seem to amount to little in an environment in which ideology is all. So much for common courtesy, not to mention justice. Ecumenical politeness of old would dictate that I send an appropriate note to Eunice bemoaning her fate and wishing her luck. But I think that the ecumenical linkages that bond us permit more now, indeed require more. First, the intricacies of individual church workings need to be mastered by those beyond its limits. While I can tick off the Catholic cardinals and the cardinal sins with ease, I am only now coming to an appreciation of the intricacies of the General Assembly Council (GAC) and CMD, the ways in which Presbyterians conduct their business and the fact that they, like Rome, err on occasion. This time the procedures were violated, certainly in spirit if not in letter. The GAC Manual of Operations calls for a two to three hour discussion of the matters at hand. Ms. Poethig reports that her twenty-minute interview began with the announcement that the Endof- Term Committee would not recommend a second term. It is not clear that three hours of dialogue would have changed anyone’s mind, but it is important to note that when such violations of due process occur one can suspect that other violations lurk. Most major corporations do better by their long-term employees than that. They are under legal constraints to follow contractual obligations. It is also simply common sense, read: manners. Second, in such cases of injustice the response must be broader than the individual group affected. Justice for Women, a Presbyterian group that launched a petition drive on Eunice Poethig’s behalf, found that its efforts backfired. On appeal, Rev. Poethig’s request for reinstatement was denied, and her option to have her term extended for several months was revoked, thus making her termination effective immediately. Here the church takes its dubious cue from the business world in which conventional wisdom has it that one gets a fired employee out of the office as quickly as possible so as to minimize disruption. In this instance, the petitions were disruptive so out she had to go. There was seemingly no effort to conceal the stunning backlash, a chilling reality for those still working in the denomination. For those outside the Presbyterian Church, to steer clear of the whole matter for the sake of ecumenical turf is to be complicit in it. A larger interdenominational response would not necessarily have changed the decision. However, it would have put Presbyterian Church officials on notice that such behaviors reflect badly on them, perhaps a concern in an era when membership numbers are wavering. Then again, perhaps not. But at least the ecumenical chorus would have sung in full voice that justice within our ranks is as important as the justice we call for outside, and without it our credibility is nil. Third, in the present theo-political climate it is hard to separate the wheat from the chaff. I do not have inside information from either side in this dispute so as to evaluate the merits of the decision on the basis of the competency of the person involved. But I would argue that, unless and until there is some new consensus on what constitutes a credible job, ideological considerations notwithstanding, this firing will simply be one in a long line. Indeed the Presbyterian line is growing. The Rev. Mary Anne Lundy was removed from her position on the heels of her leadership in the Re-Imagining movement. Where will it end? Working Together Amid Differences Universities have been through this for decades, with academic freedom now a respected if sometimes shaky given. Many campuses have suf- Why have we found it necessary to set up every discussion in binary terms, every panel in a pre-constructed, bean-counted fashion, every debate in a win-lose format? What about looking for the strengths in all arguments, paying special attention to those with which we disagree to ferret out their merits? Fall 1998 19 fered through the agonies of tenure battles, first on the left, then on the right. Happily, they often discover that there is usually a way to live with colleagues with whom one disagrees. We need to develop an ecclesiastical equivalent in these troubled times. It is not simply for the sake of assuring that progressive voices will be heard. It is also against a time when the shoe will be on the other foot and the same justice requirement will apply to conservatives. Intellectual opinions are held with no less fervor than faith, but somehow people manage, albeit not without struggles, to develop ways to live and work together across wide differences, recognizing the strengths and weaknesses of each other as persons and as thinkers. The alternative, of course, is the development of narrow, intellectually closed schools that produce equally narrow, closed students. The religious equivalent of this in any denomination is a nightmare. Deborah Tannen’s book, The Argument Culture, might help here. She queries why we have found it necessary to set up every discussion in binary terms, every panel in a pre-constructed, beancounted fashion, every debate in a winlose format. What about looking for the strengths in all arguments, paying special attention to those with which we disagree to ferret out their merits? I suggest some elements of this sort of thinking could help us in church circles to ease up a bit on the ideology and realize that we are all in this work because we share some similar goals that grow out of root values. After all, matters of faith are even less certain than matters of science, so surely we could all lighten up some. I do not mean to sell out key issues on which good people disagree. Taking a page from Tannen, I suggest we give more careful attention to the way in which arguments are constructed so as to see merit even where we disagree. For example, I can appreciate the arguments of anti-choice/prolife Catholics even though I come down on the other side of the issue. Respecting their rigor and commitment in no way allies me with their point of view. But it does humanize the process and relativizes my claims. How refreshing to think we might all do it! Finally, the puzzling problem of politeness is that it is designed to even the playing field, to put people ahead of ideas, what Professor Krister Stendahl claimed Paul taught, the triumph of love even over integrity. There is a slash and burn mentality in the air on controversial matters— claims to have rooted out the troublesome people with x number gone and so many left to be expelled. It is a language set that has no place, in my judgment, in communities that claim their origin, authority and inspiration in what Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza has called a “discipleship of equals.” Such a community, like the Jesus movement that inspired it, requires more. Ecumenical politeness remains a useful convention. But as our interdenominational bonds grow, so too do our responsibilities, individual and collective, to shift boundaries and behaviors. It is always dicey to offer an opinion from outside of a community of faith. But this is a dimension of ecumenism that has seldom been addressed, namely, just how we can be supportive without being disrespectful. I hope Protestant feminists will not hesitate to address Catholic injustices, though clearly they cannot do so with the same vigor and insider information that I employ. If we cannot do this in our own small ponds here at home, I shudder to think of the ecumenical faux pas ahead in a globalized church. Mary E. Hunt is Co-director of WATER, the Women’s Alliance for Theology, Ethics and Ritual (see ad, this page). She writes regularly for WATERwheel, a quarterly publication. This previously unpublished article is concurrently being published in the Network News of the Witherspoon Society. 20 Open Hands Satyagraha: Truth-force or soul-force (sat, truth; agraha, firmness); non-violent direct action; passive resistance; civil disobedience; non-violent non-cooperation. “That they all may be One; as Thou art in me, and I in Thee, that they also may be One in us: that the world may believe that Thou has sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are One.” John 17:21-22, KJV During the summer, fundamentalist Christian organizations escalated their attacks on lesbian and gay Americans, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on ads in major newspapers to convince the nation that we are “sick” and “sinful,” that we can and should be “cured,” that our rights and protections should be denied. At the same time, mainstream denominations seemed to echo the fundamentalist call for jihad against God’s gay and lesbian children. The July decision by the United Methodist Judicial Council giving legal, coercive force to the Social Principle prohibiting “homosexual unions” means, in the words of Jimmy Creech, “…the Church of John Wesley, founded upon principles of social justice and piety, will now be prosecuting pastors for praying God’s blessings upon same-sex couples who make covenants of love and fidelity.” And in August, more than 500 Anglican bishops meeting at the Lambeth world conference voted to condemn homosexual practice as “incompatible with Scripture,” prohibiting the “legitimizing or blessing” of same-sex unions and the “ordination of those involved in such unions.” We are tempted to answer these misinforming voices with equally colorful soundbites of our own; however, rushing to do battle with angry words and clenched fists will not help our cause, let alone bring One-ness to the Body of Christ. Doubting the integrity or debating the motives of our adversaries is another dead end. We must not react, but we must respond. The anti-homosexual rhetoric divides and bloodies “The Bread of Eternal Life” Mary Callaway Logan Because evil serpentinely insinuated itself into God’s Garden, Adam and Eve were prevented from eating of the Tree of Life. But now, in Jesus, we are offered the bread “that endures for eternal life” (Jn 6:27). We are given an eternal perspective that makes the evil of the cross (a tree of death) finite and the good of resurrecting love infinite. Fall 1998 21 Third, when untruth threatens, we respond with truth in love. A Christian version of Soulforce finds its basis in Jesus’ words: “Love your enemies.” Gandhi defines that love as refusing violent actions, violent words, even violent thoughts against our adversaries. King said love must control fist, tongue, and heart. To win the minds and hearts of the nation, and to bring hope and healing to Christ’s body, our g/l/b/t community must take the moral high ground. We must learn to out-love those who caricature and condemn us. We should consider giving up our angry chants and nasty gestures, our mean-spirited banners and inflammatory T-shirts, our belligerent marches and fiery speeches. These are acts of violence and meeting untruth with violence only escalates the war. I know the men and women behind this new war against us—Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Gary Bauer, D. James Kennedy, Beverly LaHaye. Whatever their motives, they truly believe that we are sick, sinful, and a threat to the nation, that we can and should be “cured.” They have not taken seriously the scientific, historical, and biblical research that demonstrates clearly that God Thoughts on the L/G/B/T Religious Movement Mark Bowman In physics we learn that every action produces what? An equal and opposite reaction. When you try to drive a car forward or change the direction of a moving car, what creates resistance? Inertia. When a plane tries to take off, what force resists? Gravity. Are inertia and gravity unusual phenomena? No, they are natural phenomena. In social change, where do you find resistance to change? In religious institutions. In the conflict over homosexuality, where is the most resistance? The so-called religious right. Is the religious right an unusual phenomenon? No, it’s the natural resistance to change. As the car tries to move faster, what is the effect of inertia? It appears stronger. As the plane tries to fly higher, what is the effect of gravity? It appears stronger. Now, if you are trying to make the car go faster, what do you do? Attack inertia? No, you give the care more forward power. If you’re trying to make the plane fly higher, do you attack gravity? No, you give the plane more lift power. What we should be doing now is increasing power and lift—cultivating allies, creating networks, and building a movement that will overcome the church’s resistance to change. We must engage in positive, forward-looking movment, inviting folks to join us on the plane that is soaring up. Mark Bowman is the publisher of Open Hands and director of the Reconciling Congregation Program within the United Methodist Church. This is excerpted from a presentation to the Religious Leaders Roundtable of the national l/g/b/t movement on July 23, 1998, in Washington, D.C. Christ’s body and leads to intolerance, suffering, and death for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered Americans. It must be confronted and the Soulforce principles of relentless nonviolent resistance as taught by Jesus, Gandhi and King show us how. First, we must see our adversaries as children of the same loving God who created us, our brothers and sisters in Christ, members of our own family. Neither Pat Robertson and his fundamentalist colleagues nor the Anglican bishops meeting in Canterbury are evil. They are victims of misinformation (as we have been). Our goal is not to triumph over them but to be reconciled with them. Ending segregation was not Martin Luther King’s primary goal. His goal was to help bring in the “beloved community” where he and the late Governor George Wallace could live as neighbors. Our goal is not to overwhelm, censor, coerce or even be victorious over our adversaries. Our goal is to be reconciled with them. No one wins until we are One again. Second, when untruth threatens, we respond with truth. There is a positive side to this new round of anti-homosexual propaganda. One of my non-religious, heterosexual friends was enraged by the summer’s avalanche of blatant untruth. “How can they say these things?” he asked. In fact, they’ve been saying these things for years but saying them virtually in secret on their TV and radio programs, in their direct mail campaigns and fundraising appeals. Now, the untruth is out there where our friends and neighbors can read it for themselves, and though the untruth confuses many it will also win allies to our cause. We have one task only: respond to the untruth with truth. Before we respond to the antihomosexual propaganda, we must hear it carefully. Find the statements that are clearly untrue, and answer them with truth. And where they speak the truth, even if painful, we must acknowledge it. Inadvertently, they have invited us to “a new national discussion of homosexuality.” Let’s accept! 22 Open Hands created us and loves us exactly as we are. It is our job to help them discover this new truth. Just decades ago, many of our current adversaries were misusing the Bible to support segregation. The folks behind these anti-homosexual ads are as ignorant about homosexuals as Governor Wallace and Sheriff “Bull” Conner were ignorant about African-Americans. King didn’t yell back at his enemies. He didn’t call them bigots or liars. He didn’t waste time hating them or plotting their destruction. Dr. King demonstrated the truth about African-Americans by his loving response to the untruth. We must demonstrate the truth about homosexuals by the way we respond to the war of words being waged against us. We must not hate or fear those who misunderstand us. We must lovingly liberate them from the untruth that holds them hostage. Fourth, when untruth threatens, we respond with truth in love relentlessly. We will not confront the untruth effectively until we have responded with relentless determination. For too long it’s been a war of words. They launch their missives. We counterstrike. They take out ads. We respond with ads of our own or we hold a rally, a demonstration, a benefit, or a one-day march—then thinking we have advanced the cause, we all go out to party. Soulforce calls us to a far more difficult and demanding task. First, we make a list of their dangerous and deadly untruths. Second, we do our homework, preparing our answers to each untruth with carefully researched truth. Third, we accept their offer of “a new national discussion of homosexuality” and ask them to join us at the table in a mutual search for truth. Fourth, if they refuse to join us at the table; or if, when there, they refuse to negotiate seriously an end to their anti-homosexual campaign, we take direct nonviolent actions that will convince them (and the nation) of our sincerity and compel them to join us at the table. Look at the fifteen organizations listed at the bottom of the summer’s anti-homosexual ads. These are the nation’s primary sources of misinformation, not just about homofolk but about other minorities, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the separation of church and state. In the name of “saving it,” our Christian brothers and sisters have become not just opponents of God’s lesbian and gay children, but opponents of the nation, a very real threat to democracy. We must surround these Christian organizations with truth in love relentlessly, not just for our sake but for the future of the country. One day protests will not do it. Ad campaigns will fail. No one cares if our one-day march is bigger than their march. In South Africa and India, Gandhi led his people in relentless direct actions to demonstrate their sincerity and to win friends to their cause. Refusing to give up until their truth prevailed, King’s “children” faced water hoses, police dogs, beatings, jail terms, and lynchings. Our time has come. We are second class citizens in our own country. Our freedom is at stake. Our lives are on the line. The nation is in peril. It is time for a new strategy of relentless nonviolent resistance. The Way of Non-Violence Gandhi and King both began their civil rights campaigns by training their allies in nonviolence. Marchers signed vows that carefully proscribed behavior or they weren’t allowed to march. Direct actions, once begun, were not ended until the goal was accomplished even if it meant imprisonment, suffering and death. We must re-discover and apply their Soulforce rules. I don’t know what will happen to us and to our allies when we take nonviolence seriously. Gandhi says “Just take the first step and the rest will follow.” It is time to try. Thinking ourselves safe in our closets, we are sleeping through a revolution. The Soulforce guidelines are clear. Truth cannot prevail until those who hold that truth are willing to live and die for it. The Body of Christ will be One again when we learn to outlove our enemies whatever the cost. Mel White, pictured with his partner in life and in ministry, Gary Nixon (l.), is the author of Stranger at the Gate: To Be Gay and Christian in America, describing his experience working with and writing for the most conservative Christian leaders in the U.S. while struggling with his homosexuality. He is last year’s recipient of the national ACLU’s Civil Liberties Award for his application of Soulforce principles to our struggle, and is Justice Minister of the UFMCC. He may be contacted at P.O.Box 4467, Laguna Beach, CA 92652 or via e-mail at RevMel@aol.com or visit his website: www.soulforce.org Fall 1998 23 How do we navigate in the world when our familiar methods of finding our way dissolve? Every August from the time I was seven until I was twelve, my stepfather piled our family into his old Chrysler and drove us from Ft. Riley, Kansas, to his family home in Amory, Mississippi, to pick cotton. I have to confess that my cousins and I picked little cotton, but we had a great time raiding the watermelon patch and avoiding work. We stayed in my Aunt Pearl and Uncle Opal’s farmhouse, which had no indoor plumbing. On my first visit, I did not know about the chamber pot under the beds, so, one night, when I had to relieve myself, I headed for the outhouse in the field out back. It was a moonless night, and in that opaque darkness, even little squirrels sounded like giant bears. How do we navigate in the world when our familiar methods of finding our way dissolve? We often set faith at odds with the night, as if faith always illuminated life like the sun and gave us clear choices: good or evil, us or them. We need our faith most, however, when old ways of knowing fail us—when we face confusing and anguishing choices. In these moments we need faith that sustains us through our human limits, through the edges of our knowing and understanding— where our fears lurk. Such sustaining faith is like a sliver of moonlight, just enough glow to help us keep going, even when we are uncertain about our footing. The Christian tradition has tragic moments when our obsession with cer- “Teacher, we saw someone casting out demons in your name, and we tried to stop him, because he was not following us.” But Jesus said, “Do not stop him; for no one who does a deed of power in my name will be able soon afterward to speak evil of me. Whoever is not against us is for us.” Mark 9:38-40 tainty of faith inflicted great harm and destroyed many lives. The obsession with certainty leads to the oversimplification of people’s lives and the lean toward self-righteousness. Linda Petrocelli, who directs the global sharing of resources for the United Church of Christ, once told a story of an experience in Catholic grammar school. Sister Mary Robert Cecelia gave a lesson on the importance of Catholic faith by concluding that everyone, EVERYONE, even Lutherans and Episcopalians, were going to hell because they were NOT Catholic. When she got home from school that evening, Linda’s mom asked her, “Linda, what are you grateful for today?” a question she often asked her. Linda replied, “I am grateful that Sister Mary Robert Cecilia is not God.” Reducing the world to clear polarized choices is born of the need to control; it is not born of love. Faith in God’s grace is not a guarantee of certainty; it is a promise that whatever we face, God is with us—no matter how terrifying the night. And sometimes, the night full of terrors can be exceedingly long. We need each other, even as we stumble together in the night. We cannot avoid forever going out into the night if we live in this world, but Jesus reminds us that the stranger, all those who speak the truth, can expel our demons of denial, self-righteousness, and control. Venturing into the night teaches us the limits of our control. Courage to venture out leads us to divine mystery, and we learn to trust that power which transcends our limits. In that mystery, we find a sliver of moonlight lighting our way. For as we find the courage to go out into the night, we journey in the confidence that our salvation is promised by God and sealed in the life of Jesus Christ, who said to us that anyone who is not against us is for us, even those we do not know or understand. The church has too often depended on certainty to decide who is in our community and who is out. We have been preoccupied with who is authorized to act in the name of Christ and who is not, rather than on the quality of works we ourselves do in Christ’s name. We cannot purge violence and hate by counting police arrests and convictions, and building more prisons. We cannot take care of families by figuring out how much we can cut from our social welfare policies, rather than by asking what mothers and children need to thrive in our society. The survivors of sexual abuse and domestic violence who have faced their own long nights are unauthorized exorcists forcing us to face demons that possess our families. We cannot under24 Open Hands stand loving faithfully by lauding heterosexual marriage and condemning homosexual relationships, instead of asking what we might learn from seeing how love is made manifest in any relationship. We need to know how life is enhanced, pain and suffering healed, creativity encouraged, promises kept, and each person able to flourish. Under the lens of those criteria, many marriages would fail and many samesex relationships would stand as examples to us all. Gay and lesbian Christians are the unauthorized exorcists who have revealed how broken our tradition has been about sexuality. We must purge the demons of shame, guilt, control, and abuse from our sexuality by making space for all to speak honestly about how we love and fail to love. The promise of our faith is that, somehow, as we stumble along together, God is with us, like the moonlight. For to work in Christ’s name is, finally, to trust the moon to rise in the night. We will never know certainty, but the moonlight is more than enough. The moonlight reveals to us the unexpected, what we ordinarily cannot see. The moonlight supports our courage to make new discoveries; and with new discoveries come joy, generosity, and great curiosity. When we find the mystery and joy in the night, we have found the full moon, the light that shows us the unauthorized exorcists and the open spaces where still new discoveries await us. Let us be on our adventurous, perilous, and life-giving journey in the night. Let us walk in the moonlight together. Rita Nakashima Brock is Director of the Bunting Institute at Radcliffe College in Cambridge, Massachusetts. She is a feminist theologian (and served as a leader at the first Re-Imagining Conference) and member of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ). This article was excerpted from a sermon delivered October 23, 1995, during the Disciples’ General Assembly in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. “Exiled in the House of Love” “As so many of my collages come together with unexpected images, this spinning figure is whirling between light and darkness, between the inside and the outside of the house of love—simply between. This is God’s Beloved, as we all are, yet a feeling of exile may interfere with the experience of God’s love.” Mary Callaway Logan Fall 1998 MINISTRIES 25 In Memory of Matthew Shepard (1976-1998) The Need to Pray Always and Not Lose Heart Chris Glaser “Then Jesus told them a parable about their need to pray always and not to lose heart” Luke 18:1. If ever we needed a parable to keep us from losing heart, it is now. We were confronted with a modern crucifixion this fall. A twenty-one-year-old gay University of Wyoming student was severely beaten as he begged for his life and hung on a post, exposed to the nearly freezing elements for eighteen hours before discovered by passersby. This is what they do to unwanted coyotes in Wyoming, kill one and put it on a post as a warning to other coyotes that they are not welcome. This is what the Romans did to activists of Jesus’ day, hung them on crosses where they died of exposure along the road to warn passersby that those who would change the status quo were not welcome. This is what the ancient Hebrews used to do to a goat, projecting their sins onto the goat and excommunicating it into the wilderness to die from exposure to the elements. We feel helpless hearing of Matthew Shepard’s suffering. With the vulnerable but relentless widow seeking justice at the hands of an arrogant judge in the parable that Jesus told about our need to pray always and not to lose heart (Lk 18:18- 8), we cry to God and to anyone who will listen, “Grant us justice against our opponents.” University and state officials in Wyoming kept describing Michael’s death as “an isolated incident.” But the feeling I had in my gut as if someone’s fist had hit it with full force told me this gay-bashing was not an isolated incident. The whole message of spirituality is that there are no isolated incidents. Everything that happens is part of a fabric, and this incident is part of a shroud of prejudice that would bury us all. This summer we saw ads from the religious right that would portray their Nazi-like movement to extinguish homosexuality as if it were a healing rather than a killing ministry, and even dare to claim themselves as victims of those who would deny them their rights to administer hate in the form of repressive legislation. The religious right has resurrected a term used in Nazi Germany against those who would taint the German race, “culture wars.” The religious right has launched what they call a culture war against gay people, against women who make their own reproductive choices, against those who believe in the separation of church and state. Disguising themselves as victims, they are the wolves in sheep’s clothing that Jesus warned about in the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew: “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves” (Matthew 7:15). These ravenous wolves arrayed against us are not healthy people. They are gaybashers trying to prove their holiness at the expense of others, namely us. Their weapons are not clubs nor guns, but the Bible and church polities. “God, grant us justice against our opponents.” But it’s too easy to point to the extremists who want to do us in, such as the religious right and sick personalities. Just as there are no isolated incidents, there are no isolated extremists. No gay-basher— whether on the street or in a pulpit or in office— would be able to do their violent deeds were it not for the support of the mainstream. Virtually every gay-basher cites religious reasons for their behavior, whether it is to take away our lives, our livelihoods in the church, our loving marriages, or our rights to live under protection of law. In polls, most Americans say they support gay civil rights. At the same time, most Americans say they believe homosexuality is a sin. Thus the church plays the culprit behind both the votes of legislators and electorates and the violence of gay-bashers. As Matthew Shepard grew up and became aware of his sexual identity, our churches repeatedly sent the message to him that he was unacceptable to God in their various pronouncements against homosexuality. More fatally, they sent the same hostile message to his assailants. “O God,” we pray, “Grant us justice against our opponents.” Much of what I have done in my own ministry has been for the sake of young people like Matthew Shepard. I never wanted to see another young gay person go through what I had to as a child and adolescent, lonely and afraid, questioning my worth and my belovedness in the sight of God and family and the family of faith. The welcoming congregations movement has shared the same burden. What we have done, we have done for the sake of our posterity, our unknown lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered children. I remember one young man brought into my office by his foster father when I was Director of the Lazarus Project of West Hollywood Presbyterian Church. First I met with the father, then I met with his teenage son. Years later, when I was on a panel at the Los Angeles Lesbian and Gay Community Services Center, a young man in his twenties came up to me and said, “You probably don’t remember me, but my Dad brought me in to see you when I first became aware that I was gay. You have no idea what that meeting meant to me. You were the first gay person I ever met, and you became a role model for me.” He made my day. Three weeks before Shepard’s brutal death, after I preached at MCC L.A., a man came up and began, “You probably don’t remember me, but many years ago I brought my foster son in to meet you when you were still at West Hollywood Presbyterian Church.” I told him of running into his son at the Center and how glad I had been to hear from him again. A little apprehensive because of AIDS, I asked after the son. “Oh, he’s doing fine,” the father said, “He lives in Mexico now. You made a difference. You kept him from going the route of his brother who got onto the street and into drugs.” This story serves as a parable about our need to pray always and not to lose heart. WE have made a difference. Open Hands and the welcoming congregations movement have made a difference. If there are no “isolated incidents” when it comes to tragedies such as a young gay man’s death this fall, there are no “isolated incidents” when it comes to resurrections such as this foster son’s life as a result of our ministry. At times you may feel isolated, Outreach 26 MINISTRIES Open Hands but you are a thread in the fabric of a rainbow flag that will liberate us all. Together we serve the church and the l/g/b/t community as a living parable about our need to pray always and not to lose heart. Chris Glaser served as the founding director of the Lazarus Project, a ministry of reconciliation between the church and the l/g/b/t community. This is excerpted and adapted from a sermon delivered to West Hollywood Presbyterian Church in California, Oct.18, 1998, in celebration of more than 20 years of ministry of the Lazarus Project. Discerning the Nearness of God Lectio Divina and AlDS Patricia Hoffman “There was always this big chasm between God and everyone else,” Art said, reflecting on his past experiences in the church. “The message was, ‘You’re broken and God isn’t.’ In Spiritual Questing I’ve discovered our unity in God that transcends whether we’re broken or not. In this group the focus is off of the brokenness and on the wholeness. We’re on a path toward wholeness.” It was deeply gratifying to me as the chaplain at AIDS Care to hear Art’s observation after three years of participation in Spiritual Questing groups. From the first group, which was eight gay men, I could see that alienation was a major issue— alienation from self, God, and others. During our weekly meetings some expressed difficulty accepting their own feelings as good and trustworthy. Others struggled with images of a distant and judgmental God. Most, if not all, have told painful stories of familial and social abuse. The idea for the Spiritual Questing group began to hatch seven years ago. I had just moved from Los Angeles up the coast to the quiet city of Ventura. That summer my husband and I spent a week on retreat in the desert at St. Andrew’s, a Benedictine Abbey, where we were introduced to a group lectio divina process. At the end of the week, as we drove out of the Abbey grounds, I said, lectio divina could be a wonderful gift in the gay community. I thought of myself offering it, but could not imagine a setting. I was a lay woman who had worked in ecumenical social change ministries. Leading spiritual support groups had not been part of my life history. But a year of volunteering for AIDS Project Los Angeles as a hospital visitor had opened me to new possibilities. A year after that retreat at St. Andrew’s, I was in my first extended unit of Clinical Pastoral Education, training to be a Chaplain in AIDS ministry. In the group practice of lectio divina, participants hear a brief passage from Scripture or some other reflective reading and notice a word or phrase that attracts them. They stay with that word or phrase, repeating it silently. Each person is invited to share their word or phrase. The passage is read again and participants are invited to notice how the word or phrase touches them. After three minutes of silence, people in the circle are invited to share how the passage as a whole touches them. There is a third reading in which they are asked to be open to an invitation that may come to them. Following the silence, participants are invited to share what came to them. The session concludes with each person praying— silently or aloud— for the person next to them, with special reference to what that person shared. Lectio divina delivers back to a wounded community the authority to hear God’s word to them. The spoken word from written scripture that meets a person’s heart becomes the voice of the Sacred brought near. As it says in Deuteronomy 30:14, “The word is very near to you; it is in your mouth and in your heart for you to observe.” More than ninety percent of the men and women who have been part of Spiritual Questing during the past three years have been unrelated to a religious community, though raised in ones as varied as Roman Catholic to Southern Baptist to Reform Judaism. Spiritual Questing has, as one man told me, “Given me permission to be spiritual.” He and all the others who have come are people of spirit. Always were. Spiritual Questing offers people who have been wounded in so many ways a welcoming setting that suggests, this spiritual questing is for you. It is your right. It is your inheritance if you wish to take it. Luke has an account of Jesus and a woman who had hemorrhaged for 12 years. She was considered unclean because of the bleeding. When Jesus stopped in the midst of the crowd to ask who had touched his garment, she had bravely said that it was her. He then addressed her as “daughter of Abraham.” Calling her a daughter of Abraham delivered the woman back to her status as a member of the community. What have I wanted as week after week I showed up to form the chairs in a circle, set out the candles, and find yet another good lectio passage? I have wanted to deliver men and women in the AIDS-affected community back to their status as sons and daughters of Abraham. Patricia Hoffman serves as Chaplain with AIDS Care in Ventura County. She wrote AIDS and the Sleeping Church: A Journal, published by Eerdmans in 1995. She also wrote AIDS Ministry: A Practical Guide for Pastors, for the United Methodist Board of Global Ministries. She offers consultations and trainings in Spiritual Questing groups and retreats for inclusivity. She can be reached at 805/643-0446, or by e-mail at choffman@compuserve.com Chaplain Pat Hoffman (second from left) leads Spiritual Questing group at AIDS Care in Ventura, California. Health Fall 1998 MINISTRIES 27 From “Jeffrey” to “Angels” Education for Gay/Lesbian Advocacy in a Theological Seminary J. Cy Rowell Immediately before the start of my 1998 spring semester religious education seminar on human sexuality, Paul Rudnick’s “Jeffrey” was produced by a local theater. After the seminar had concluded another theater produced Tony Kushner’s “Angels in America-Part I.” Those two plays served as the unintended but useful contextual brackets for the seminar. This was the third time since 1993 that this course had been offered, and the first one coinciding with relevant stage productions. Six of the ten general sessions focused on issues in basic human sexuality: creation theology, issues in feminism and the men’s movement, sexuality education for churches, etc. Four of the sessions were devoted to gay/lesbian issues. My challenge here was to be an advocate for gay and lesbian persons in the midst of the so-called “objective” nature of higher education. The solution was to be open in the course syllabus about my goals, one of which was that “all of us will have opportunity to deal with our understandings of and feelings about gay and lesbian persons.” I added: “How and to what purposes a minister gives leadership to her/his congregation with regard to understanding and accepting gay/lesbian persons will be as much, if not more, a function of one’s feelings and commitments than it will be a function of one’s theology and intellectual understandings.” Another approach to the advocacy focus was to ask students to sign a learning covenant in which we promised to be open with one another and to treat each other with respect. The “Jeffrey” play, seen by half the students at the theater or in video at my urging before the start of the course, raised their awareness of their own feelings. “I felt uncomfortable seeing a man in his underwear,” a young man noted with some surprise, while at the same time commenting that slick ads of women in lingerie were commonly accepted. And the long kiss between two men at the end of the play made many students uncomfortable. One issue in doing education for advocacy is the risk implicit in the “advocate” presuming she/he can speak for “others.” The key is to have those “other” voices actually present in the class. Throughout the semester, the one openly gay student in the class helped us to be honest and to hear a different voice. The highlight for all the students was the session in which we heard the life stories of three invited guests: a gay artistic director (whose has a liberal minister father) of a live theater, a gay caterer who has been in a partnership for twelve years, and the lesbian founder of a gay/lesbian employee support group of a large corporation, who brought along her young adult son and the current gay president of the support group. Their responses to two questions—“What is your life story?” and “What role, if any, did church/religion play in that story?”— provided untold insights for the seminary students. Toward the end of the course students planned and led presentations on topics related to either human sexuality in general or particular homosexual themes. Of the ten presentations, six examined gay issues, including the coming out process, when parents come out, holy union rituals, ordination, and congregational educational programs. In addition there were two presentations on AIDS, one on sexuality for the single person, and one on sexuality education in the church. The seminar’s final session began with an ordained gay minister telling his story, describing the gifts and graces of being a gay minister, and making suggestions for straight ministers about their ministry to gays and lesbians. The concluding worship included a litany of thanks to God for “our new friends, those gay and lesbian persons who have shared their lives with us.” It ended with “We thank you and commit ourselves to being your witnesses of love and mercy in this world.” Though the semester had ended officially, most of the students voluntarily attended the stage production of “Angels in America” as a way to wrap up the course. Their response to “Angels” (as to “Jeffrey”) was positive, though there was general consensus that before the seminar they most likely would not have gone to “Angels” (or “Jeffrey”), but now that they had been through the course, they were ready to “hear” the play and in fact, were able to critique it with appreciation. What happened to these students? The one openly gay man found more acceptance and support in this course than at any time in his seminary experience. The other students found their boundaries being pushed open. They all dealt in some way with their own sexuality and its impact on their perceptions of gay and lesbian persons. Some were moved to a public commitment to affirming gay/lesbian persons. My conclusion? The theological seminary is an appropriate context for exploring issues in gay/lesbian understanding and fostering advocacy for gay and lesbian persons. J. Cy Rowell is professor of Religious Education at Brite Divinity School, Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, Texas Campus Connections Homosexuality, European Churches, the Ecumenical Movement, and the WCC Meeting in Harare Robert C. Lodwick In Europe, disparity characterizes the way various churches view homosexuality. Protestant churches range from full acceptance (e.g. Remonstrant Brotherhood, Netherlands) to rejection (e.g. Greek Evangelical Church). The majority of 28 MINISTRIES Open Hands churches, however, are in the discussion stage, particularly where there is an active gay Christian group pressing the issue. The (Anglican) Church of England faces sharp controversy, whereas the (Lutheran) Church of Sweden is positive. In many European countries, a civil marriage ceremony is required and a religious blessing is optional. In a number of churches individual pastors are blessing Holy Unions. Eastern and Oriental Orthodox churches deny the issue, even opposing legislation for the civil rights of homosexuals and viewing the issue as part of the “western Protestant agenda.” Roman Catholic congregations follow the Vatican position, although some individual priests and parishes are reaching out to the gay and lesbian community as in the United States. Bisexuality and transgender issues are not part of the current discussion in most churches in Europe. In Geneva, Switzerland, I was part of C+H (Christian + Homosexual), an ecumenical group that meets monthly. Homosexual or homophile is the preferred word rather than gay. C+H has published a statement dealing with homosexuality from biblical, social, and church perspectives, and is now preparing a contemporary Confession of Faith for the group. Geneva is home to many ecumenical bodies, such as the World Council of Churches, Lutheran World Federation, and the World Alliance of Reformed Churches. At present, the World Council of Churches (WCC) is struggling with the issue of homosexuality at its 8th Assembly in Harare, Zimbabwe in December. In his public declarations, Zimbabwe President Mugabe is exceedingly homophobic, and local gays and lesbians have been hounded and harassed. The two largest Dutch Protestant churches have launched a campaign to support the rights of Zimbabwe homosexuals, while three smaller Dutch denominations have expressed solidarity with Zimbabwe gays and lesbians through a letter-writing campaign. President Mugabe’s statements have prompted two Dutch Churches not to take part in the WCC Assembly. Some USA member churches have also questioned holding the Assembly in Zimbabwe. In the Assembly program, there will be a Padare, a market place of ideas, where groups can share their stories, activities, and concerns, such as environmental issues, debt repayment, racial justice, women’s role in church and society, and other vital issues. Gay and lesbian groups have been accepted for the Padare. The UFMCC plans to offer a seminar telling its story and describing its remarkable ministry. Several member churches will staff a bookstand with publications about human rights and homosexuality. Unfortunately, many Zimbabwean Christians see this as an affront to their cultural sensitivities. Orthodox Churches are equally upset that these groups have been approved for the Padare. No doubt there will be lively discussion! This Assembly will celebrate the 50th anniversary of the first World Council Assembly and, hopefully, the 50th anniversary of the UN Charter on Human Rights— a golden opportunity to speak against the discrimination of homosexuals. Many of us believe, however, that the most important task of ecumenical assemblies regarding the issues of sexual orientation is to strengthen the climate in which ongoing debates can take place. While individual churches have their own traditions and experiences and determine their own life, the ecumenical movement’s task is to provide a forum for sharing of insights and searching for a common mission in response to our calling from Jesus Christ. Many of those preparing the WCC assembly realize that, given the wide divergence of opinion, the primary task will be to encourage dialogue and find common words to enable us to discuss these issues with sensitivity among fellow Christians with different opinions. This debate may represent a moment of testing for the ecumenical movement— whether we do indeed acknowledge that the fellowship is not only to encourage us in the things on which we agree but to wrestle with those things about which we have differences of opinion and to hear each other with respect. The time has not come for votes in plenary sessions, as this could give a negative judgment, effectively shutting a door. The only possible ecumenical action is to promote continuing dialogue— to keep the door open. Even that may be difficult in Harare. Robert C. Lodwick is an ordained Presbyterian minister and most recently served the PCUSA as Area Associate for Europe with offices in the Ecumenical Center in Geneva. Bob and his wife, Hedy, have long been active members of More Light Presbyterians. Coming Out as Sacrament Chris Glaser Paper $14.00 Chris Glaser proposes that coming out has biblical precedence and sacramental dimensions. Using personal and biblical illustrations, he discusses coming out as an act of vulnerability, much like the sacrificial offerings of ancient Israel, that invokes God’s presence and effects reconciliation. Includes original liturgical material and a ritual for coming out. Unleashed The Wit and Wisdom of Calvin the Dog Calvin T. Dog with Chris Glaser Cloth $12.00 Calvin’s wit and honest observations help us recognize our human plight. Calvin offers a philosophy of life that has universal applications, and speaks to many of the social and cultural issues of our day. Also by Glaser: Uncommon Calling, Paper, $20.00 Coming Out to God, Paper, $12.00 At your bookstore, your Cokesbury bookstore or call (800) 227-2872 • www.wjk.org Fall 1998 29 Sustaining the Spirit & b b b 4 4 oe ˙ oe Eb Gm 1. Be - 2. Once 3. For 4. So liev - out - bringnow, ers, cast ing in oe oe oe oe Ab here and us joy - we re - sal - ful gath - ject - va - wor - er, ed, tion, ship, oe ˙ oe Fm u - some we our nit - lives lift hearts ed were our we oe oe ˙ Ab/Bb Bb7 by filled Sav - join God's with ior’s in grace; shame, name, song, & b b b oe ˙ oe Gm A But And Once Cho - here now, for - sen are as eign - oe oe oe oe Cm gen - words God's ers er - of own and a - mer - Chilstrantion, cy dren, gers, oe ˙ oe Fm re - that our to deemed we, birth - God from in right we oe oe ˙ Bb7 ev - faith, we now ’ry would pro - be - race. claim: claim, long, & b b b oe ˙ oe Gm Re - *“Come, As Each born ev - heirs day through ’ry - of we oe oe oe oe Cm Je - one the are sus’ with Al - re - dy - bur - migh - joic - ing dens, ty, ing oe ˙ oe Fm and and we and, ris - I fol - through ing will low the oe oe ˙ Bb7 from give this Spir - the you comit, dead, rest.” mand: live & b b b oe ˙ oe Ebmaj7 Fm Eb/G With In †“Love A this Christ God life new we and made oe oe oe oe Ab light are one up we’re ac - an - of liv - cept - oth - ser - ing, ed, er.” vice, oe ˙ n oe Eb/Bb by for - on the God’s giv - Christ sac - own en, we ri - ˙ ˙ Bb7 Pres - loved, take fice ence and our we w Eb led. blest. stand. give. w Believers, Here We Gather Thomas J. Ritter, 1993 Thomas J. Ritter, 1994 *Matthew 11:28 †Matthew 22:36-40 Text and Music ©1998 Thomas J. Ritter Used by permission. Text may also be used with Lancashire, Webb or any 7676 D tune. 30 Open Hands Welcoming Communities Movement News MORE LIGHT CHURCHES Govans Presbyterian Church Baltimore, Maryland Govans is a 500-member urban congregation which is the product of a 1992 merger with Waverly Presbyterian Church, a More Light congregation prior to the merger. It is a racially integrated congregation with a long history of ministry with persons of special needs. It provides housing for both mentally ill and mentally disabled persons and has organized a group of congregations committed to providing housing for 33 homeless families. Immanuel Presbyterian Church Anchorage, Alaska Immanuel is a small congregation in a middle-class section of Anchorage, drawing its members from throughout the city and surrounding area. In the process of redeveloping its life and mission, the congregation is committed to being a church that is safe for discussion of any issue, including matters of human sexuality and leadership. It makes space available to the Lamb of God Metropolitan Community Church, and is developing a supportive relationship with the neighborhood elementary school. Fifteen Conservative Religious Groups Run Anti-Gay Ad Campaign In what critics call a follow-up to a summer of attacks by Republican leaders against gay people, 15 religious groups invested $200,000 in full-page ads in The New York Times, The Washington Post, and USA Today in July, promoting so-called “reparative” therapy for homosexuals, and planned for more ads before the November elections. In an op-ed piece in The New York Times (July 26), gay conservative commentator Andrew Sullivan reflected on their strategy supporting fair treatment of “former” homosexuals. “In a strange and beautiful way, then, the religious right may have finally stumbled onto the true moral ground,” wrote Sullivan. “The more you think about it, the rights of former homosexuals are truly indistinguishable from the rights of gay men and women.” “Reconciling” Designation and Same- Gender Ceremonies Prohibited by United Methodists In early November, the United Methodist Judicial Council struck a blow against the Reconciling movement within that church by ruling that “such identification…is divisive” and forbidden. At the same time, it ruled constitutional the sentence in the denomination’s Social Principles earlier interpreted as legally binding on United Methodist clergy, prohibiting them from conducting same-gender union ceremonies. The first action responded to the decision of the Northwest Texas Annual Conference to name itself a “confessing conference,” in compliance with United Methodism. The Council cited an earlier decision that stated, “A vote to approve implies the power to disapprove, and is therefore not permissible.” Thus an annual conference also may not identify itself either as a Reconciling Conference (seeking reconciliation between l/g/b/t and the church) or as a Transforming Conference (seeking transformation of homosexual persons), reversing two earlier court opinions. The implications for Reconciling Congregations were not specified, but there is fear the ruling may be applied against such churches. In response to the question of divisiveness, the Reconciling Congregations Program reminded the church that “current policies and practices of [the church] fracture the Body of Christ by excluding lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons and their families...” [emphasis added]. The second action resulted from an appeal from the Oregon- Idaho and California-Nevada annual conferences, questioning a prohibition added to the Social Principles in 1996. The prohibition of clergy performing same-gender marriages served as a basis for the trial of the Rev. Jimmy Creech, acquitted by one vote last March in Nebraska. The Judicial Council ruled last August that the restriction was enforceable as church law, an interpretation questioned by the opposition, who claim that the Social Principles simply offer guidance. The Reconciling Congregation Program affirmed at that time, “The…Social Principles…reflect a realization that Christ’s message of inclusiveness and justice is an essential component of our mission. The decision of the Judicial Council to single out this one exclusionary statement to be legally binding is deplorable and theologically unsound.” In related developments, Chicago Bishop Joseph Sprague filed a complaint in October against the Rev. Gregory Dell for performing a same-gender union. And nearly 70 United Methodist clergy in the California-Nevada Annual Conference plan— in what organizer Rev. Don Fado calls an act of “ecclesial disobedience”— to celebrate in early 1999 the holy union of two women: the conference’s lay leader and a member of its board of trustees. Second Stone Mails Final Issue The first and only national gay/lesbian Christian newspaper, Second Stone, ceased publication with its July/August issue due to lack of support, having suffered a $14,000 loss in the first half of this year. Founding editor and publisher Jim Bailey, in a letter to subscribers outlining potential reasons for a recent decline in subscriptions, wrote, “We have lost our niche…As I worked on the July/Aug issue, my tears have freely flown. I have always seen Second Stone as a lifetime work. And even more anguishing, the Nov/Dec issue would have been the 10th anniversary issue.” Subscribers will be compensated with a full year subscription to The Other Side magazine. While thanking subscribers and those who wrote and published the paper, Bailey added, “I rejoice in and celebrate the work you have empowered me to do...I believe God has honored this work.” Fall 1998 31 OPEN AND AFFIRMING Memorial Congregational Church, UCC Sudbury, Massachusetts This suburban church of 300 members has a long history of commitment to mission and justice. Its current focus is planning a capital campaign which will be part of the wider “Gift and the Promise” campaign of the Massachusetts Conference, UCC. As a result of its ONA process, the congregation has a support group for anyone with a concern about ONA issues. Most members were active in the church’s ONA process, and two members find the group helpful to themselves and their gay/lesbian children. The church is also involved in an exciting, growing, interfaith group of congregations involved in ONA-type activities. This group meets twice a year for mutual support and strategy around gay, lesbian, and bisexual issues. Fellowship Congregational Church, UCC Tulsa, Oklahoma Located in the heart of the Bible Belt, this 226-member, midcity congregation is “an alternative church for inquisitive people,” seeking to be a “bridge” between traditional and progressive thought. It is a faith community which seeks to address the religious right, while providing intellectual and spiritual tools to people who wish to better connect their faith, biblical teachings, and the issues of life. Over the first weekend in October, the church hosted presentations by fellows of the “Jesus Seminar.” Fellowship supports g/l/b activities in the community and is home to the local P-FLAG chapter. RECONCILING IN CHRIST Lutheran Church of Christ the Redeemer Minneapolis, Minnesota A congregation of just over one hundred households, Christ the Redeemer gathers weekly around the word and meal of Christ, the center of our common life and the source of spiritual renewal for our daily lives. Opportunities to grow and serve include, among others, learning for all ages, small groups, refugee resettlements, serving meals at Loaves and Fishes, and partnership with other congregations at home and abroad. On June 28, 1998, the church became a Reconciling in Christ congregation. The church invites every person to the bread and cup of Christ and to ministry in his name. St. Paul Lutheran Church Wheaton, Illinois This ELCA congregation of 800 baptized members, established in 1927, is located in a suburb of Chicago in the county of Du Page. Its members are committed to becoming an inclusive and welcoming congregation. It is a congregation with a strong outreach ministry, an outstanding musical program, and a worship service with weekly Eucharist, that uses lay assisting ministers and blends both traditional and contemporary liturgies and music. Although the congregation lost both of its pastors, it was able to institute and complete its study toward becoming a Reconciling in Christ congregation under strong lay leadership and the support and guidance of its interim pastor, Michelle Miller. The affirming statement and a banner inviting all to share in worship, ministry, and fellowship are prominently displayed. RECONCILING CONGREGATIONS People’s United Methodist Church Newburyport, Massachusetts People’s UMC is truly aware of what it means to be a church in mission. This active congregation, with an average Sunday attendance of 50, has many members who perform volunteer work in community food pantries and who collect food donations for Link House, a treatment facility for alcoholics. The church is very open to people of all backgrounds, ages, and sexual orientations, and is extremely proud of its active Sunday School and Children’s programs. Praxis Minneapolis, Minnesota Praxis, a new church start in downtown Minneapolis, is aimed at young adults in their 20s and 30s who have typically not attended church or who have been left out of the church in the past. As part of its “Open Table” mission, the Praxis design team decided to join the family of Reconciling Congregations even before the church opened its doors for the first time. The church, which started holding Sunday evening services in March, has adopted an unusual form of worship which includes no formal preaching, but centers on round table discussions focusing on scripture lessons. With attendance currently averaging between 10 and 30, Praxis has a diverse mix of gay and straight members. More information about Praxis can be found at its web site: www.mumac.org/newthing St. Matthew’s United Methodist Church Acton, Massachusetts St. Matthew’s, a church of 350 members, began examining the issue of becoming a Reconciling Congregation in the summer of 1996 when a church member preached on a book about a parent’s grief following the suicide of a homosexual child. Throughout 1997, the church conducted four Sunday School classes using the Cokesbury curriculum on the General Conference Commission’s Report on Homosexuality (1992). Following additional discussions and information sessions with PFLAG members and persons from the local gay and lesbian speaker’s bureau, the church became a Reconciling Congregation by consensus on November 9, 1997. St. Matthew’s, which was founded 36 years ago and recently celebrated the first anniversary of its new sanctuary, has a very active outreach program. Current missions include its involvement with Rosie’s Place, a Boston women’s shelter, the Maine Economic Mission, and a youth program involving home building in Barrier Island, South Carolina. The church will be hosting a workshop for current and prospective Reconciling Congregations within its Annual Conference at the end of October. 32 Open Hands QTY BACK ISSUES AVAILABLE ___ Be Ye Reconciled (Summer 1985) ___ A Matter of Justice (Winter 1986) ___ Our Families (Spring 1986) ___ Our Churches’ Policies (Summer 1986) ___ Images of Healing (Fall 1986) ___ Minorities within a Minority (Spring 1987) ___ Sexual Violence (Fall 1987) ___ Building Reconciling Ministries (Spring 1988) ___ Living and Loving with AIDS (Summer 1988) ___ Lesbian & Gay Men in the Religious Arts (Spring 1989) ___ The Closet Dilemma (Summer 1989) ___ Images of Family (Fall 1989) ___ Journeys toward Recovery and Wholeness (Spring 1990) ___ The “Holy Union” Controversy (Fall 1990) ___ Youth and Sexual Identity (Winter 1991) ___ Lesbian/Gay Reflections on Theology (Spring 1991) ___ The Lesbian Spirit (Summer 1991) ___ Our Spirituality: How Sexual Expression and Oppression Shape It (Summer 1992) ___ Aging and Integrity (Fall 1992) ___ Reclaiming Pride (Summer 1994) ___ The God to Whom We Pray (Spring 1995) ___ Remembering…10th Anniversary (Summer 1995) ___ Untangling Prejudice and Privilege (Fall 1995) ___ Same-Sex Unions (Spring 1997) ___ Creating Sanctuary: All Youth Welcome Here! (Summer 1997) ___ From One Womb at One Table (Fall 1997) ___ We’re Welcoming, Now What? (Winter 1998) ___ Treasure in Earthen Vessels—Sexual Ethics (Spring 1998) ___ Bisexuality: Both/And Rather Than Either/Or (Summer 1998) ❑ Please send me the back issues indicated ($6 each; 10+ @ $4). ❑ Send me Open Hands each quarter ($20/year; outside U.S.A. @ $25). ❑ Send Open Hands gift subscription(s) to name(s) attached. Enclosed is my payment of $ _______ OR Charge $ _____________ to my VISA MASTERCARD (Circle one) # __________________________________________ Expiration _____/_____. Name on Card ____________________________________________________ Signature ________________________________________________________ My Name ________________________________________________________ Address _________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip _____________________________________________________ Daytime Phone (______) _____________________ Local Church _____________________________________________________ Denomination _____________________________________________________ Send to: Open Hands, 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 Published by the Reconciling Congregation Program in conjunction with Affirming Congregation Programme, More Light, Open and Affirming Ministries, Open and Affirming Program, Reconciling in Christ, and Welcoming & Affirming Baptist programs. A Unique Resource on Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual Concerns in the Church for Christian Education • Personal Reading Research Projects • Worship Resources Ministry & Outreach Selected Resources The Argument Culture—Moving from Debate to Dialogue by Deborah Tannen. New York: Random House, 1998. Caught in the Crossfire—Helping Christians Debate Homosexuality, ed. by Sally B. Geis & Donald E. Messer. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1994. Coming Out as Sacrament by Chris Glaser. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1998. The Culture of Disbelief—How American Law and Politics Trivialize Religious Devotion by Stephen L. Carter. New York: HarperCollins, 1993. The Good Book—Reading the Bible with Mind and Heart by Peter J. Gomes. New York: William Morrow Co., 1996. Homosexuality in the Church—Both Sides of the Debate, ed. By Jeffrey S. Siker. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1994. The Political Meaning of Christianity—The Prophetic Stance by Glenn Tinder. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1991. Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism—A Bishop Rethinks the Meaning of Scripture by John Shelby Spong. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1991. Stealing Jesus—How Fundamentalism Betrays Christianity by Bruce Bawer. New York: Crown Publishers, 1997. Stranger at the Gate—To Be Gay and Christian in America by Mel White. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994. Why Christianity Must Change or Die: A Bishop Speaks to Believers in Exile by John Shelby Spong. San Francisco: Harper- SanFrancisco, 1998. WELCOMING CHURCH LISTS AVAILABLE The complete ecumenical list of welcoming churches is printed in the winter issue of Open Hands each year. For a more up-to-date list of your particular denomination, contact the appropriate program listed on page 3. Add Open Hands to your holiday gift list this year— either by a donation, or as a gift subscription ($20 per year; $25 outside U.S.) to an individual or congregation. Send to Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Ave Chicago, IL 60641 Thank you! 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 Open Hands Vol 14 No 2 - A House Divided: Irreconcilable Differences? https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/ae3b88adc750e33ee01ac49344fe57fc.pdf 9f4d82c7f58111e3a76abceb8785238b Issue An issue of a recurring publication. Volume Number The volume number of the issue 14 Issue Number The number of the issue (within a volume) 3 Publication Year The year the issue was published 1999 Publication Date The date the issue was published Winter Text Any textual data included in the document Why Be Specific in Our Welcome? When Tolerance is Not Enough Coming Out Christian Invisibly Gay True Family Values Vol. 14 No. 3 Winter 1999 2 Open Hands Vol. 14 No. 3 Winter 1999 Resources for Ministries Affirming the Diversity of Human Sexuality Open Hands is a resource for congregations and individuals seeking to be in ministry with lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons. Each issue focuses on a specific area of concern within the church. Open Hands is published quarterly by the Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (United Methodist) in cooperation with the Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada), the Association of Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (American), the More Light Presbyterians, the Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ), the Open and Affirming Program (United Church of Christ), and the Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran). Each of these programs is a national network of local churches that publicly affirm their ministry with the whole family of God and welcome lesbian and gay persons and their families into their community of faith. These seven programs—along with Supportive Congregations (Brethren/ Mennonite), and Welcoming Congregations (Unitarian Universalist)—offer hope that the church can be a reconciled community. Open Hands is published quarterly. Subscription is $20 for four issues ($25 outside the U.S.). Single copies and back issues are $6. Quantities of 10 or more, $4 each. Subscriptions, requests for advertising rates, and other business correspondence should be sent to: Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773 / 736-5526 Fax: 773 / 736-5475 Member, The Associated Church Press © 1998 Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. Open Hands is a registered trademark. ISSN 0888-8833 Printed on recycled paper. Publisher Mark Bowman Interim Editor Chris Glaser Designer In Print—Jan Graves Why Be Specific in Our Welcome? Tolerance is Not Enough 5 Inclusion and the Problem of “Elmwood” CRAIG WASHINGTON Denouncing homophobia and supporting PWAs is not enough. Fear of Church Association with Homosexuality 7 in John Wesley’s Era ALICE G. KNOTTS Wesley’s own reconciling program with a gay man in prison. Something There Is... 10 After Robert Frost’s “The Mending Wall” MAREN C. TIRABASSI A poem questioning the rigidity of churches. Why Be Specific In Our Welcome? 11 The President’s Church Affirms Unity With Gays and Lesbians RALPH WILLIAMS “God loves you and we love you, we affirm you, and accept you, we treasure you. We welcome you.” –Foundry United Methodist Church, Washington, D.C. “Lord, I want to be in that number, 13 When the saints go marching in...” BETH BENTLEY Saints in a gay pride march. Reconciling 15 LES NORMAN A poem celebrating the welcome decision of a congregation. Coming Out Christian The Campus Minister’s View JAN GRIESINGER 16 A Student’s View HEATHER MOYER 17 Coming out of the “other” closet. Throughout this issue, biblical images suggested by our theme are represented visually in a traditional style and verbally by selected words of scripture: the parable of the lost sheep (cover, and page 4), the woman at the well (page 8), the younger brother’s return (page 14), and the parable of the lost coin (page 20). Winter 1999 3 Program Coordinators Mark Bowman Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (UMC) 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 773/736-5526 www.rcp.org Ron Coughlin Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada) P.O. Box 333, Station Q Toronto, Ontario CANADA M4T 2M5 416/466-1489 acpucc@aol.com Ann B. Day Open and Affirming Program (UCC) P.O. Box 403 Holden, MA 01520 508/856-9316 www.coalition.simplenet.com Bob Gibeling Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran) 2466 Sharondale Drive Atlanta, GA 30305 404/266-9615 www.lcna.org Dick Lundy More Light Presbyterians (PCUSA) 5525 Timber Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 612/470-0093 http://www.mlcn.org Brenda J. Moulton Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (ABC/USA) P.O. Box 2596 Attleboro Falls, MA 02763 508/226-1945 http://users.aol.com/ wabaptists Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ) P.O. Box 44400 Indianapolis, IN 46244 http://pilot.msu.edu/user/ laceyj/ Editorial Advisory Committee Vaughn Beckman, O&A Howard Bess, W&A Ann Marie Coleman, ONA Bobbi Hargleroad, MLCN Tom Harshman, O&A Dick Hasbany, MLCN Alyson Huntly, ACP Bonnie Kelly, ACP Susan Laurie, RCP Samuel E. Loliger, ONA Tim Phillips, W&A Lisa Ann Pierce, SCN Caroline Presnell, RCP Paul Santillán, RCP Kelly Sprinkle, W&A Margarita Suaréz, ONA Judith Hoch Wray, O&A Stuart Wright, RIC Love in the Open 19 Strengthening Families By Our Welcome SARA MOORES CAMPBELL Commemorating a life and a love. The Body of Christ Stretches to be Inclusive 21 CRAIG A. BUXTON “Love each other deeply, because love covers over many sins.” –Paul MINISTRIES Outreach Specific in Rejection—Why Not in Welcome? 4 APRIL HERRON-SWEET Youth On Harassment and Invisibility: One Student’s Story 9 ANONYMOUS Campus Mysterious Ways 18 ISAIAH JONES SUSTAINING THE SPIRIT A Gift for the Altar 22 A new hymn welcoming lesbian and gay gifts by Amanda Udis Kessler. Next Issue: Listening to Voices Around the World Movement News & Gatherings ..................... 24 Profiles of Welcoming Congregations ......... 25 Welcoming Resources .................................... 26 Annual Welcoming List .................................. 27 Call for articles for Open Hands Fall 1999 HOLY/WHOLLY Theme section: The church became holier as it became more whole, evangelistically opening its doors wider and wider throughout its history to include the unjudaized Gentiles of Acts, the “ordinary” people of the Reformation, the multicultural spectrum of the worldwide church today, and the increasing diversity of the church tomorrow. A rash of “isms” interfere with the integrity of the Body of Christ: racism, classism, sexism, heterosexism, genderism, ageism, ableism, tribalism, and nationalism. Across the chasms of isms, how might the church cultivate an integrity that allows us to suffer and rejoice and worship together? Ministries section: We seek columns describing practical experience and suggestions in the following areas: Welcoming Process, Connections (with other justice issues), Worship, Outreach, Leadership, Health, Youth, Campus, Children. These brief articles may or may not have to do with the theme. Contact with idea by July 15, 1999 Manuscript deadline: September 15, 1999 Chris Glaser, Phone/Fax 404/622-4222 or e-mail at ChrsGlaser@aol.com 991 Berne St. SE, Atlanta, GA 30316-1859 4 Open Hands The Good Shepherd And the Pharisees and the scribes were grumbling and saying, “This fellow welcomes sinners and eats with them.” Jesus replied, “Take care that you do not despise one of these little ones; for I tell you, in heaven their angels continually see the face of God in heaven. What do you think? If a shepherd has a hundred sheep, and one of them has gone astray, does the shepherd not leave the ninetynine in the wilderness and go after the one that is missing until found? When found, the shepherd lays it on his shoulders and rejoices over it more than over the ninety-nine that never left. And coming home the shepherd calls together friends and neighbors, saying to them, ‘Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep that was missing.’ Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one who returns than over ninety-nine persons who remained. It is not the will of God in heaven that one of these little ones should be excluded.” Adapted, blending Matthew 18:10-14 and Luke 15:2-7 This summer, a group of organizations including the “Christian Family Network” and the “Christian Coalition” ran a series of paid advertisements in major newspapers across the country. The advertisements described how gay men and lesbians could “leave behind” homosexuality and be “healed” if only they would turn to God for help. Homosexuality was described as a sinful condition which leads to “deception and emotional instability.” The suggested solution was to ask God for a “change of heart” which would lead in turn to happiness and fulfillment. The text of one of these ads was sent to me via e-mail by one of my church members, a gay man. It provided me with a clear and obvious answer as to why churches need to be specific in our welcome. We need to be specific in our welcome of gay men and lesbians because the voice of the church has been, and continues to be, specific in its rejection. And lest we think, “but that’s some other church, not my church, which has been unwelcoming” we have only to look as far as recent church pronouncements against the marriage and ministry of gay and lesbian members. Such negative church decisions have been widely publicized by the national news media, and the message is loud and clear to all: “We are not ready or willing to welcome gays and lesbians here.” Our local conference of United Methodist Churches has entered into an extended discussion about whether and how to take a welcoming stance toward gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered persons. As the discussion goes on, one perspective often voiced is that we can “welcome all people” without being specific. The fears seem to be that we will offend some of our membership or constituency, that we will be “labeling” ourselves or others, or that in naming one specific welcome we might exclude others who are not mentioned. Our own congregation has learned that being specific in our welcome has helped people in search of an inclusive church to find us. People have been referred to us by our national welcoming program and web site, by the local denominational office, by other pastors, and by people who do not attend the church but know of our welcoming ministry. Our specific welcome has allowed gay and lesbian members to trust us enough to tell their stories, be themselves, and be open about their relationships. Our efforts to implement and incarnate our welcoming statement has given us, on many occasions, the opportunity to share our thoughts, fears, and hopes with one another. We are a stronger church for having decided to make inclusiveness a focal point of our ministry by adding to our Mission Statement: “We welcome all people into our congregation, regardless of age, race, gender, marital status, physical condition, sexual orientation, ethnic background, or economic situation.” April Herron-Sweet, pictured with her family, is copastor of Pacific Beach United Methodist Church, which, she writes, is “known for its warmth and friendliness, ministry to hungry and homeless people, inspiring music and fabulous sanctuary decorations.” She shares the parsonage with the other pastor and their two children. Specific in Rejection – Why Not in Welcome? April Herron-Sweet Outreach Winter 1999 5 Church Not Part of My Family “Culture” When I look back over my childhood I can attest that religion was not an integral part of my family “culture.” It really was not “our way of doing things.” In fact, I never attended a regular service until I was 17 years old. I remember neighbors would playfully tease us on those rare occasions when we headed for hallowed ground. “Must be a wedding or a funeral!” “Lord, the Washingtons are going to church. I know it’s gonna rain!” My parents often joked right along with them. They freely admitted the absence of that tradition in our home. I think they were somewhat proud of their non-conformist stance. My brother and I were forewarned about religious folk. My parents portrayed them as sometimes arrogant or spiteful but almost always hypocritical. My parents were quick to upbraid the saved ex-smoker who warned about the perilous nicotine “spirit.” For them, hypocrisy was the universal chink in the armor of those hapless saints. I soon understood that my identity as a same-gender-loving being had placed me as an outsider at the gates of any black church in America. My adult awareness of that identity and the re- Tolerance Is Not Enough Inclusion and The Problem of “Elmwood” Craig Washington “It is the wretched choice of the oppressed either to deny your essence in order to be accepted for what you are not, which is to die; or to accept the godforsaken lot they have offered your kind, which is to live a non-life; or to redefine yourself demanding recognition from those who have not a name for what you call yourself, which is to live fully in the face of fear and ignorance.” sulting social “location” necessitated that I take some stance either in opposition or deference to the cultural status quo. It is the wretched choice of the oppressed either to deny your essence in order to be accepted for what you are not, which is to die; or to accept the godforsaken lot they have offered your kind, which is to live a non-life; or to redefine yourself demanding recognition from those who have not a name for what you call yourself, which is to live fully in the face of fear and ignorance. Perhaps my parent’s non-compliance afforded me a critical eye, the wherewithal to interrogate the unquestioned arbiter of black propriety and, more to the point, normalcy. I often wonder if they had any inkling that they were raising not only a black homosexual (of this I’m sure there was ample evidence) but a homosexual activist, that is, one who asks “who are you to ask who am I?” I didn’t know much about Atlanta when I moved here in 1992, but I certainly did know something about the South. Black folk here went to church and expected that you did too even if you were from up North. By this time I’d fashioned a clear image of the church and what it represented. I saw “The Black Church” as a monolithic anachronism, once the vanguard of the most fabled progressive movement in American history, now a self-serving sanctuary of pompous zealots. While on temp assignments, I politely refused invitations from friendly co-workers to attend service or a choir concert. I was safe— for a short time anyway. Then Came “Elmwood,” a Tolerant Church I began meeting other gay men and lesbians from various artist and activist circles. Many of them did not attend any organized religious services. Most of those who did mentioned a particular church (I will use the pseudonym “Elmwood”) located in a historically black neighborhood. “Elmwood” was acclaimed for its progressive philosophy and application of scripture—the pastor’s directives were affirming and not guilt-based, and notably, there was no gay-bashing in the sermons. I was curious and reasonably assured by my new friends, so I attended a service. I loved it. A legion of warm-smilin’ goodsmellin’ nice-lookin’ members filled a huge church-in-the-round. Several “Toleration is not the opposite of intoleration, but is the counterfeit of it. Both are despotisms. The one assumes to itself the right of withholding liberty of conscience, and the other of granting it.” Thomas Paine 6 Open Hands people greeted me with a disarming sincerity, including some handsome men (whom I did not assume were same-sexattracted) who hugged me with full body hugs. I was unprepared but fully delighted! The pastor, an imperial woman, preached as if she were talking to a peer offering encouragement not judgment. She was very animated but unlike many preachers, her ardor highlighted her words without overshadowing her message. During subsequent visits, I noticed that my initial enthusiasm began to wane. At first I didn’t understand why, as there were no covert homophobic subtexts in the sermon, and the members were as affectionate as ever. After my third or fourth visit, I still declined to join and was attending less frequently. Perhaps, I thought, my original perceptions of the institutional church were too dominant for me to fully accept any church as my own. In many ways Elmwood was everything I thought “the Church” should be. However, I could not deny that my admiration for Elmwood had always been detached and academic. There was no personal connection for me, and once I recognized the nature of my relationship with Elmwood, it abruptly became clear why. In all the morning hours I spent at Elmwood there was never any reference to my full identity as a self-identified same-gender-loving man. Oh, there were several cautions about the evils of homophobia and AIDS discrimination. And that was exceptionally admirable at a time when many black churches were framing AIDS as evidence of God’s disdain for homosexuality. Admirable, but not enough. In order to feel at home, to feel truly embraced beyond the greeting hug, I needed more. Recalling sermons past I realized that none of the messages addressed the lives of gays and lesbians directly. While there were plenty of specific examples of the challenges and triumphs of heterosexual unions, as well as singles’ ministries and workshops, there was no such intimate guidance for same-gender-loving folk. Given the numbers of gays and lesbians lining the pews and coffers at Elmwood, this was no mere oversight. I am inclined to believe that this pastor felt that she was doing the best she could for her gay members by denouncing the oppression they faced from the outside world. To go any further— that is, to provide a focused level of ministry to gay folk— would be, for any number of reasons, extremely risky. Perhaps the pastor herself was not comfortable or knowledgeable enough about the lives and culture of gays and lesbians despite our common black identity. She may also have feared offending many of those warm-smilin’ members whose love and tolerance had distinct limits. It is highly uncommon for any large black church to affirm gay and lesbian identity and experience to the extent that this pastor had done. I pondered whether to ask any more of Elmwood would be asking too much. What More Could I Expect? Iasked several gay-identified Elmwood members what they got from this church. Some of the common responses were: “I feel at ease here because I know I won’t be called an abomination.” “I don’t need Pastor to focus on my gayness, there’s more to me than that.” “Everybody there is friendly. The straight people there are very progressive.” There is some problematic July 29 - August 1, 1999 University of North Texas Denton, Texas Come to the sixth national convocation of the Reconciling Congregation Program Renew Release Reconcile Rejoice For convocation registration information, contact: Reconciling Congregation Program • 3801 N. Keeler Avenue • Chicago, IL 60641 Voice: 773/736-5526 • Fax: 773/736-5475 • Website: www.rcp.org Worship preachers: Renae Extrum-Fernandez Sid Hall Melanie Morrison Cecil Williams Bible Study Leader: Ted Jennings Music Leader: Jorge Lockward Worshops Covenant Groups Area Strategy Sessions Celebrations Winter 1999 7 subtext underlying each of those three responses. (a) Elmwood appeals to many gays and lesbians because of the lack of traditional homophobic vitriol— in fact homophobia is often denounced there. Generally, black gay folk expect a good trouncing from most black churches. It is difficult for many to demand more from a church that refutes this approach. If I am used to being thirsty every Sunday, I might not criticize the only pastor who offers me tap water even though she’s pouring Evian for my neighbor. (b) There are those who claim that their sexual orientation is not an integral aspect of their identity. I believe that such claims are grounded in some form of denial and false conformity (“I’m not that gay— I’m not that different”) in order to defend against social approbation. These folks may not want to be addressed in terms of their gayness and may prefer indirect, generic acknowledgment. (c) Many of us are so happy to meet straight people who are not castigating us that we don’t critically assess the power dynamic at play in our connections with them (“You are so good for just accepting me. Who am I to question our relationship?”). In my six years here in Atlanta, I have found that many black gays and lesbians accept social rejection from black institutions without challenging their communities. Many such folks continue to attend and pay tithes to churches whose pastors condemn them from the pulpit. Unfortunately, then, these churches have no apparent inducement to stop stoning members who remain as loyal as abused children. Those who do confront homophobia or refuse to support oppressive organizations often make an exception with the church. Elmwood is experienced by many as a haven of tolerance which I believe is misinterpreted as affirmation. Thus Elmwood has little incentive to work harder toward being inviting toward and inclusive of gay worshipers. Ironically, the only black church in Atlanta (Unity Fellowship) headed by an openly gay pastor has a relatively small congregation. Due to Unity’s “profile” many black gays know of this space, and yet very few have ever visited. I believe that churches such as Elmwood face an ethical challenge. Its leadership has already publicly displayed a level of understanding and compassion for its gay members. Yet for whatever reason(s), it will not fully extend its resources to launch a “culturally competent” spiritual intervention targeting this population. The Broader Question(s) of Authentic Diversity This dilemma in many ways parallels the contemporary topic of diversity along lines of race, class, gender and other forms of identity. Inclusiveness has become one of the most influential standards (and red herrings) of hiring practices, advocacy, grass roots organizing, and boardroom ethics in America. Such efforts usually seek to redress white patriarchal thought and Fear of Church Association with Homosexuality in John Wesley’s Era Alice G. Knotts When John Wesley was an Oxford fellow and active leader in the Holy Club, whose members daily visited prisons after having prayer and Holy Communion, the Methodists showed an unconventional and unpopular sympathy for a homosexual. Wesley took up the cause of Mr. Blair, a young gay man who had been imprisoned for sodomy.1 Nowhere in his journal did Wesley write judgmentally of Blair’s behavior. Instead, 14 journal entries about Blair describe how Wesley devoted much time during the autumn and winter of 1732 to visiting Blair and reading to him, contacting his attorney, Mr. Austin, and writing out his case.2 Wesley met with the vice chancellor of Oxford University to discuss his proteges, including Blair. On November 14, 1732, a number of interested Methodists met at a local inn to discuss Blair’s case. Townspeople heaped criticism on Wesley and the Methodists for their actions. Some thought that it would have been better for Blair to suffer the dreadful hardships of prison life than for the name of Methodists to be associated with homosexuality. But in spite of setbacks and hostile criticism, Wesley and the Holy Club maintained their ministry with Blair. The Blair situation provided “the occasion for terrible reflections,” leading Methodist historian V. H. H. Green to wonder whether some Methodists, in considering homosexuality, were led to re-examine their own sexual feelings and behaviors. From Experiencing God’s Love, A Methodist Federation for Social Action Presentation to the United Methodist Committee to Study Homosexuality, December 1, 1989, by Alice G. Knotts. 1 Vivian H.H. Green, John Wesley (Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America, 1964, 1987), 32. 2 Vivian H. H. Green, The Young Mr. Wesley (London, 1961), 167, 178-9. 8 Open Hands application or derivatives thereof. It has touched every realm of cultural discourse. It has been the source of great struggle and debate and with good reason. For many of us the act of “including” those whom we perceive as different from us may pose a threat to our traditions and beliefs. Does everyone need to be more inclusive? When is inclusion appropriate? When is it not? These questions must be addressed in specific contexts. There is certainly a need for group bonding and organizing along lines of common identity. There are certain levels of affirmation and healing that can happen only in these groupings. I don’t think inclusion efforts should be applied to universally heterogenize these spaces. I believe such standards are applicable to public institutions and services and even some private clubs and services where it is deemed appropriate and/or just (by the group itself or by the law). If however a group/institution identifies the need and/or imperative (ethical or otherwise) to include people who are somehow different from the majority of its members, then such a group must honestly assess its consciousness and the desires of those whom it seeks to include. It must be said that white patriarchy isn’t the only form of dominion and exclusion to be addressed. Unfortunately, oppression doesn’t morally inform all oppressed people to act better. It is often quite the opposite— and certainly, many black organizations, as an example, exclude gayidentified and other “different kinds” of black people from many goods and services, including affirmation of God’s love. Many of these institutions act as if inclusion is a charge for white men only; that by dint of their blackness they are “down by law” and are exempt from this work. They are already oppressed and are in no position to oppress anyone else. Such fallacious justification hinders not only moral development; it blocks the social progress of black folks and people everywhere. The Woman at the Well The Samaritan woman said to Jesus, “How is it that you, a Jew, ask a drink of me, a woman of Samaria?”…[Afterward Jesus said to his disciples:] “I tell you, look around you, and see how the fields are ripe for harvesting.” John 4:9, 35 Winter 1999 9 What Next for “Tolerant” Churches? What is the recommendation(s) then for black churches like Elmwood, that have demonstrated an appreciation of the struggles of its own same-gender-loving kin? There is rigorous work to be done along several fronts. The gay and lesbian members and/or visitors who desire ministry that is more reflective of their experience must voice their concerns to the leadership. The process of inclusion is not the sole responsibility of the “including” party. The leadership, of course, should evaluate its own desire and commitment to such efforts before taking any action. Too many groups seek to diversify for too many wrong reasons (i.e., “it would make people feel better,” “it’s just something we should do”). An action plan including goals and objectives should be developed and implemented with the participation of gays and lesbians from the onset. (This would also be true in terms of bisexual or transgendered outreach.) The leadership body would need to open its ranks to include gay-identified persons so that again the change is not merely cosmetic. The pastor should also speak to this activity within the context of sermons, announcements, and bulletins to send a message that the process is conscious and deliberate. If Elmwood were serious about reaching out to its gay sisters and brothers, the commitment would manifest beyond the level of good intentions. Indeed, it may not be appropriate for Elmwood to take on a more inclusive approach. Then I would assume that gays and lesbians who are not satisfied with Elmwood would identify a space that more fully addresses their needs. It is my hope that black churches and their leaders begin to talk to, not at, their gay and lesbian members so that a greater understanding can be reached. In many instances such revolutionary discourse will be spearheaded by the body of the broader Church. Indeed the issue of the treatment of gays in the church may very well offer the pivotal focus whereby demagogues will be dislodged and the body will authorize responsible leadership. Even the most influential black megachurches which are grounded in oppressive traditions cannot suppress the growth of progressive thought throughout black communities across the nation. Thus the concept of inclusion will soon be redefined as no longer the proverbial indictment of white male corporate America. Black churches have never been exempt from this responsibility. It is a charge mandated by a very high covenant they can no longer ignore. Craig Washington is the Program Coordinator for The Deeper Love Project, an HIV Prevention program of AID Atlanta specifically reaching gay African American males. He also serves as Co-Chair of the Metro Atlanta HIV Health Services Planning Council and Vice- Chair of 2nd Sunday, a support organization for same-gender-loving black men. Born and raised in New York, he loves to write and listen to Aretha Franklin. On Harassment and Invisibility: One Student’s Story Nobody tells Latino kids in the high school that nobody cares if they’re Hispanic so long as they keep it to themselves. Jewish kids aren’t told that they’re sinners, and they could change into Christians if they wanted to. People don’t tell black kids they should put up with racism because they’ve come so far from when they were slaves. They don’t have to defend why there is a black history month, or why people want black studies included in the curriculum. People don’t say, “That’s so Korean!” when they mean something is stupid or weird. People don’t tell disabled kids that the community isn’t ready to defend their equal rights and inclusion yet. You never hear anyone argue that breast cancer is God’s way of killing off women, or that it’s a good thing. If a teacher hears anyone use a slang insult for a Chinese kid, they jump on it. When foreign exchange students ask teachers about dating in the school, they aren’t sent to see a guidance counselor. But every day in the high school, I hear it’s okay if I’m gay so long as I stay in the closet, and that I’m an abomination against God, that I can change if I want to, and that people like me shouldn’t be taught about in school. I’m told that I should be satisfied because our school is far better than it used to be, and that I shouldn’t push for my equal rights and inclusion because the community isn’t ready yet. I hear, “That’s so gay!” all the time, and I hear that “AIDS is my punishment” for being who I am, and I hear the word “faggot” all the time. It’s hard not to walk around angry all the time. —Anonymous Massachusetts High School Student Youth 10 Open Hands Something there is that doesn’t love a church— that sends the ground swell and the subway roar to crack the plaster in the highest place and shatter stained glass on the street below. The work of burglars is another thing. What they must hope to find in this poor place I hardly know, perhaps a place to sleep. One hastened off—we set alarms again and mend the window’s wooden frame. I smile—we would keep this one out and long to welcome others in. We meet as congregation once a year to rehearse the business and tell the tale of seasons past. Well, what report of sacred time? But, nonetheless, we prop the structure up again, line out concerns, note trends, mourn friends whose passing make the pews more bare. And one says, “Good churches… good churches make good neighbors.” Spring is the mischief in me, and I wonder if I could put a notion in all their heads, “Why do they make good neighbors? Isn’t it the very moral of the Samaritan story where priest and scribe walk by, that churches are more walls than doors? Before I’d build a church I’d like to know what I was churching in or churching out and to whom I might be neighboring. Something there is that doesn’t love a church, that wants it open. I could say, “angels.” But it’s not angels exactly, and I’d rather we said it for ourselves. I look around and see us bringing stones to build the church, not loaves or flowers, but some age-old strong things, hard things. We move in sadness then it seems to me, not of world only, and the shades of death, but of not-trusting in the chance of life. We like our ancestors’ certitude and hope to paraphrase some god we met once, any one will do. We say again, “Good churches make good neighbors.” Something There Is… after Robert Frost’s The Mending Wall Maren C. Tirabassi Maren C. Tirabassi is a poet, writer of liturgy, and “bi-vocational” pastor of Northwood Congregational Church, UCC, in Northwood, New Hampshire. She has coauthored a number of books, including Touch Holiness and An Improbable Gift of Blessing. She is adding her poetry to a forthcoming book from United Church Press entitled Seeing Is Believing: Faith, Art and Social Justice. A Harvard Divinity School graduate, she lives with her husband and children in Portsmouth. Call For Prayers From Youth Rev. Tirabassi is seeking prayers 75-150 words in length on a single concern written by writers between the ages of 12 and 21 for an anthology of prayers and worship resources for youth. Send submissions to her at 271 Lafayette Rd., Portsmouth, NH 03801-5433; questions, phone 603/436-9352. Winter 1999 11 Ten years ago on “Laity Sunday,” I was asked to give the sermon at my church, Foundry United Methodist, probably because I had asked our Council of Ministries the previous year to begin a dialogue about becoming a Reconciling Congregation. I had extreme anxiety over addressing the congregation that Sunday. While no one assigned me a topic, it was clear what I had to talk about: the need for our church to unambiguously embrace and welcome its gay and lesbian members. Seven years later, on October 3, 1995, Foundry UMC voted to become a Reconciling Congregation, and its administrative board adopted the following statement: We, the friends and members of Foundry United Methodist Church, hold deeply our commitment to help bring about a peaceful, loving, just and accepting world. We are proud of our active, diverse congregation and have seen how each person has graced our community with her/his talents. We believe that the Holy Spirit dwells within all. We acknowledge our oneness with all of God’s creation and invite gay and lesbian persons to share our faith, our community life, and our ministries. We also affirm the same for all persons without regard to race, color, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, marital status, age, economic status, or physical or mental condition. We seek to be an inclusive congregation and we proclaim our commitment to seek the reconciliation of all persons to God and each other through Jesus Christ. As we journey toward reconciliation with all, we proclaim this statement of welcome to all, including our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters: God loves you and we love you, we affirm you, and accept you, we treasure you. We welcome you. At the same time, we recognize that there remain differences of opinion among us on issues relating to sexuality. We do not seek to erase our differences, but to journey together in faith toward greater understanding and mutual respect. In becoming a Reconciling Congregation we believe that we are being reconciled to God and to one another. “All this is from God, who reconciled us…through Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation.” (II Corinthians 5:18) I sometimes ask myself, how did a nice Pentecostal boy like me get to a place where I no longer feel estranged from God because I am gay and find my mind and heart transformed to tell a new story of God’s grace? I have come a long way from seeing this as my deepest shame to proclaiming it as a blessing of God. As I reflect on my life and spiritual journey and try to find the words to express where I am today, three themes of my journey come to mind: 1. Moving from serving a God of fear to serving a God of love; 2. Coming to understand that scripture does not condemn me for being a gay man; 3. Becoming aware that human love, including sexual love, is a good gift of God. Why Be Specific In Our Welcome? The President’s Church Affirms Unity with Gays and Lesbians Ralph Williams The God of Fear vs. the God of Love Central to my spiritual journey has been moving from serving a God of Fear to understanding the God of Love as revealed in Jesus the Christ. I don’t know if you knew the God of Fear. For me this god is best represented in the Old Testament by Baal, the pagan god, who required the community to sacrifice their firstborn to appease him. I grew up in a fundamentalist Christian home. My parents and all the members of my family are devout Pentecostals. My father and brother are Pentecostal ministers, as well as one brother-in-law. When I joined Foundry some 20 years ago, the minister from my home church would not transfer my church membership to a United Methodist Church. Instead, he wrote the church to explain what we believe as Pentecostal Christians and why Methodists were not true members of the Church of Jesus Christ! Within that tradition, accepting Christ in my late teens was—at least partially— an attempt to have God change my same-gender love orientation. As I began to understand this orientation, I also understood that it was not accepted by my church. My church promised that if I accepted Christ, my same-gender love orientation would go away. It did not! For several years I struggled with that reality. During a period of despair God allowed me to meet a gay man who was also struggling with his sexual orientation and his faith. It was through that encounter that I was led to Foundry United Methodist Church. It was within Adapted from an October 17, 1998 presentation before 300 people of the Baltimore-Washington Conference of the United Methodist Church held at Towson UMC. The gathering included a spectrum of presenters and was sponsored by the conference task force on homosexuality. 12 Open Hands this new church that I came to a fresh understanding of God’s grace and love. At Foundry I came in contact with Affirmation, United Methodists for Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Concerns. Affirmation formed a Bible Study Group which met at my home for over ten years. We studied the scriptures, shared our lives, and came to know with a certainty God’s love. When I stood to speak on that Laity Sunday morning ten years ago, I was undergirded by the love and support of the Bible Study group and our growing knowledge of God’s love and presence which emboldened us to take on this task. We had no idea where the journey would lead. Over the seven years of study and dialogue in the congregation we had many difficult times. Despite the difficult times, I came to know that it is different when you know the God of Love. With the God of Love you don’t have to win the battle, just engage as God gives you grace. With the God of Love you only need strength and grace for the day. With the God of Love you don’t even have to get it right all of the time. With the God of Love you can trust. I am glad I have come to know the God of Love and am grateful for a congregation where I could discover this God. Scripture and the Hot Comb People sometimes ask how I can ignore the “clear” scriptural condemnation of homosexuality. That reminds me of an incident in my family which gave me great insight on how scripture is used and misused in the Christian community. My early childhood was spent in Jamaica where the black Christian women did not cut their hair or use hot combs to straighten their hair. Straightening one’s hair was considered to be worldly and not in line with God’s requirements for Christian living. My mother did not use a hot comb in her hair. After my family immigrated to the U.S., my mother and the rest of us had to come face to face with the fact that all the black Christian women in our Pentecostal Christian Church used hot combs to straighten their hair. It took my mother years to adjust to this change. About the time she started using the hot comb to straighten her hair the Black Pride movement began to take hold in the U.S. Out went hot combs as crinkly Afros became a sign of black pride. In my conservative Pentecostal church this demonstration of black pride was not warmly received, and the black crinkly hair was seen as being “worldly.” My mother made the transition to the hot comb just in time because she certainly didn’t want to be perceived as a member of a worldly movement! When I first heard that homosexuals (not to mention biblical scholars) were pointing out that the story of Sodom and Gomorrah was not about homosexuality but about inhospitality, I wondered how they could possibly have perverted scripture in that manner. But when I read the story now, I wonder how it could have been perverted to have been cited as a story about condemnation of homosexuality. The story has nothing to say about a loving, caring relationship between two persons of the same gender. It would have been easier to conclude that the story was about sex between angels and human beings than about having sex between persons of the same gender, but the story was not about that either. It was about physical, sexual abuse of the stranger. It was about grossly inhospitable behavior, not about same-gender love. What I see in both these examples is our tendency to bring our cultural views and interpretations to scripture. Homosexuality is not a major theme of the scriptures, it is not a minor theme of the scriptures— it did not make Moses’ top 10. A tendency to single out this one issue as the defining aspect of our faith is a matter of culture and tradition, not Gospel. The first commandment is to love God, the second is to love our neighbor. The love of God has transformed my understanding of scripture. I now ask, how can scripture be perverted and used as a means of alienating gay and lesbian people from God? I now find it curious that gay and lesbian people are the only group knocking on the church doors asking to be let in and to whom the doors are closed. This, I am convinced, is not the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. Sexual Love— A Foretaste of God’s Love Much of the discussion of homosexuality seems to miss the fact that we are talking about an expression As we journey toward reconciliation with all, we proclaim this statement of welcome to all, including our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters: God loves you and we love you, we affirm you, and accept you, we treasure you. We welcome you. —Foundry United Methodist Church, Washington, D.C. “I am glad I have come to know the God of Love and am grateful for a congregation where I could discover this God.” Winter 1999 13 of human love. God is love! And, as the church affirms, human sexual love is a good gift of God. It is a part of what makes us fully human. It provides healing and comfort and relationship. Believing that human sexual love is just for procreation is missing the broader purpose of human sexuality. Loving someone of the same gender is the same love with the same power to comfort and heal and provide temporary respite from loneliness, estrangement and despair as any other love. It is a foretaste of the love of God. Therapist and theologian John J. McNeill, the former Jesuit priest, notes that good psychology is good theology and good theology is good psychology. What gives deep meaning and healing of the human soul and helps us to love and relate to the deepest parts of ourselves and others is a gift of God. On the other hand, what leads to the kind of hatred that causes the violence we saw in Wyoming last fall is not of God. Much of what constitutes the current position and practice of the church leads to the kind of self hatred and hatred of others that gives license to those who think they are doing God’s work by marginalizing and even killing gay and lesbian people. Instead of disassociating itself from gays and lesbians, the church should be disassociating itself from the Topeka, Kansas minister Fred Phelps and others who would condone the murder of Matthew Shepard and picket his funeral because he is gay. The church should disassociate itself from those who would deny our inheritance as sons and daughters of God. The church wants us to live lives worthy of the Christ who died for us and so do we. Our message to the church is that we can only live such lives when we claim the authentic persons God created us to be. We do not want to live lives in closets of fear but to bring down the walls of fear which block us all. From Church Family to Family In the midst of the Reconciling Congregation discussion at Foundry Church, I decided to come out to members of my family. Yes, some already “Lord, I want to be in that number, when the saints go marching in…” Beth Bentley Marching in New York City’s Gay Pride Parade several years ago, a group from my church carried a banner with the message: PARK SLOPE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH: GAY AND STRAIGHT RECONCILED BY FAITH IN A LOVING GOD. In contrast, the presumably religious counter-demonstrators whom we passed carried signs which said things like, GOD SENT JESUS TO PUNISH SINNERS. While marching, we met a man who told us that he was an ordained United Methodist minister who had been forced to leave the ministry when he revealed his homosexuality. When he discovered that most people in our contingent were not gay, he said, “I can’t believe you walked all this way when you didn’t have to!” But we did have to march. We had to march to demonstrate our faith in a loving God and because the homophobia which pervades our society also pervades our church, resulting in our church depriving itself of this person’s gifts as well as the gifts of too many others. Testimony to the United Methodist Committee to Study Homosexuality’s Listening Post April 28, 1990. knew. But we were playing one of those family games where those who knew didn’t want others to know. I decided to end this family game, end the secrets. I wrote a letter and mailed it to all members of my immediate family. The first person to respond was my dad, a Pentecostal minister. He called and, in a brief conversation, said, “Ralph, I read your letter and noted its content. I would like to take you up on your offer to come visit you and your friend.” I didn’t know what kind of visit to expect. After discussing with my friend the possibility of my dad visiting, I called my father back to let him know that I had received a very negative letter from my mother and that if 14 Open Hands his visit was intended to interfere with our relationship, it would be better if he didn’t come. It would not be pleasant. He said he and my mother did not see eye to eye on this matter and he wanted to come visit. During my father’s one-week visit, he and I had some of the most meaningful and honest discussions of my life. He wanted to know if I loved God and accepted the Lord Jesus Christ. I said I did. He said, after a series of discussions on various issues, that we were not that far apart. Before he left, he asked if we could pray together. He held hands with me and my friend and prayed God’s blessing on our home. This demonstrated to me how with God’s help we can be transformed— gaining understanding and offering acceptance through love. I have come to view the ministry of welcoming congregations as a ministry to the whole church. The message is that God’s love and grace truly are amazing. It includes gays and lesbians, bisexuals, and transgendered persons— and it reached me. I know that to be the good news of the gospel and it is that good news that our ministry proclaims. Ralph Williams is a member of Foundry United Methodist Church in Washington D.C. He was a member of its Reconciling Congregation Task Force and is the founder of Foundry’s Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Group. The Younger Brother’s Return “Then the father said to the elder brother, ‘Son, you are always with me, and all that is mine is yours. But we had to celebrate and rejoice, because this brother of yours was dead and has come to life; he was lost and has been found.’” —Jesus, Luke 14:31-32 WJK Ad Winter 1999 15 Reconciling Les Norman I can’t remember now the facts of how I came to get the word, or when it was, though I recall a night of snow and hard to travel out to that church gath’ring in the farther suburbs. It was a smallish group of twelve or so just starting on their journey into parts unknown. How could they know? Or I? But start they did, and I the one who helped them on their way. I told my story, fresh and vivid then to me, and startling new to them, of our young son, and how his news, his sense of who he is, had rocked our world. And how we’d come to terms with it, and then, with insight’s flash, had turned the world around, and seen, with clarity, where God’s truth lies, and where the falsehood and denial. Les Norman is pastor and teacher of the Sanbornton Congregational Church, United Church of Christ, in Sanbornton, New Hampshire, one of six Open and Affirming congregations in that state. Les is the father of three sons, the youngest of whom is gay. He is also active in PFLAG, and is the current president of the New Hampshire State Council. That meeting was a first; I had no standard of comparison, no feel of how this journey might proceed. They seemed to have been moved, this little group, and their young pastor thanked me as I left the door. And then the other day we met, in some chance way. She sought me out and said that now her church had come to the resolve to reconcile, to be both open and affirming of each child of God. I shared with all her joy, and memories of that time when we had started on the road; and offered up a silent prayer of thanks for grace that gives us strength to persevere. We wanted to put our longstanding affirmation for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered people into practice through ritual and worship. We wanted to be unambiguous that this event was open and welcoming of g/l/ b/t and heterosexual people on campus and in the community. Being in a rural area with the closest welcoming congregation 75 miles away, both community residents as well as students were enthusiastic. Our title for our annual worship services during Coming Out Week, “Coming Out Christian,” was borrowed from the Rev. Steve Hammond of the First Baptist Church at Oberlin College, part of a similar week on their own campus. The event is listed on the Coming Out Week calendar and publicized through fliers and advertising. A variety of leaders served as musicians, readers, ushers, etc., thus providing outreach to their friends as well. The most powerful elements of the services have been: • a rainbow and other symbols around the chapel; • calls to worship, hymns, litanies naming the names and experiences of g/l/b/t people, which was very empowering; (For example, Rev. Rick Yramategui’s hymn “Hear Our Voices” includes these words: “Joined together on this day; straight and lesbian and gay.”) • using the poem “What if God Were a Big, Black Lesbian?” by Michael Edward Mitchell; • brief sermons on themes such as “Love Casting Out Fear”; • sharing time when coming out stories were told and current events celebrated or lamented; • a time of prayer when all the pieces were gathered together and lifted up to the God of the Open Door who brings light into the fearsome closet; • our closing hymn and benediction in a circle with hands joined. Our best attended and most joyful event was entitled “Human Rights Celebration: A Worship Service of Thanksgiving to Honor Adoption of the Sexual Orientation Amendment.” While students were away on winter break, the Athens City Council had added “sexual orientation” to the city human rights ordinance. Students and community members welcomed a chance to celebrate this big step forward in a public way. City Council members were invited and asked to give brief testimony on their experience of publicly supporting this ordinance. They were overwhelmed with the gratitude and applause they received. Most said it was the only thanks they ever received for serving in public office. As we say in the welcoming congregations movement, you have to be bold with the g/l/b/t words in publicizing your welcome, otherwise we will assume that “open” does not really mean us. By creating worship opportunities on campus to put the “Christian” and “g/l/b/t” parts together, we open a clear channel for the love of God. To the Christians who would scorn us, we say: we are here, we are queer, we are pilgrims of the faith, and we are not hiding any more. A few negative letters and phone calls have come in, but they can’t compare with the smiles of joy and shouts of amen from those who are finding a beloved community. When I was wrestling with my sexual identity, the biggest issue was how my Christian faith fit into it all. I was raised a United Methodist, and my family is very conservative in their political and religious views. All I could do for a while was blame God for making me gay, which I had learned was a horrible thing that would send me to hell. I didn’t understand what I had done to deserve it, and I was so angry. Yet when I was going through the hardest times of my journey to acceptance, God got me through it all. I remember praying to God so many times when I thought the only thing left for me to do was to kill myself, and at the last second I’d get this overwhelming feeling of comfort and relaxation. I knew God was telling me everything was okay, and that killing myself would never be the right way out. And I am okay. In fact, I’m fabulous. My faith fits into my life, and actually, it’s the foundation of my life. I can’t imagine living without it. I really think I’d be lost.Yet now that I’ve come to accept it myself, I often get challenged. “Homosexual Christian”: it sounds quite the oxymoron by society’s standards today. But many of us live with that title for our entire lives, facing alienation from both the Christian community and the queer community. Many Christians say “your lifestyle is a sin, and you are not welcome in our community.” Or they make us feel uncomfortable in other ways, like tossing around the phrase “love the sinner, hate the sin,” therefore not accepting us as whole persons. And then the queer community, many of whom are turned off to religion in general because of the hypocrisy they see in the church, wonder how other queers can still be part of a religion that does not welcome us. It’s surprising how many “closeted” Christians there are in the queer community. Most of us are looking for a way to be involved with other open-minded Christians (which may also seem like an oxymoron), straight and gay. The Campus Minister’s View Jan Griesinger So when I was a freshman in college and was dealing with coming out to friends and family, I was really trying to find some way to feel okay with being a Christian too. That’s when I saw a sign advertising a “Coming Out Christian” worship service put on by United Campus Ministry during Ohio University’s Coming Out Week. I was happy to see that a religious organization saw the need to address this issue. The service uses its motto well: “Proudly Embracing Straight & Gay.” For once everyone was welcome, especially the queer community! The service encouraged us to see our sexuality as what it is: a gift from God that should be celebrated and embraced. All the inclusive words, songs, and prayers in the service also served to move our faith into more open and progressive mindsets. I met so many other queer Christians and it was nice not to feel as alienated from either community. We decided to keep the service going throughout the years (I’m a junior now ). Many good feelings and happenings have come out of the service, like making lasting friendships, growing in our faiths, and realizing that no one can draw that line between God and us. Our Christian service even inspired some of my queer Jewish friends to have their first ever “Coming Out Jewish” event! Our welcome has to be specific— we have to state exactly what the service is about and who it is for. Everyone needs to help stop this division between the queer community and the church, or the wedge that has already been partially driven between us will just separate us forever. God loves us and makes us who we are, and no one can say there is no room for us in God’s kingdom. Coming Out Christian A Student’s View Heather Moyer Heather Moyer (left) is a broadcast journalism major at Ohio University and a member of a United Methodist Church in the Dayton, Ohio area. Jan Griesinger (right) is director of the United Campus Ministry of Ohio University and national coordinator of CLOUT (Christian Lesbians OUT Together). 16 Open Hands Winter 1999 17 18 Open Hands As a young African American male growing up in the community, I often heard the phrase “God works in mysterious ways.” This proclamation was heard not only in worship settings but on the lips of people in the community on various occasions. There was a strength within this expression that made me know this was an important awareness to have. As my understanding of spiritual matters developed I eventually realized that this adage “God works in mysterious ways” meant that God’s truth, purposes and love often happened in unusual ways and through unexpected experiences. The power of this truth hit me and our students with the force of a mighty wind one Wednesday evening. Each Wednesday evening at United Campus Ministry at Oregon State University we have a student gathering. This time consists of a meal, music and a Bible study or some subject related to faith. We were just beginning our time of study for the evening when a young student walked in. As was our practice, we welcomed her into our midst. Lynn informed us that she had never seen our building before. Seeing lights on and the door open she decided to enter. After introductions from everyone we invited her to be a part of the study. She agreed. Our focus was on God’s love being available to everyone. John 3:16-17 made it clear that Jesus’ coming was a demonstration of the universality of God’s love. We also looked at the Galatians 3:28 passage—“There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” The interaction was very stimulating as students applied these truths to their particular life experiences. At one point in the discussion a student raised the concern that the Chris- Mysterious Ways Isaiah Jones tian community seemed so hostile to homosexual persons. He said if it was in fact true that God’s love was available to everyone and that there were no distinctions between ethnic groups, social status and genders, then it was in fact hypocritical not to accept homosexuals into the Christian community. To restrict them in their service to the church was placing them in a secondhand experience with the God who loved all with equality. Of course I was encouraged to hear young people interpret biblical truth as I had seen it done and had done myself growing up in the African American community. A loving acceptance and a sense of equality and oneness was very powerful in my community, when it was so blatantly denied us by the dominant culture. Lynn, our guest student, realized in our settings that she was fully accepted and included as one of us, even though she had just come that evening. As we were preparing to end the evening with our closing prayer, Lynn asked if she could say something. Yes, everyone chimed. She told us she had rejected Christianity because she had never been treated as she was that evening. Her impression of Christianity was that it was not a loving, accepting and equality-oriented religion. She thanked us for permitting her to share with us. Lynn said, “I’m lesbian and the church never demonstrated that God loves me or that I was equal with other Christians.” We closed with fervent prayer. “God works in mysterious ways.” This experience cemented my understanding that God’s truth, love and purposes go beyond our limited understanding. How great is God’s love for one individual to lead her to our study that particular evening. Is there any doubt that God’s ways are not our ways? Is there any doubt that God cares about us as individuals? Is there any doubt that God will go to whatever length it takes to help us experience divine love? What a great God is our God! Truly God works in mysterious ways. Isaiah Jones is a campus minister/director of United Campus Ministry at Oregon State University and teaches in the music department as well. Many of his hymns and songs are in various denominational hymnbooks. He has ser ved as worship leader at the Presbyterian General Assembly, Youth Triennium, and the Montreat Conference Center. Campus Winter 1999 19 Boxes were still stacked in the living room of the parsonage when I heard about Jane.1 “She has brain cancer,” I was told. By the time I started unpacking the kitchen, I knew that Jane was very ill and not likely to live more than a few months. She and Beth, members of this church which had just called me fresh out of divinity school, were a couple— a lesbian couple. Their two story Victorian home commanded a corner on a quiet Long Island village street lined with maple trees. Beth greeted me warmly. Smiling from large brown eyes full of pain, she invited me in. Before I met Jane, Beth wanted me to see their home. “Come upstairs,” she said. “I want to show you something.” She led me into Jane’s study, where the walls announced Jane’s accomplishments as a playwright and novelist. “Before you see her as she is now,” she said, gesturing toward a closeup of Jane, “I want you to see what she was.” My eyes surveyed the proud gallery of awards and triumphs before focusing on a photograph of Jane and Beth arm in arm on the beach, pausing to let the camera in on their mutual enjoyment of a summer day. “How long have you been together?” I asked. Her voice cracked and tears rimmed her eyes. “Fourteen years.” I visited with Beth and Jane almost every week for five months before Jane died. Since Jane was a significant playwright, her obituary was written up in The New York Times. It included a long list of literary honors and awards. Then at the end it said, “She leaves her mother, Clarice, of Florida and two brothers, Henry and Ben.” Period. It mentioned earlier that she had shared a house with her long-time companion and manager, Beth. Love in the Open Strengthening Families by Our Welcome Sara Moores Campbell From the Introduction to Last Summer at Bluefish Cove, in which the character Lil faces a terminal illness with the help of her family of lesbian friends, a situation playwright Jane Chambers faced herself five years after writing the play: Perhaps the most interesting thing in this strange situation where life seems to be imitating art is that I discovered Lil’s responses were not fiction...that without the support of…my gay family—the real women of Bluefish Cove—I could not have dealt with this or borne it. It is being surrounded by the recognition of who you are, what you’ve done and the absolute acceptance of the goodness of those things that feed one’s own strength to fight for one’s life, and that reassures one that life, whatever its length, has meaning and effect. Life is not a crap shoot; it is what we who love each other do together, and that is, in itself, sufficient meaning. —Jane Chambers, December 1981 1 Jane Chambers, best known for the play, Last Summer at Bluefish Cove. 20 Open Hands How long? Fourteen years. And if Jane had not died at the age of 45, it would have been many more. Longtime companions. House-mates. Survived by her mother, with whom she was only reconciled toward the end, and by her brothers, who did not show up for her last year of living or honor her with attendance at her funeral. A journalist interviewed Beth after Jane’s death. Beth mentioned that she had received support from two women ministers in their small town; she was speaking of me and a Methodist minister who was Jane’s therapist. “Both of them went to the funeral home with me,” said Beth. “The director, who knew we were lovers, had to ask a series of questions, including ‘Was she ever married?’ I said no, and both ministers, together, insisted, ‘Oh yes, she was.’” The journalist who interviewed Beth quoted her: “At Jane’s funeral there were an awful lot of straight people. There were the people who owned the hardware store and the Laundromat, all the small town folks whom Jane and I had educated. We both believed in gently being ourselves and thereby teaching people.” I was one of their students. In my five months of weekly visits in their home, I witnessed Beth’s incredible devotion to Jane, whose tumor progressively ravaged her brilliant mind and broke her dynamic spirit. I met their extended family of gay and lesbian friends who visited or relieved Beth when she needed some time away. I met Jane’s mother, who reconciled with Jane after years of alienation. After I conducted Jane’s memorial service the mail started coming in. I have never received so many letters of gratitude from strangers. Letters came from members of the gay and lesbian community who said that they had never before experienced in a church the sense of dignity that they felt at that service. Most of them enclosed generous contributions to the church—because they wanted to say thank you for the open recognition of love and commitment between two women. One of Jane’s friends, Jere, joined the church immediately, and became active. She was an actor, and she enjoyed The Lost Coin “What woman having ten silver coins, if she loses one of them, does not light a lamp, sweep the house, and search carefully until she finds it? When she has found it, she calls together her friends and neighbors, saying, ‘Rejoice with me, for I have found the coin that I had lost.’” —Jesus, Luke 15:8-9 working with the children on special projects. She remarked on one occasion that it was nice to be in a church where parents didn’t snatch their children away when she walked into a room. Quite the contrary, Jere was and is one of the most loved and respected leaders in that congregation. So when she and Anne came to me and said they would like to plan a union ceremony in the church, I rejoiced with them and we started planning. Our denomination had passed a resolution in support of ministers who performed union ceremonies for gay couples. After my move to a congregation in Santa Barbara, I was reminded of Beth and Jane— and of so many other gay or Winter 1999 21 lesbian couples I have known in congregations I’ve served—as I read the slogan for the conservative group promoting the passage of a bill to outlaw gay marriages in the state: “What strengthens families strengthens California.” I could not agree more. What strengthens families? Love, for one thing. And acceptance. I have seen many families weakened by rejection of gay sons or lesbian daughters. I have seen families strengthened by acceptance of them. What strengthens families? Openness, honesty. But how many gay and lesbian couples do you know who can bring their beloved life companions home for Thanksgiving dinner? What strengthens families? Devotion to children. In the congregation I serve, there are at least four families of children with same-gender parents. Their children are loved and nurtured by parents who have given themselves to one another and to their children with every bit as much commitment as any heterosexual couple. More families have been destroyed by rejection of gay members than by exposure to gay love. More families have been rendered dysfunctional by secrecy than by openness. More children have been taught to hate by the example of rejection than by the example of acceptance. There is a cultural conspiracy against the truth and it corrupts families. “Don’t ask, don’t tell.” Live a lie, they are advised. And all of this is true of congregational families as well as biological families. I would not ask everyone to be comfortable with same-sex marriages and families. In fact, I would encourage some open conversation about the discomfort which everyone has at some level. But I would ask this: How would you feel if you had to pretend you were single when you weren’t? How would you feel if, after fourteen years of marriage and a year of caring for a dying spouse, you were left out of the obituary? How does someone else’s vow to love another in sickness or in health hurt you or anyone else? In a world where children are neglected and abused, why would you want to deprive The Body of Christ Stretches to be Inclusive Craig A. Buxton What does it mean to be part of a [church] community? What does that kind of fellowship look like? Peter says, “Above everything else, love each other deeply, because love covers over many sins.” How do we love each other— deeply, earnestly? The Greek word translated deeply means “to stretch out, to extend.” It was used to describe a horse made to go at full gallop. Think of an athlete straining to meet the goal. Christian love is something we have to work at— it’s not a matter of emotional feeling but of dedicated will. To love deeply suggests intensity, exerting one’s powers to their full extent. Practicing that kind of love for one another matters more than anything else among Christians. Remember the words of our Lord Jesus? “As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Evangelism committees and council on ministries committees can try to come up with all kinds of strategies and programs; but the most effective ones will be those that empower us to begin to practice loving each other— deeply, earnestly. From a sermon entitled Church Alive: Belonging, Caring, Serving reflecting on 1 Peter 4:8-11. a child of parents who will offer love and nurture? Since that day in February of 1983 when I buried Jane, I have been invited into the lives of gay couples facing the horror of AIDS, and gay and lesbian couples going through the trauma of separation after years of committed relationships. Their experience is no different from that of anyone else who suffers the pain of grief or loss, except for one thing: they are deprived of the larger community’s acknowledgment and support. Likewise, I have performed union ceremonies for same-sex couples, always aware that these rites, while receiving the sanction of the Unitarian Universalist tradition, are not acknowledged by the state. In our congregations we are in a position to be part of the educating process. First, by recognizing our prejudices, our discomforts, our fears. And then by asking ourselves: Is this a place where we recognize that at least some of our members are gay? Is this a place where visiting lesbians and gay men feel welcome? Do we assume that a couples group will be all heterosexual couples, or a singles group all heterosexual singles? Would two men or two women feel comfortable dancing together at a congregational dance, or holding one another’s hands during a prayer in worship? May our welcoming voices be heard—in our state capitals, in Washington, D.C., in our own communities, and in our congregational life—in support of family values: family values not just for men and women who choose to love each other, but for women who love women, and for men who love men. Sara Moores Campbell is senior minister of The Unitarian Society of Santa Barbara, California. 22 Open Hands & ### 4 3 .. ’’’ A ’’’ D ’’’ A ’’’ D oe oe oe oe A 1. Jane 2. Bob 3. We has has have a a a gift gift gift oe oe oe oe D for for for the the the al - al - al - oe ˙ A tar: tar: tar: & ## # oe . j oe oe She He We brings brings bring oe oe oe oe F# m peace cour - all she age we has and can found, trust give oe oe oe oe peace that all to the the pass world days oe oe oe oe C# m all can that abe we round, just— live— ˙ oe sweet good These & ### ˙ oe D peace; faith, lives, God’s God’s our oe oe oe oe E peace faith lives for for for the the the al - al - al - oe oe ˙ A tar tar tar. oe oe oe oe but but Will she he's the comes nev - al - oe oe oe with er tar her been stand & ### j oe oe j oe oe oe lov - shy emper a - ty? to bout The hon - who church oe oe oe oe F# m or shares must the his deday. life— cide. ˙ oe The The With our oe oe oe oe D church ring heads in on bowed its his in fear fin - prayer oe oe oe oe turns ger the is and wo - not lift - & ### oe oe oe oe A men from ed a - his in way, wife. pride oe oe oe oe E Late we at The have night cold - light oe oe oe oe F# m they ness for join they the hands show world oe oe oe F# m/E and him that in cuts can - oe oe oe oe D sad - deep not ness as be they a de - pray knife nied & ### ˙ oe oe C# m that and Yes the he the oe oe oe oe doors leaves doors of through of the the the church doors church oe oe oe oe D will still will be un - be o - o - o - oe oe ˙ E pened pened pened Chorus OE oe oe oe AND BUT FOR THE THE THE ONE ONE ONE Bm q = 155 Bm Sustaining the Spirit A Gift for the Altar words and music by Amanda Udis-Kessler Copyright ©1999 by Amanda Udis-Kessler. Permission granted for nonprofit use in worship. For other permission contact Amanda Udis-Kessler P.O. Box 1814, Cambridge MA 02238 Winter 1999 23 & ## # % oe oe oe A WHO IS oe oe oe oe O - PEN- ING oe oe oe oe E DOORS ALL THE TIME oe j oe oe j oe IN OUR HEARTS oe oe oe oe D AND OUR MINDS & ## # oe oe oe oe F# m AND OUR SOULS oe oe oe oe E CAN BE HEARD oe oe oe TO SAY oe oe oe oe A LOVE ONE A- NOTH - J oe oe j oe oe ER AS & ## # J oe oe oe J oe E I HAVE LOVED YOU oe oe oe FOR MY j oe oe j oe oe oe F# m LOVE IS THE GRACE oe oe oe oe D AT THE HEART oe oe oe oe A OF THE WORD. & ## # ˙ oe oe E IN YOUR oe oe oe oe C# WORD WE A - BIDE, ˙ oe oe F# m IN YOUR oe oe oe oe E LOVE WE RE- MAIN oe oe oe oe A BUT THE DOORS & ## # oe oe oe oe C# CLOSED A - ROUND oe oe oe oe F# m US CAUSE AN - oe oe oe oe E GUISH AND PAIN oe oe oe oe D SO BE - FORE & ## # oe oe oe oe A THEM WE STAND, ˙ oe oe E HUM - BLE oe oe oe oe F# m HEARTS AND STRONG HANDS oe oe oe oe C# m WITH THE HO - & ## # oe oe oe oe D LY DE - MAND oe oe oe oe A THAT THEY OP - oe ˙ C# m EN, oe oe oe oe D OP - EN, TILL oe oe oe oe ALL OF GOD’S & ## # .. oe oe oe oe E CHILD - REN ARE WEL - To Coda j oe oe . oe A D COME, ˙ . A 3. D.S. al Coda OE oe oe oe AND THE ONE & fi## # Coda oe oe rit. oe oe ALL OF GOD’S oe oe oe oe E CHILD - REN ARE WEL - j oe oe . oe A D COME. ˙ . U A 1.,2. Bm q (for) Bm —A Gift for the Altar— 24 Open Hands Movement News 95 Methodist Clergy Bless Same-Sex Union Ninety-five clergy from the California-Nevada Conference of the United Methodist Church co-officiated in the blessing of the relationship of two female conference leaders on January 16, challenging the denominational policy banning samesex unions. More than 1,200 persons gathered at the Sacramento Convention Center to celebrate the committed relationship of Jeanne Barnett and Ellie Charlton. The mood was exuberant. A choir of over 100 voices sang before the service. Jim and Jean Strathdee led the gathering in singing, and Bethany UMC member Randy Miller preached a brief, stirring sermon about these “radical” grandmothers from Sacramento. The backdrop featured the logo of the Reconciling Congregations Program and banners representing the Reconciling Congregations in the conference. With the co-officiating clergy and lay representatives from each Reconciling Congregation gathered behind the couple, presiding pastor Don Fado remarked that, if charges were to be filed against these clergy, it would be for these words of blessing: “O God, our Creator, Redeemer and Sustainer, we bow before you to ask your blessing upon Ellie and Jeanne, whom we now bless in your name. Their commitment to one another grows out of their commitment to you, whose love is revealed through Jesus Christ. We pray for you to guide and strengthen them, that they remain open to your spirit and continue to grow in love. We thank you for Jeanne and Ellie’s love and faith which they so readily share with us. We recognize in this service the place of family, friends, church, and the entire human family; we are able to love because you first loved us. O God, our maker, we gladly proclaim to the world that Jeanne and Ellie are loving partners together for life. Amen.” Charges are pending against some of the clergy who participated. In a related development in the Northern Illinois conference, a March church trial is anticipated for Broadway UMC pastor Greg Dell for conducting a service of blessing for two men last September. –Mark Bowman Welcoming Movement Spreads to the UK The Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement (LGCM) of the United Kingdom has sought to develop a Welcoming Congregations Project. A congregational resource packet was prepared, drawing heavily on RCP, ONA, and “Claiming the Promise” material, as well as a World Council of Churches resource. Four introductory meetings were held in London in 1998, with a total attendance of 80 people and the purchase of 32 packets. In August a small group met to consider nomenclature, criteria, and future plans. Decisions on criteria for becoming welcoming were quite tricky because LGCM is working ecumenically and needs to provide and allow for many differing authority structures, etc. It was agreed to use the title INCLUSIVE Congregations with a rainbow logo. It was felt that INCLUSIVE represents a theological understanding of the nature of God, as compared with the words Welcoming or Affirming which tend to suggest human activity. Five regional half-day conferences are booked for 1999 in Newcastle, Manchester, Birmingham, Bristol and Cambridge, a wide English coverage, and information on INCLUSIVE Congregations and the offer of a speaker has been circulated nationwide to County Ecumenical Officers. The first congregation (Anglican) has just applied for listing as INCLUSIVE! – Janet Webber, INCLUSIVE Congregations Project voluntary worker UCC’s Sherry Challenges the WCC On December 14, despite an impassioned plea from United Church of Christ USA President Paul Sherry that met with sustained applause, the World Council of Churches meeting in Harare, Zimbabwe, approved a Human Rights document which fails to specify l/g/b people as in need of protection. Sherry, who in November wrote a pastoral letter to all UCC churches urging them to welcome g/l/b people, said in part, “A year ago, Amnesty International documented scores of instances in countries all over the globe in which individuals are being targeted for imprisonment, torture and murder simply on the grounds of their sexual orientation. In my own country, but a few weeks ago, a young college student was brutally beaten and hung on a fence to die, simply because he was gay. “The silence, in the midst of this ugliness, is deafening. I urge us all to break the silence.…I urge us all to speak and act on behalf of God’s children in pain so that justice may be pursued, wholeness restored, and the integrity of the Gospel preserved.” The WCC did pass a proposed program for the next seven years which includes a study on human sexuality, declaring, “...the issue of human sexuality has emerged as an important issue which faces the churches. It is clear that issues surrounding the understanding of human sexuality have divided and continue to divide some churches. An ecumenical approach to issues of human sexuality would need…to explore the issues while creating and deepening mutual trust.” L/G/B people were well represented at WCC’s Padare, or marketplace of ideas, by representatives of the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches and many denominational groups from around the world. – Robert C. Lodwick Ecumenical Conference Staff Position Applications are now being accepted for a Conference Coordinator for the ecumenical gathering of Welcoming Churches which will be August 3-6, 2000, at the University of Northern Illinois outside Chicago. This full-time, temporary position will begin in late summer 1999 and continue through the conference. The staff person will work directly with the conference coordinating committee and will support volunteer task groups in carrying out fund raising, promotion, program planning and other tasks for this event. The staff person is expected to provide own office space. If interested, send resume and letter to Mark Bowman at RCP, 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641; fax: 773/736-5475. Equal Opportunity Employer. Winter 1999 25 Welcoming Communities UPCOMING GATHERINGS March 19-21 Eighth Annual National Conference for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgendered Seminarians and Their Allies: “Common Pain, Common Hope” at Chicago Theological Seminary and Meadville-Lombard Theological School in Chicago. Contact Michael Cooper (m-cooper@mindspring.com), Tanya Denley (TDenley @juno.com), Marilyn Nash (mnash100@aol.com), or Ken Stone (kstone@chgosem.edu). April 15-18 Affirm United Annual Conference and AGM. An exciting conference of worship, inspiration, organising and strategizing in Winnipeg, Manitoba. Theme speakers will include Darryl MacDonald, the Presbyterian minister from Montreal who has been barred from ordination and Alyson Huntley, the author of Daring to be United. For information contact Ken Delisle at 204-772-4322; or acpucc@aol.com May 21-23 More Light Presbyterians Annual Conference: “Before Us an Open Door” (interpreting Revelation 3:8) at Oklahoma City University in Oklahoma City. Keynoters are Scott Anderson and Tony de la Rosa. Workshops ranging from spirituality to organizing. Contact John McNeese: 405/848-2819 or john33@ix.netcom.com June 25-27 Supportive Congregations Network (Brethren-Mennonite): “Leading the Dance: Living the Church Re- Imagined” at Plymouth UCC in Milwaukee. Contact Ralph McFadden at 303/936-7734; Hikermac@aol.com June 28-July 1 UCC Coalition for LGBT Concerns National Gathering: “A Love Worth Risking For/The Challenge and Opportunity of Our Time” (based on the biblical narrative of Esther) at Brown University, Providence, RI. 4 p.m., June 28-Noon, July 1. Worship, movement, conversation, music, fun! (Pre-Gathering events: People of Color Institute and White People Working Against Racism, June 28, 8:30 a.m.-3:30 p.m.) For more information/registration contact: John Lardin 734/753-4808 or email: JWLARDIN@aol.com RECONCILING IN CHRIST Lutheran Church of Christ the Redeemer Minneapolis, Minnesota In the Twin Cities there is an active support group of Lutheran parents and friends of gay and lesbian people. One of the leaders of this group presented the idea of becoming a Reconciling in Christ congregation to her church council meeting in October 1997. Over the next several months, Pastor Donald Luther held a series of five Bible studies for the Church Council. There were four educational forums open to the entire congregation as well. A group of five people were appointed by the church council to draft an affirmation to be presented at a congregational meeting. After eight months of discussion and information, the congregation voted on a statement of welcome. It passed by a margin of 63 to 3. Christ the Redeemer is the tenth Lutheran congregation in the Minneapolis/St. Paul metro area to become Reconciling in Christ. OPEN & AFFIRMING MINISTRIES First Christian Church Boulder, Colorado Established in 1878, First Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) has always valued independent thinking and encouraged its members to participate in those activities that bring justice to the larger community. Once its present building was erected, one of the first ministries undertaken was the creation of a low income senior adult facility near the church. On November 8, 1998 the congregation continued that tradition and voted to identify itself as an Open & Affirming congregation. Pastor Terry Zimmerman affirms, “Our decision to become ‘officially’ O&A brings new opportunities and challenges to our members, but if our future is anything like our past, we have many wonderful, creative, fulfilling and purposeful days ahead of us!” As leaders of the Open & Affirming Task Force, the Rev. Glenn Johnson, a retired pastor, and his wife, Louise, were a strong impetus behind this achievement. First Christian Church San Mateo, California First Christian Church voted to become Open &Affirming in January of 1991, during the pastorate of Rev. Herb Leslie. Organized in June of 1957, the congregation was deeply committed to building bridges of understanding and acceptance between people who represented a wide variety of beliefs and positions on controversial social issues during the 1960s and 1970s. Today the congregation is involved in a ministry in San Mateo County which provides food for persons with AIDS. The present pastor is Rev. Ron Frazier. MARK YOUR CALENDARS NOW! WELCOME 2000 Mass Ecumenical Gathering of Welcoming Congregations Northern Illinois University in DeKalb, Illinois August 3-6, 2000 DON’T MISS THIS HISTORIC EVENT! Sponsored by: • Affirming Congregations (United Church of Canada) • Association of Welcoming & Affirming Baptists • More Light Presbyterians • Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ) • Open and Affirming Program (UCC) • Reconciling Congregations (United Methodist) • Reconciling in Christ Churches (Lutheran) • Supportive Congregations (Brethren/Mennonite) 26 Open Hands Welcoming Resources ECUMENICAL Claiming the Promise: An Ecumenical Welcoming Bible Study Resource on Homosexuality. Mary Jo Osterman. Chicago: Reconciling Congregations Program, 1997. Study book ($5.95) and Leader’s Guide ($9.95) plus 15% shipping. Available from RCP, 3801 N. Keeler Ave., Chicago, IL 60641. 773/726-5526. With Love, monthly newsletter of an ecumenical ministry assisting individuals and congregations create welcoming communities, edited by Alice G. Knotts. No subscription fee, donations gratefully accepted. Send name, address, phone, and e-mail to With Love, 710 N. Mountain Avenue, Ashland, OR 97520. 541/488-2770. TV spots for outreach to the g/l community now available: Two 30-second commercials for use by Christian congregations and groups with a specific outreach to the g/l community, prepared by Word of Life Ministries of New Orleans. Former Second Stone editor Jim Bailey is administrator. For information packet, e-mail Word of Life at tv4gayxian@aol.com MORE LIGHT PRESBYTERIANS Order from: Dick Lundy, 5525 Timber Lane, Excelsior MN 55331; 612/470-0093; e-mail: dick_lundy.parti@ecunet.org Checks payable to MLP. Price includes postage. More Light Resource Packet. Includes More Light brochure (with history, list of welcoming churches, and how to become More Light), Mission Statement, Annual Report, “How to” ideas for developing More Light ministry in the congregation, sample More Light statements, where to find excellent video and print materials, and much more. $18.00. Brochure available separately for free. Keeping the Flame Alive, 20 suggestions for your welcoming congregation. Free; copy or internet. OPEN AND AFFIRMING Order from: ONA Resources, P.O. Box 403, Holden, MA 01520- 0403. Checks payable to “The Coalition.” Price includes postage. And So We Speak. ONA’s newest resource is a collection of 30 openly gay, lesbian, and bisexual UCC clergy and four seminarians describing experiences and offering reflections about being closeted and “out” in ministry, seeking a pastoral call, spirituality, and much more. Lay persons offer perspectives on having openly gay or lesbian pastors serving their congregations. $16. OK! We’re ONA. Now What? An ONA Idea Book. Ideas from congregations across the country about living out an ONA commitment. $8.00 Blessing Ceremonies: Resources for Same-Gender Services of Commitment. Materials include theological background, sample services, liturgical resources, and personal accounts of those who have been part of such services. $12.50 RECONCILING CONGREGATION PROGRAM Order from: RCP, 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641; 773/726-5526. Add 15% postage. Enfold: A Reconciling Congregation Explores What it Means to Welcome all People. Forty members of Bethany United Methodist Church in San Francisco explain why it’s important to be part of a Reconciling Congregation. $10. Still on the Journey: A Handbook for Reconciling Congregations in Ministry with Lesbians, Bisexuals, and Gay Men. Practical ideas and plans for ministries with lesbian, gay and bisexual persons and for witnessing about the welcoming church movement. 54pp. $15. RECONCILING IN CHRIST PROGRAM Prices include shipping. Reconciling in Christ Information Packet. Background information and advice, brochures for RIC Program, Lutherans Concerned, and Open Hands; relevant material and resource list. Free. Order from: Bob Gibeling, 2466 Sharondale Dr., Atlanta, GA 30305; 404/266-9615. Multiple brochures only @ 10¢ from Lutherans Concerned InfoX, address below. This Is My Story. Video produced by Lutherans Concerned featuring personal stories of gay and lesbian Christians and their journeys of reconciliation. Two versions, one for an individual who needs to hear hopeful words and the other for a congregation which needs more understanding. 22 minutes. $15. Specify which version and order from: Lutherans Concerned InfoX, 409 Roland Hills Dr. Mogadore, OH 44260; or by e-mail: InfoX@lcna.org Inclusive Faith. Video for congregations considering the Reconciling in Christ program. Features former ELCA Presiding Bishop Herbert Chilstrom and Rev. Mel White, former ghostwriter for conservative Christian leaders. $15. Order from: (see directly above). WELCOME & AFFIRMING BAPTISTS Order from Brenda J. Moulton, P.O. Box 2596, Attleboro Falls, MA 02763; 508/226-1945. Does It Matter? A Study Discussion Guide on Homosexuality and Faith for American Baptists, by Rev. Timothy Phillips. $10. Pastor, I Am Gay by Howard Bess. The story of an American Baptist pastor who grapples with homosexuality after a church member tells him he’s gay. $15. SUPPORTIVE CONGREGATIONS NETWORK Body of Dissent: Lesbian and Gay Mennonites and Brethren Continue the Journey. Video stories of l/g/b Mennonites and Brethren. Provides a basis for dialogue on how the church weaves its Anabaptist history of nonconformity and its call to justice with the divisiveness surrounding homosexuality. 39 minutes. $30, includes study guide and shipping. Order from: Brethren/Mennonite Council for Lesbian and Gay Concerns, Box 6300, Minneapolis, MN 55406-0300; 612/722-6906; e-mail: BMCouncil@aol.com Winter 1999 27 OUR WELCOMING MOVEMENT GROWS Since 1978, 867 local churches, 45 campus ministries, 31 judicatories, and four national ministries have publicly declared themselves welcoming of all people, including lesbian women and gay men. These 943* welcoming communities are found in ten denominations in 46 states and the District of Columbia of the United States and in five provinces of Canada. The complete list (as of January 15, 1999) follows. The affiliation of each is designated by the following codes: CONGREGATIONS UNITED STATES ALABAMA Huntsville UU Church (WEL) ALASKA Anchorage Immanuel Presbyterian (ML) UU Fellowship (WEL) Palmer Church of the Covenant (W&A) Sitka UMC of Sitka (RC) ARIZONA Mesa Celebration of Life Presbyterian (ML) Phoenix Asbury UMC (RC) Augustana Lutheran (RIC) Faith Lutheran (RIC) Tucson Church of the Painted Hills (ONA) First Christian (O&A) Rincon Congregational UCC (ONA) St. Francis in the Foothills UMC (RC) ARKANSAS Little Rock Pulaski Heights Christian (O&A) CALIFORNIA Alameda First Christian (O&A) First Congregational (ONA) Albany Albany UMC (RC) Altadena Altadena Congregational (ONA) Christ the Shepherd Lutheran (RIC) Baldwin Park First Presbyterian (ML) Belmont Congregational Church UCC (ONA) Benicia Community Congregational (ONA) Berkeley Berkeley/Richmond Intercity Min. (O&A) Epworth UMC (RC) First Baptist (W&A) First Congregational (ONA) St. John’s Presbyterian (ML) Shepherd of the Hills Lutheran (RIC) Trinity UMC (RC) University Lutheran Chapel (RIC) University Church (O&A) Campbell First UMC (RC) Carlsbad Pilgrim Congregational UCC (ONA) Carmel UU of Monterey Peninsula (WEL) Chatsworth West Valley UMC (RC) Chico Congregational Church (ONA) Claremont Claremont UMC (RC) Claremont UCC, Congregational (ONA) Concord First Christian (O&A) Danville Peace Lutheran (RIC) Davis Davis UMC (RC) El Cerrito Christ Lutheran (RIC) El Cerrito UMC (RC) Mira Vista UCC (ONA) Northminster Presbyterian (ML) Eureka First Congregational (ONA) Fair Oaks Fair Oaks UMC (RC) Fairfax Fairfax Community (ONA) Fremont Fremont Congregational (ONA) Niles Congregational UCC (ONA) Fresno First Congregational (ONA) Wesley UMC (RC) Fullerton Fullerton Congregational (ONA) Gardena First UMC (RC) Guerneville Community Church, UCC (ONA) Hayward Eden UCC (ONA) New Fellowship UCC (ONA) United Church (ONA) Westminster Hills Presbyterian (ML) Hollywood Hollywood UMC (RC) Irvine Irvine UCC (ONA) Kensington Arlington Community UCC (ONA) Lafayette Lafayette Christian (O&A) Larkspur Redwoods Presbyterian (ML) La Verne Church of the Brethren (SCN) Long Beach First Congregational UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Los Alamitos Community Congregational UCC (ONA) Los Angeles Bethel Lutheran (RIC) Mt. Hollywood Congregational UCC (ONA) United University (ML, RC) Westwood Hills Congregational (ONA) Wilshire UMC (RC) Los Gatos First UMC (RC) Malibu Malibu UMC (RC) Marin City St. Andrews Presbyterian (ML) Milpitas Sunnyhills UMC (RC) Modesto College Avenue Congregational (ONA) Napa Emmanuel Lutheran (RIC) Newark Holy Redeemer Lutheran (RIC) North Hollywood St. Matthew’s Lutheran (RIC) Toluca Lake UMC (RC) Oakland Beacon Presbyterian Fellowship (ML) Faith American Lutheran (RIC) First Congregational (ONA) First Lutheran (RIC) Lake Merritt UMC (RC) Lakeshore Avenue Baptist (W&A) Lutheran Peace Fellowship (RIC) Montclair Presbyterian (ML) Plymouth UCC (ONA) St. Paul Lutheran (RIC) Palo Alto Covenant Presbyterian (ML) First Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) First Presbyterian (ML) St. Andrew’s UMC (RC) University Lutheran (RIC) Pasadena First Congregational UCC (ONA) Portola Valley Ladera Community Church (ONA) Richmond Grace Lutheran (RIC) Riverside First Congregational (ONA) Sacramento Lutheran Church of Our Redeemer (RIC) Unitarian Universalist Society (WEL) San Bernardino First Congregational Church, UCC (ONA) San Bruno Peace Lutheran (RIC) San Diego First Lutheran (RIC) First Unitarian (WEL) Pacific Beach UMC (RC) San Francisco Bethany UMC (RC) Calvary UMC (RC) Christ Church Lutheran (RIC) Church of the Advent (OAS) Church of St. John the Evangelist (OAS) City of Refuge (ONA) Dolores Street Baptist (W&A) First Congregational UCC (ONA) First Mennonite Church (SCN) First St. John’s UMC (RC) First Unitarian Society (WEL) First United Lutheran (RIC) Glide Memorial UMC (RC) Hamilton UMC (RC) Noe Valley Ministry (ML) Pine UMC (RC) Seventh Avenue Presbyterian (ML) St. Aidan’s Church (OAS) St. Francis Lutheran (RIC) St. John the Evangelist Episcopal (OAS) St. John’s UCC (ONA) St. Mark’s Lutheran (RIC) St. Paulus Lutheran (RIC) Temple UMC (RC) Trinity Church (OAS) San Jose Christ the Good Shepherd Lutheran (RIC) First Christian Church (O&A) New Community of Faith (ONA, W&A) St. Paul’s UMC (RC) TOTAL AC Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada) .... 11 ML More Light Presbyterians ................................................................... 93 OAS Oasis (Episcopal) ................................................................................ 52 ONA Open and Affirming (United Church of Christ) ............................. 260 O&A Open & Affirming (Disciples) ............................................................ 37 RIC Reconciling in Christ (Lutheran) ..................................................... 164 RC Reconciling Congregation Program (United Methodist) ................. 178 SCN Supportive (Brethren/Mennonite) ..................................................... 21 W&A Welcoming & Affirming (American Baptist) ..................................... 33 WEL Welcoming (Unitarian Universalist) ................................................ 107 *This total is lower than the sum of the numbers listed on the right because some welcoming communities are multiply designated and affiliated with more than one denomination. 28 Open Hands San Leandro San Leandro Community (W&A) San Mateo Chalice Christian Church (O&A) College Heights UCC (ONA) San Rafael Christ in Terra Linda Presb. (ML) Faith Lutheran (RIC) First Congregational UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Santa Barbara La Mesa Community (ONA) Santa Cruz First Congregational UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Grace UMC (RC) Santa Monica The Church in Ocean Park (RC) Santa Rosa Christ UMC (RC) First Congregational UCC (ONA) UU Fellowship of Sonoma Co. (WEL) Saratoga Grace UMC (RC) Sausalito First Presbyterian (ML) Sebastopol Community Church (ONA) Simi Valley United Church of Christ (ONA) Stockton First Christian (O&A) St. Mark’s UMC (RC) Sunnyvale Congregational Community (ONA) Raynor Park Christian (O&A) St. John’s Lutheran (RIC) Sunol Little Brown Church (ONA) Tiburon Community Congregational (ONA) Shepherd of the Hills Lutheran (RIC) Westminster Presbyterian (ML) Vacaville St. Paul’s UMC (RC) Vallejo Fellowship UMC (RC) First Christian (O&A) Walnut Creek Mt. Diablo UU (WEL) Walnut Creek UMC (RC) West Covina Shepherd of the Valley Lutheran (RIC) West Hollywood Crescent Heights UMC (RC) West Hollywood Presbyterian (ML) Yucaipa Faith Lutheran (RIC) COLORADO Arvada Arvada Mennonite (SCN) Aurora Parkview Congregational UCC (ONA) Boulder Boulder Mennonite (SCN) Community UCC (ONA) First Congregational (ONA) First UMC (RC) Mount Calvary Lutheran (RIC) Colorado Springs All Souls Unitarian (WEL) Denver Capitol Heights Presbyterian (ML) Fireside Christian (O&A) First Universalist (WEL) Our Savior’s Lutheran (RIC) Park Hill Congregational UCC (ONA) Sixth Avenue United (ONA) Spirit of Joy Fellowship (SCN) St. Paul’s UMC (RC) Washington Park UCC (ONA) Evergreen Wild Rose UCC (ONA) Fort Collins St. Thomas Lutheran Chapel (RIC) Greeley Family of Christ Presbyterian (ML) Pueblo Christ Congregational, UCC (ONA) Telluride Christ Presbyterian (ML) CONNECTICUT Coventry Second Congregational (ONA) Ellington First Lutheran (RIC) Fairfield First Church Cong. (ONA) Glastonbury First Church of Christ Cong. (ONA) Guilford First Congregational UCC (ONA) Hamden Spring Glen Church, UCC (ONA) U Society of New Haven (WEL) Hartford Central Baptist (W&A) First Church of Christ, UCC (ONA) Madison Shoreline UU Society (WEL) Mansfield Center First Church of Christ Cong. (ONA) Middletown First Church of Christ Cong. (ONA) New Haven Church of Christ in Yale Univ. (ONA) First & Summerfield UMC (RC) United Church on the Green (ONA) Noank Noank Baptist (W&A) South Glastonbury Congregational Church (ONA) Stamford St. John Lutheran (RIC) Storrs Storrs Congregational (ONA) Uncasville Uncasville UMC (RC) Waterbury South Congregational (ONA) Westport Unitarian Church (WEL) Windsor First Church UCC (ONA) DELAWARE Newark New Ark UCC (ONA) Wilmington West Presbyterian (ML) DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Washington, D.C. All Souls Unitarian (WEL) Augustana Lutheran (RIC) Christ Lutheran (RIC) Christ UMC (RC) Community of Christ Lutheran (RIC) Dumbarton UMC (RC) First Congregational (ONA) First Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Foundry UMC (RC) Georgetown Lutheran (RIC) Grace Lutheran (RIC) Lutheran Church of the Reformation (RIC) Riverside Baptist (W&A) Sojourner Truth Cong. UU (WEL) St. Paul’s Lutheran (RIC) Westminster Presbyterian (ML) FLORIDA Clearwater UU Church of Clearwater (WEL) Gainesville United Church (ONA) Unitarian Universalist Fellowship (WEL) Key West Holy Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Lake Mary Grace UMC (RC) Miami Beach Miami Beach Community (ONA) Riviera Presbyterian (ML) St. John’s UMC (RC) North Palm Beach First Unitarian (WEL) Orlando First Unitarian (WEL) Pinellas Park Good Samaritan Presbyterian (ML, ONA) St. Petersburg Lakewood UCC (ONA) Tallahassee United Church (ONA) Tampa First United Church (ONA) John Calvin Presbyterian (ML) Unitarian Universalist (WEL) GEORGIA Athens Unitarian Universalist Fellowship (WEL) Atlanta Clifton Presbyterian (ML) Grant Park-Aldersgate UMC (RC) Ormewood Park Presbyterian (ML) Trinity UMC (RC) Marietta Pilgrimage UCC (ONA) HAWAI‘I Honolulu Calvary By the Sea Lutheran (RIC) Church of the Crossroads (ONA) Honolulu Lutheran (RIC) Kalaupapa Kanaana Hou-Siloama, UCC (ONA) ILLINOIS Carbondale Church of the Good Shepherd (ONA) Champaign Community UCC (ONA) McKinley Memorial Presbyterian (ML) St. Andrew’s Lutheran (RIC) Chicago Albany Park UMC (RC) Augustana Lutheran (RIC) Berry Memorial UMC (RC) Broadway UMC (RC) Christ the King Lutheran (RIC) Christ the Mediator Lutheran (RIC) Ebenezer Lutheran (RIC) Epworth UMC (RC) First UMC (RC) Gladstone Park Lutheran (RIC) Grace Baptist (W&A) Grace UMC (RC) Holy Covenant UMC (RC) Holy Trinity Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) Immanuel Lutheran (RIC) Irving Park Christian (O&A) Irving Park UMC (RC) Lake View Lutheran (RIC) Lincoln Park Presbyterian (ML) Mayfair UMC (RC) Nazareth UCC (ONA) Norwood Park UMC (RC) Park View Lutheran (RIC) Peoples Church (ONA) Resurrection Lutheran (RIC) St. Luke’s Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) St. Mark Lutheran (RIC) St. Paul’s UCC (ONA) Trinity Lutheran (RIC) United Church of Rogers Park (RC) University Church (ONA, O&A) Wellington Avenue UCC (ONA) Elmhurst Maywood House Church (RIC) Evanston Lake Street Church of Evanston (W&A) Hemenway UMC (RC) Wheadon UMC (RC) Hazel Crest Hazel Crest Community UMC (RC) Jacksonville Congregational Church, UCC (ONA) Naperville First Congregational Church (ONA) Normal New Covenant Community (ML, ONA, O&A) Oak Park Euclid Avenue UMC (RC) First United Church (ML, ONA) Good Shepherd Lutheran (RIC) Oak Park Mennonite (SCN) Pilgrim Church (ONA) Park Forest UU Community (WEL) Rockford Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Streamwood Immanuel UCC (ONA) Waukegan First Congregational UCC (ONA) Wheaton St. Paul Lutheran (RIC) Wilmette First Congregational UCC (ONA) Winfield Winfield Community UMC (RC) Winter 1999 29 INDIANA Bloomington St. Thomas Lutheran (RIC) Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Goshen Circle of Hope Mennonite Fellowship (SCN) Indianapolis First Congregational UCC (ONA) Northeast UCC (ONA) North Manchester Manchester Church of the Brethren (SCN) South Bend Central UMC (RC) First Unitarian (WEL) Southside Christian (O&A) West Lafayette Shalom UCC (ONA) IOWA Ames Ames Mennonite (SCN) Lord of Life Lutheran (RIC) University Lutheran (RIC) Cedar Rapids Faith UMC (RC) Peoples Church UU (WEL) Clinton Clinton-Camanche, Iowa MFSA (RC) Davenport Davenport Unitarian (WEL) Des Moines Cottage Grove Avenue Presbyterian (ML) First Unitarian (WEL) Plymouth Congregational UCC (ONA) Trinity UMC (RC) Urbandale UCC (ONA) Iowa City Faith UCC (ONA) KANSAS Kansas City Rainbow Mennonite (SCN) Olathe St. Andrews Christian (O&A) Topeka Central Congregational UCC (ONA) KENTUCKY Henderson Zion UCC (ONA) Louisville Central Presbyterian (ML) First Unitarian (WEL) Third Lutheran (RIC) Mount Prospect Grace and Glory Lutheran (RIC) LOUISIANA New Orleans St. Mark’s UMC (RC) MAINE Bath UCC, Congregational (ONA) Camden John Street UMC (RC) Ellsworth Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Mt. Desert Somesville Union Meeting House (ONA) Rockland The First Universalist (WEL) Waterville Universalist Unitarian (WEL) MARYLAND Adelphi Paint Branch UU (WEL) Baltimore Brown Memorial Park Ave. Pres. (ML) Dundalk Church of the Brethren (SCN) First & Franklin Presbyterian (ML) Govans Presbyterian (ML) St. John’s UMC (RC) St. Mark’s Lutheran (RIC) Bethesda Cedar Lane Unitarian (WEL) River Road Unitarian (WEL) Columbia Christ UMC (RC) Columbia United Christian (O&A) St. John UM-Presbyterian (ML, RC) UU Congregation (WEL) Gaithersburg Christ the Servant Lutheran (RIC) Lanham Good Samaritan Lutheran (RIC) Rockville Rockville Presbyterian (ML) Silver Spring Christ Congregational UCC (ONA) Silver Spring Presbyterian (ML) Takoma Park Takoma Park Presbyterian (ML) MASSACHUSETTS Acton St. Matthew’s UMC (RC) Amherst First Congregational UCC (ONA) South Congregational (ONA) Andover Ballardvale United (ONA, RC) Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Auburn Pakachoag (ONA) Boston Arlington Street (WEL) Church of the Covenant (ML, ONA) Mennonite Congregation (SCN) Old South Church (ONA) Braintree All Souls Church (WEL) Brewster First Parish (WEL) Cambridge First Church, Congregational (ONA) Old Cambridge Baptist (W&A) University Lutheran (RIC) Danvers Holy Trinity UMC (RC) Framingham Grace UCC (ONA) Park Street Baptist (W&A) Greenfield First Congregational UCC (ONA) Hingham First Parish Old Ship (WEL) Hingham Congregational (ONA) Holliston First Congregational (ONA) Jamaica Plain Central Congregational (ONA) Lincoln The First Parish in Lincoln (ONA) Marblehead St. Stephen’s UMC (RC) Middleboro First Unitarian Society (WEL) Needham First Parish UU (WEL) Newburyport Belleville Congregational UCC (ONA) First Parish Society (WEL) People’s UMC (RC) Newton Highlands Congregational (ONA) Northampton First Church of Christ (ONA) Unitarian Society (WEL) Osterville United Methodist (RC) Penbroke First Church in Penbroke (ONA) Provincetown Universalist Meeting House (WEL) Reading Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Roxbury United Community Church (O&A, ONA) Salem Crombie Street UCC (ONA) Shrewsbury Mt. Olivet Lutheran (RIC) Somerville Clarenden Hill Presbyterian (ML) South Hadley UMC of Holyoke, S. Hadley, & Granby Springfield First Ch. of Christ Congregational (ONA) Stowe First Parish Ch. of Stowe & Acton (WEL) Sudbury The First Parish (WEL) Memorial Congregational UCC (ONA) Waltham First Presbyterian (ML) Wayland First Parish of Wayland (WEL) Wellesley Wellesley Congregational (ONA) Wendell Wendell Congregational (ONA) West Newton First Unitarian Society (WEL) Second Church in Newton UCC (ONA) West Somerville College Avenue UMC (RC) Williamstown First Congregational UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Worcester Bethany Christian United Parish (W&A, ONA, O&A) United Congregational (ONA) MICHIGAN Ann Arbor Amistad Community Church, UCC (ONA) Church of the Good Shepherd (ONA) First UU (WEL) Lord of Light Lutheran (RIC) Memorial Christian (O&A) Northside Presbyterian (ML) Bloomfield Hills Birmingham Unitarian (WEL) Detroit Truth Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) Douglas Douglas Congregational UCC (ONA) East Lansing Edgewood United Church (ONA) UU of Greater Lansing (WEL) Ferndale Zion Lutheran (RIC) Grand Rapids Plymouth Congregational, UCC (ONA) Kalamazoo Phoenix Community UCC (ONA) Skyridge Church of the Brethren (SCN) Lansing Ecclesia (O&A) Lansing Church of the Brethren (SCN) Southfield Calvary Lutheran (RIC) Williamston Williamston UMC (RC) Ypsilanti First Congregational UCC (ONA) MINNESOTA Becker Becker UMC (RC) Burnsville Presbyterian Church of the Apostles (ML) Edina Edina Community Lutheran (RIC) Good Samaritan UMC (RC) Mahtomedi White Bear UU (WEL) Mankato First Congregational UCC (ONA) Maple Grove Pilgrims United (ONA) Minneapolis Christ the Redeemer Lutheran (RIC) First Congregational (ONA) First Unitarian Society (WEL) First Universalist (WEL) Grace University Lutheran (RIC) Hennepin Avenue UMC (RC) Hobart UMC (RC) Holy Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Judson Memorial Baptist (W&A) Lyndale UCC (ONA) Lynnhurst Congregational (ONA) Mayflower Community Cong. UCC (ONA) Minnehaha UCC (ONA) Our Savior’s Lutheran (RIC) Parkway UCC (ONA) Praxis (RC) Prospect Park UMC (RC) Spirit of the Lakes (ONA) St. Andrew’s Lutheran (RIC) Temple Baptist (W&A) University Baptist (W&A) Walker Community (RC) Wesley UMC (RC) New Brighton United Church of Christ (ONA) Northfield First UCC (ONA) Robbinsdale Robbinsdale UCC (ONA) St. Cloud St. Cloud UU Fellwoship (WEL) Univ. Lutheran of the Epiphany (RIC) 30 Open Hands St. Paul Cherokee Park United (ML, ONA) Dayton Avenue Presbyterian (ML) Macalester-Plymouth United (ML, ONA) St. Anthony Park UCC St. Paul Mennonite Fellowship (SCN) St. Paul-Reformation Lutheran (RIC) Wayzatta St. Luke Presbyterian (ML) MISSOURI Kansas City Abiding Peace Lutheran (RIC) All Souls Unitarian (WEL) Country Club Congregational (ONA) Fountain of Hope Lutheran (RIC) Kairos UMC (RC) St. James Lutheran (RIC) St. Mark’s Lutheran (RIC) Trinity UMC (RC) Van Brunt Blvd. Presbyterian (ML) St. Louis Centenary UMC (RC) Epiphany (ONA) Gibson Heights United (ML) St. Marcus Evangelical UCC (ONA) Tyler Place Presbyterian (ML) University City Bethel Lutheran (RIC) MONTANA Billings First Congregational UCC (ONA) Butte United Congregational Church (ONA) Missoula University Congregational UCC (ONA) NEBRASKA Lincoln Unitarian Church (WEL) Omaha First Lutheran (RIC) Reconciling Worship Community (RC) NEW HAMPSHIRE Concord South Congregational, UCC (ONA) Exeter Congregational (ONA) Hanover Our Savior Lutheran (RIC) Jaffrey United Church (ONA) Milford Unitarian Universalist Congregation (WEL) Pelham First Congregational (ONA) Plymouth Plymouth Congregational (ONA) Sanbornton Sanbornton Congregational UCC (ONA) NEW JERSEY Belvedere St. Mary’s Episcopal (OAS) Bloomfield Christ Episcopal (OAS) Boonton St. John’s Episcopal (OAS) Chatham St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Cherry Hill UU Church (WEL) Chester Church of the Messiah Episcopal (OAS) Clifton St. Peter’s Episcopal (OAS) Denville Church of Our Saviour Episcopal (OAS) East Brunswick East Brunswick Cong. UCC (ONA) Englewood St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Exeter Congregational Church (ONA) Fort Lee Church of the Good Shepherd (OAS) Hackensack Christ Episcopal (OAS) Hackettstown St. James’ Episcopal (OAS) Harrington Park St. Andrew’s Episcopal (OAS) Hasbrouck Heights Church of St. John the Divine (OAS) Haworth St. Luke’s Episcopal (OAS) Hawthorne St. Clement’s Episcopal (OAS) Hoboken All Saints Parish (OAS) Jersey City Grace Van Vorst Episcopal (OAS) St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Kearny Trinity Episcopal (OAS) Leonia All Saints Episcopal (OAS) Madison Grace Episcopal (OAS) Maplewood St. George’s Episcopal (OAS) Mendham St. Mark’s Episcopal (OAS) Millburn St. Stephen’s Episcopal (OAS) Montclair St. John’s Episcopal (OAS) St. Luke’s Episcopal (OAS) Unitarian (WEL) Montvale St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Morristown Church of the Redeemer (OAS) St. Peter’s Episcopal (OAS) Unitarian Fellowship (WEL) Mt. Arlington St. Peter’s Episcopal (OAS) New Brunswick Emanuel Lutheran (RIC) Newark Cathedral of Trinity and St. Philip (OAS) Grace Episcopal (OAS) Norwood Church of the Holy Communion (OAS) Oakland St. Alban’s Episcopal (OAS) Parsippany St. Gregory’s Episcopal (OAS) Passaic St. John’s Episcopal (OAS) Paterson St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Plainfield First Unitarian Society (WEL) Pompton Lakes Christ Church (OAS) Princeton Christ Congregation (ONA, W&A) Ridgewood Christ Episcopal (OAS) South Orange First Presbyterian & Trinity (ML) Sparta St. Mary’s Episcopal (OAS) Summit Calvary Episcopal (OAS) Teaneck St. Mark’s Episcopal (OAS) Tenafly Church of the Atonement (OAS) Towaco Church of the Transfiguration (OAS) Titusville UU of Washington Crossing (WEL) Upper Montclair St. James’ Episcopal (OAS) Verona Holy Spirit Episcopal (OAS) Wantage Good Shepherd Episcopal (OAS) NEW MEXICO Albuquerque First Unitarian (WEL) Santa Fe Christ Lutheran (RIC) First Christian Church (O&A) Unitarian Church (WEL) United Church (ONA) NEW YORK Albany Emmanuel Baptist (W&A) First Presbyterian (ML) Binghamton Centenary-Chenango Street UMC (RC) UU Congregation (WEL) Blooming Grove Blooming Grove UCC (ONA) Brookhaven Old South Haven Presbyterian (ML) Brooklyn Church of Gethsemane (ML) First Unitarian Cong. Society (WEL) King’s Highway UMC (RC) Lafayette Avenue Presbyterian (ML) Park Slope UMC (RC) St. John-St. Matthew-Emmanuel Lutheran (RIC) Buffalo Westminster Presbyterian (ML) Churchville Union Congregational (ONA) Copake Craryville UMC (RC) Cortland United Community Church (W&A, ONA) Dobbs Ferry South Presbyterian (ML) Fairport Mountain Rise UCC (ONA) Gloversville First Congregational UCC (ONA) Grand Island Riverside Salem (ONA) Henrietta John Calvin Presbyterian (ML) Huntington UU Fellowship (WEL) Ithaca First Baptist (W&A) First Baptist Church (W&A) St. Paul’s UMC (RC) Marcellus First Presbyterian (ML) Merrick Community Presbyterian (ML) Mt. Kisco Mt. Kisco Presbyterian (ML) Mt. Sinai Mt. Sinai Congregational UCC (ONA) New York City Broadway UCC (ONA) Central Presbyterian (ML) Good Shepherd-Faith Presbyterian (ML) Grace & St. Paul’s Lutheran (RIC) Jan Hus Presbyterian (ML) Judson Memorial (ONA, W&A) Madison Avenue Baptist (W&A) Metropolitan-Duane UMC (RC) Our Savior’s Atonement Lutheran (RIC) Park Avenue Christian (O&A) Riverside (ONA, W&A) Rutgers Presbyterian (ML) St. Paul & St. Andrew UMC (RC) St. Peter’s Lutheran (RIC) Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Trinity Presbyterian (ML) Unitarian Ch. of All Souls (WEL) Washington Square UMC (RC) West-Park Presbyterian (ML) Oneonta First UMC (RC) UU Society (WEL) Palisades Palisades Presbyterian (ML) Plattsburgh Plattsburgh UMC (RC) Poughkeepsie Unitarian Fellowship (WEL) Rochester Calvary-St. Andrews (ML) Downtown United Presbyterian (ML) First Unitarian (WEL) Lake Avenue Baptist (W&A) Third Presbyterian (ML) Westminster Presbyterian (ML) Saratoga Springs Presb.-New Eng. Cong. (ML, ONA) Saratoga Springs UMC (RC) Sayville Sayville Congregational UCC (ONA) Schenectady First UMC (RC) First Unitarian (WEL) Slatehill Grace UMC of Ridgebury (RC) Slingerlands Community UMC (RC) Snyder Amherst Community (ONA, O&A) Syracuse Plymouth Congregational UCC (ONA) Winter 1999 31 Troy First United Presbyterian (ML) Utica Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Williamsville UU of Amherst (WEL) Yorktown Heights First Presbyterian (ML) NORTH CAROLINA Chapel Hill Church of the Reconciliation (ML) Olin T. Binkley Memorial Baptist (W&A) United Church (ONA) Durham Eno River UU Fellowship (WEL) Raleigh Community UCC (ONA) Pullen Memorial Baptist (W&A) Wilmington UU Fellowship (WEL) Winston-Salem First Christian (O&A) UU Fellowship (WEL) NORTH DAKOTA Fargo St. Mark’s Lutheran (RIC) OHIO Brecksville United Church of Christ (ONA) Chesterland Community Church (ONA) Cincinnati Clifton UMC (RC) Mt. Auburn Presbyterian (ML) Cleveland Archwood UCC (ONA) Euclid Ave. Congregational UCC (ONA) Liberation UCC (ONA) Pilgrim Congregational UCC (ONA) Simpson UMC (RC) West Shore UU (WEL) Zion UCC (ONA) Cleveland Heights Church of the Redeemer (RC) Noble Road Presbyterian (ML) Columbus Calvary Lutheran (RIC) First English Lutheran (RIC) First Unitarian Universalist (WEL) North Congregational UCC (ONA) Redeemer Lutheran (RIC) St. Mark Lutheran (RIC) Dayton Congregation for Reconciliation (ONA) Cross Creek Community (ONA) Faith UCC (ONA) Miami Valley Unitarian Fellowship (WEL) Granville First Baptist (W&A) Lakewood Cove UMC (RC) Parkwood Congregational, UCC (ONA) Norton Grace UCC (ONA) Oberlin First Church in Oberlin (ONA) Shaker Heights First Unitarian of Cleveland (WEL) Toledo Central UMC (RC) OKLAHOMA Oklahoma City Church of the Open Arms, UCC (ONA) Epworth UMC (RC) Tulsa Fellowship Congregational, UCC (ONA) UM Community of Hope (RC) OREGON Ashland United Church of Christ, Cong. (ONA) Beaverton Southminster Presbyterian (ML) Corvallis First Congregational Church (ONA) First UMC (RC) Estacada Estacada UMC (RC) Eugene First Congregational, UCC (ONA) Unitarian of Eugene & Lane Co. (WEL) Forest Grove Forest Grove UCC (ONA) Gresham Zion UCC (ONA) Klamath Falls Klamath Falls Cong. UCC (ONA) Lake Oswego Lake Oswego UCC (ONA) Milwaukie Clackamus UCC (ONA) Milwaukie UCC (ONA) Portland Ainsworth UCC (ONA) First Congregational (ONA) First UMC (RC) Metanoia Peace Community (RC) Peace Church of the Brethren (SCN) Southwest United (ONA) St. James Lutheran (RIC) St. Mark Presbyterian (ML) University Park UMC (RC) Salem First Congregational UCC (ONA) First Unitarian Society (WEL) Morningside UMC (RC) Springfield Church of the Brethren (SCN) PENNSYLVANIA Allentown Muhlenberg College Chapel (RIC) St. John Lutheran (RIC) Devon Main Line Unitarian (WEL) Harrisburg Unitarian Church (WEL) Lansdale Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Levittown United Christian Church (O&A, ONA) Lewisburg Beaver Memorial UMC (RC) Philadelphia Calvary UMC (RC) First Germantown Mennonite (SCN) First UMC of Germantown (RC) Holy Communion Lutheran (RIC) Old First Reformed (ONA) St. Michael’s Lutheran (RIC) Tabernacle United (ML, ONA) Univ. Lutheran of the Incarnation (RIC) Pittsburgh First Unitarian (WEL) Sixth Presbyterian (ML) St. Andrew Lutheran (RIC) Upper Darby Christ Lutheran (RIC) Wayne Central Baptist (W&A) RHODE ISLAND East Greenwich Westminster Unitarian (WEL) Newport Newport Congregational (ONA) Providence Mathewson Street UMC (RC) SOUTH CAROLINA Columbia Gethsemane Lutheran (RIC) SOUTH DAKOTA Erwin Erwin UCC (ONA) TENNESSEE Chattanooga Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Knoxville Tennessee Valley UU (WEL) Memphis First Congregational UCC (ONA) Nashville Brookmeade Congregational UCC (ONA) Edgehill UMC (RC) First UU Church (WEL) Hobson UMC (RC) TEXAS Austin First English Lutheran (RIC) First UU Church (WEL) St. Andrews Presbyterian (ML) Trinity UMC (RC) College Station Friends Congregational (ONA) Corpus Christi St. Paul UCC (ONA) Dallas Bethany Presbyterian (ML) First Unitarian (WEL) Midway Hills Christian (O&A) Northaven UMC (RC) El Paso St. Timothy Lutheran (RIC) Fort Worth St. Matthew’s Lutheran (RIC) Houston Bering Memorial UMC (RC) Comm. of the Reconciling Servant (ML) Faith Covenant (ML, ONA) First Congregational (ONA) Grace Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) Lubbock St. John’s UMC (RC) Mesquite St. Stephen UMC (RC) Plano Dallas North Unitarian (WEL) San Antonio Spirit of Life (RIC) UTAH Salt Lake City Mount Tabor Lutheran (RIC) South Valley UU Society (WEL) VERMONT Bennington Second Congregational (ONA) Burlington Christ Presbyterian (ML) College Street Congregational (ONA) Middlebury Congregational UCC (ONA) Putney United Church (ONA) Rutland Rutland UMC (RC) Thetford First Congregational Church (ONA) VIRGINIA Alexandria Mount Vernon Unitarian (WEL) Peace Lutheran (RIC) Arlington Clarendon Presbyterian (ML) Unitarian Church (WEL) Charlottesville Sojourners UCC (ONA) Harrisonburg Sanctuary UCC (ONA) Oakton Fairfax Unitarian (WEL) Roanoke Unitarian Universalist (WEL) WASHINGTON Bellevue Eastgate Congregational UCC (ONA) First Congregational, UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Carnation Tolt Congregational, UCC (ONA) Chelan Fullness of God Lutheran (RIC) Edmonds Edmonds UU (WEL) Ellensburg First UMC (RC) Federal Way Wayside UCC (ONA) Leavenworth Faith Lutheran (RIC) Marysville Evergreen UU Fellowship (WEL) Medical Lake Shalom UCC (ONA) Mountlake Terrace Terrace View Presbyterian (ML) Olympia Comm. for Interfaith Celebration (ONA) Pullman Community Congregational UCC (ONA) Richland Shalom UCC (ONA) Seattle Broadview Community UCC (ONA) Central Lutheran (RIC) Fauntleroy UCC (ONA) Findlay Street Christian (O&A) First Baptist (W&A) Gethsemane Lutheran (RIC) Magnolia UCC (ONA) Pilgrim Congregational (ONA) Plymouth Congregational (ONA) Prospect UCC Cong. (ONA) Ravenna UMC (RC) Richmond Beach Cong. UCC (ONA) Trinity UMC (RC) St. Paul’s UCC (ONA) University Baptist (W&A) University Christian (O&A) University Congregational (ONA) University Temple UMC (RC) Wallingford UMC (RC) Spokane Unitarian Church (WEL) Suquamish Community Congregational (ONA) Vancouver East Vancouver UMC (RC) First Congregational UCC (ONA) White Salmon Bethel Cong., UCC (ONA) WEST VIRGINIA Wheeling UU Congregation (WEL) WISCONSIN Brown Deer Brown Deer UCC (ONA) Delavan Delavan UMC (RC) Eau Claire University Lutheran (RIC) Madison Advent Lutheran (RIC) Community of Hope UCC (ONA) First Baptist (W&A) First Congregational UCC (ONA) James Reeb UU Congregation (WEL) Lake Edge Lutheran (RIC) Orchard Ridge UCC (ONA) Plymouth Congregational UCC (ONA) University UMC (RC) Milwaukee Cross Lutheran (RIC) Pentecost Lutheran (RIC) Plymouth UCC (ONA) Reformation Lutheran (RIC) Village Church, Lutheran (RIC) Racine Our Savior’s Lutheran (RIC) Sheboygan Wesley UMC (RC) Waukesha Maple Avenue Mennonite (SCN) CANADA ALBERTA Calgary South Calgary Inter-Mennonite (SCN) Edmonton Unitarian Church (WEL) BRITISH COLUMBIA Vancouver First United Church (AC) Trinity United (AC) Unitarian Church (WEL) MANITOBA Winnipeg Augustine United (AC) First Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Young United (AC) ONTARIO Thunder Bay Lakehead U. Fellowship (WEL) Toronto Bathurst United (AC) Bloor Street United (AC) Glen Rhodes United (AC) Trinity-St. Paul’s United (AC) Waterloo Olive Branch Mennonite (SCN) Westminster United (AC) SASKATCHEWAN Regina St. James United (AC) Saskatoon King of Glory Lutheran (RIC) St. Thomas-Wesley United (AC) CAMPUS MINISTRIES Key: LCM=Lutheran Campus Ministry LSC=Lutheran Student Center LSM=Lutheran Student Movement UCM=United Campus Ministry UMSF=United Methodist Student Fellowship UNITED STATES CALIFORNIA Cal-Aggie Christian House, UC-Davis (RC) UCM, UC, Riverside (RC) UCM, USC, Los Angeles (RC) Wesley Fdn., UC-Berkeley (RC) Wesley Fdn., UC-Santa Barbara (RC) Wesley Fdn., UCLA, Los Angeles (RC) COLORADO LCM, CU-Boulder (RIC) Wesley Foundation, U. of Denver (RC) DELAWARE Wesley Fdn., UD, Newark (RC) DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UMSF, American U. (RC) ILLINOIS Agape House, U. of Illinois, Chicago (RC) Ill. Disciples Fdn., UI, Champaign (O&A) UMSF, Ill. Wesleyan, Bloomington (RC) UCM, No. Illinois, DeKalb (RC) University Christian Ministry, Northwestern, Evanston (RC) INDIANA LCM, IU, Bloomington (RIC) IOWA LCM, UI, Iowa City (RIC) Stud. Cong., Luther Coll., Decorah (RIC) KANSAS LCM, KSU, Manhattan (RIC) United Methodist CM, UK, Lawrence (RC) KENTUCKY Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary (ML Chapter) MICHIGAN Guild House, UM, Ann Arbor (O&A) Wesley Fdn., Central Mich. Univ., Mt. Pleasant (RC) Wesley Fdn., U. of Michigan, Ann Arbor (RC) MINNESOTA LCM in Minneapolis (RIC) Stud. Cong., St. Olaf, Northfield (RIC) NORTH DAKOTA Univ. Lutheran Center, NDSU, Fargo (RIC) OHIO UCM, OU, Athens (O&A, RC, W&A) OREGON LCM in Portland (RIC) Wesley Fdn., UO, Eugene (RC) PENNSYLVANIA Christ Chapel, Gettysburg College, Gettysburg (RIC) LSC-LCM, Kutztown U, Kutztown (RIC) TENNESSEE Wesley Fdn., Vanderbilt, Nashville (RC) TEXAS LCM, UT, Austin (RIC) VIRGINIA Campus Christian Community, MWC, Fredericksburg (RC, RIC) WASHINGTON The Common Ministry, Washington State U., Pullman (RC) LCM, WWU, Bellingham (RIC) Wesley Club, UW, Seattle (RC) UM Fellowship, UPS, Puget Sound (RC) WISCONSIN LCM, UW, LaCrosse (RIC) LCM, Metro Milwaukee(RIC) LCM, UW-Stout, Menomonie (RIC) Wesley Fdn., U. of Wisconsin, Madison (RC) CANADA SASKATCHEWAN LSC, LSM, Saskatoon (RIC) JUDICATORIES which have passed welcoming resolutions Conferences (ONA) California/Nevada N. Central Pacific Connecticut Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota New Hampshire New York Ohio Rocky Mountain Southern California Conferences (RC) California-Nevada New York Northern Illinois Oregon-Idaho Troy Wisconsin Regions (O&A) Northern California/Nevada Synods (ML) Synod of the Northeast Synods, ELCA (RIC) Eastern North Dakota Eastern Washington-Idaho Greater Milwaukee Metro Chicago Metro New York Metro Washington, D.C. Pacifica Rocky Mountain Sierra-Pacific Southeast Michigan Southeast Pennsylvania Southern California–West NATIONAL MINISTRIES which have passed welcoming resolutions Disciples Peace Fellowship (O&A) Gen’l Commission on Christian Unity & Interreligious Concerns (RC) Lutheran Student Movement—USA (RIC) Methodist Fed. for Social Action (RC) ❑ Send me Open Hands each quarter ($20/year; outside U.S.A. @ $25). ❑ Send Open Hands gift subscription(s) to name(s) attached. Enclosed is my payment of $ _______ OR Charge $ _____________ to my VISA MASTERCARD (Circle one) # __________________________________________ Expiration _____/_____. Name on Card ____________________________________________________ Signature ________________________________________________________ My Name ________________________________________________________ Address _________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip _____________________________________________________ Daytime Phone (______) _____________________ Local Church _____________________________________________________ Denomination _____________________________________________________ Send to: Open Hands, 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 Published by the Reconciling Congregation Program in conjunction with Affirming Congregation Programme, More Light Presbyterians, Open and Affirming Ministries, Open and Affirming Program, Reconciling in Christ, and Welcoming & Affirming Baptist programs. A Unique Resource on Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual Concerns in the Church for Christian Education • Personal Reading Research Projects • Worship Resources Ministry & Outreach 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 Open Hands Vol 14 No 3 - Why Be Specific in Our Welcome? https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/d7bcd6f89ab43fb7f6d4679f581cff2f.pdf c5bf9d7bcb9ba33a9be907b68cddc159 Issue An issue of a recurring publication. Volume Number The volume number of the issue 14 Issue Number The number of the issue (within a volume) 4 Publication Year The year the issue was published 1999 Publication Date The date the issue was published Spring Text Any textual data included in the document Vol. 14 No. 4 Spring 1999 Reports from Mexico, Argentina, Fiji, Australia, Singapore, South Africa, Switzerland, and England 2 Open Hands Vol. 14 No. 4 Spring 1999 Resources for Ministries Affirming the Diversity of Human Sexuality Open Hands is a resource for congregations and individuals seeking to be in ministry with lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons. Each issue focuses on a specific area of concern within the church. Open Hands is published quarterly by the Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (United Methodist) in cooperation with the Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada), the Association of Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (American), More Light Presbyterians, Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ), Open and Affirming Program (United Church of Christ), and the Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran). Each of these programs is a national network of local churches that publicly affirm their ministry with the whole family of God and welcome lesbian and gay persons and their families into their community of faith. These seven programs—along with Supportive Congregations (Brethren/ Mennonite), and Welcoming Congregations (Unitarian Universalist)—offer hope that the church can be a reconciled community. Open Hands is published quarterly. Subscription is $20 for four issues ($25 outside the U.S.). Single copies and back issues are $6. Quantities of 10 or more, $4 each. Subscriptions, requests for advertising rates, and other business correspondence should be sent to: Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773 / 736-5526 Fax: 773 / 736-5475 Member, The Associated Church Press © 1999 Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. Open Hands is a registered trademark. ISSN 0888-8833 Printed on recycled paper. Publisher Mark Bowman Editor Chris Glaser Designer In Print—Jan Graves WELCOMING THE WORLD Jesus Somehow Became Chinese 4 HONG TAN Adjusting to an Anglophile world—a sermon for the WCC Padare in Zimbabwe. Mexico City’s Missionaries of the Realm of God 6 PERSONAL STORIES FROM MARILÚ GONZÁLEZ, ALVARO OLVERA, AND EDUARDO GONZÁLEZ. Coming Out as a Sacrament in Argentina 9 A Personal Path to Reconciliation ARIEL BARRIOS MEDINA A life signed by sacraments: baptism, reconciliation, first communion, confirmation, marriage—eventually final unction— and coming out. PFALyG—Padres, Familiares y Amigos de Lesbianas y Gays 11 IRMGARD FISCHER “You owe your children gratitude.” Women Loving Women in Fiji 12 MELINDA MADEW Reclaiming the pleasures and joys of our bodies, our sexuality, our culture. Daring to Fly With Wings Like Eagles 14 The Uniting Church in Australia and Homosexuality DOROTHY MCRAE-MCMAHON Not to decide is to decide—at least, for now. Colonialism’s Anti-Gay Legacy 17 A Case in Point: Singapore YOU-LENG L. LIM An analysis of Southeast Asia’s politics and religion in regard to homosexuality. Saint Francis in Singapore 20 TUCK-LEONG ANDREW LEE Queer Singapore cathedral protestor identifies with Saint Francis. The images on the cover/page 5, page 8, and page 9 are displayed in the sanctuary at Wheadon United Methodist Church in Evanston, Illinois. These items were donated to the church by members who had traveled to other countries, often doing mission work, and serve as a reminder of the church’s global connections. Spring 1999 3 Program Coordinators Mark Bowman Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (UMC) 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 773/736-5526 www.rcp.org Ron Coughlin Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada) P.O. Box 333, Station Q Toronto, Ontario CANADA M4T 2M5 416/466-1489 acpucc@aol.com Ann B. Day Open and Affirming Program (UCC) P.O. Box 403 Holden, MA 01520 508/856-9316 www.coalition.simplenet.com Bob Gibeling Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran) 2466 Sharondale Drive Atlanta, GA 30305 404/266-9615 www.lcna.org Dick Lundy More Light Presbyterians (PCUSA) 5525 Timber Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 612/470-0093 http://www.mlcn.org Brenda J. Moulton Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (ABC/USA) P.O. Box 2596 Attleboro Falls, MA 02763 508/226-1945 http://users.aol.com/ wabaptists Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ) P.O. Box 44400 Indianapolis, IN 46244 http://pilot.msu.edu/user/ laceyj/ Editorial Advisory Committee Vaughn Beckman, O&A Howard Bess, W&A Ann Marie Coleman, ONA Bobbi Hargleroad, MLCN Tom Harshman, O&A Dick Hasbany, MLCN Alyson Huntly, ACP Bonnie Kelly, ACP Susan Laurie, RCP Samuel E. Loliger, ONA Tim Phillips, W&A Lisa Ann Pierce, SCN Caroline Presnell, RCP Paul Santillán, RCP Julie Sevig, RIC Kelly Sprinkle, W&A Margarita Suaréz, ONA Judith Hoch Wray, O&A Stuart Wright, RIC Next Issue: Creative Chaos Movement News ............................................ 30 Welcoming Communities ............................... 31 Call for articles for Open Hands Winter 2000 LIBERATING WORD Interpreting the Bible Theme Section: Scripture is liberating when liberated from monolithic interpretations— even our own. Articles will focus on liberating the Bible from preconceptions and prejudices, as well as focus on the Bible as liberating and restorative and empowering. A variety of biblical interpretations will be acknowledged and represented, utilizing the focused lens of the Gospel. Ministries Section: We seek columns describing practical experience and suggestions in the following areas: Welcoming Process, Connections (with other justice issues), Worship, Outreach, Leadership, Health, Youth, Campus, Children. These brief articles may or may not have to do with the theme of the issue. Contact with idea by September 15, 1999 Manuscript deadline: December 1, 1999 Chris Glaser, Phone/Fax 404/622-4222 or e-mail at ChrsGlaser@aol.com 991 Berne St. SE, Atlanta, GA 30316-1859 No Longer an Alien in the Household of God 21 Growing Up as a Gay Christian in South Africa DOUGLASS JOHN TORR Coming out as gay, Christian, priest. What Will John Calvin Think? 23 Gay and Lesbian Christians in Geneva ALFRED A. MANUEL Not so much what he thinks, as what his church welcomes. The United Reformed Church’s Debate on Ordination in the UK 25 KEITH RIGLIN A view from a minister and chaplain. MINISTRIES Leadership Individual Integrity vs. Institutional Injunction 26 Two Responses to a Ban on Same-Gender Blessings LESLIE PENROSE AND GREG DELL Connections For the Least of These 28 The Current Class Divide and the Obligations of Christian L/G/B/Ts AMANDA UDIS-KESSLER SUSTAINING THE SPIRIT Christian Haikus 29 PHILIP W. GILMAN 4 Open Hands I was seven when my family came to England. It was hard for the English to say my name, Hong Tan, especially the Hong part. Once, a press report replaced the G with a K: Honk! My favorite was when they took the Honk and replaced the O with a U: Hunk Tan. There is a God! But the different sound of my name and the names of my brother, Heng, and of my sister, Tian, caused another difficulty at the primary school we attended in London. On the first morning break, in the playground, other boys and girls came up to us shouting the words “chinks go home” and “slitty eyes.” They pinched us and spat on us. My sister had beautiful pigtails and they pulled her hair. The teacher stood nearby and did nothing about these taunting words. And what were we to do? I realized very quickly that we were the only people who were not white Caucasians; we were different. My brother Heng, the butch one in the family, had had enough and when the next boy came to pinch me, he punched the boy. After break, I went to art class. Suddenly, as I was painting, the headmistress came in and told me to stand up in front of the class. She took a ruler and hit my legs hard. I cried. I was to blame for the children pinching and spitting at us. I was to blame for my brother striking out. She left saying nothing. It got so bad for our family that we left London to take refuge in one small room in the poorest part of Liverpool where we found people like us—people who welcomed us, who saw the beauty in us. We had traveled halfway across the world, and it seemed that our names, our very beings, were nothing— valueless, of no worth, made poor. I grew up in a Christian family. But I thought, how can I sing What a Friend We Have in Jesus? The same Jesus to whom the headmistress and the spitting children sang? How could I see the words of God, of Jesus, as anything vaguely Chinese, as relevant to me? All I saw were images of a beautiful Renaissance blue-eyed blond Jesus and of porcelain- skinned Madonnas that had more to do with the headmistress than my mother. My mother cradled us when we came home crying about what happened. Chinese make up 20% of the world’s population. Chinese, like gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered persons, are everywhere! But the names Hong and Tan are British slang for compost or muck. When my mother taught us to sing the mantra of survival, “Sticks and stones may hurt your bones, but names and words will never hurt you,” I started to look in the Bible—and what did I find? Words and names are important. Words are the cause of both life and death; names reveal the special relationships biblical characters had with God. Just for example, think of the high priest’s death-dealing words to Jesus, “Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God. He has uttered blasphemy. He deserves death.” And they spat in his face, and they struck him and slapped him (Matt 26:63). These were the people to whom Jesus eventually cried on the cross with the life-giving words “Abba, God, forgive them, for they do not know what they do.” Jesus’ words made sense to the sevenyear- old Chinese boy in tears. The Cosmic Word, Jesus, was not just any word. God loved us so much that the Word was made in our flesh, made human, to feel, to live and to be an example for us. For me, Jesus somehow became Chinese. I knew it all along. And Jesus became real for a seven-year-old Chinese boy. Remember the words of a Pharisee to Jesus, “Which is the greatest commandment in the law?” to which Jesus replied, “‘You shall love God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the great and first commandment. The second is ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two commandments depends all the law and the prophets.” The welcome of Jesus is to all neighbors, nearby and globally, not just the favored few. As Jesus did, we need to embrace our own belovedness as children of God to love others. Remember the words of South African martyr Steven Biko, “The most potent weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed.” A Zulu proverb sums it up this way: “He who hates, hates himself.” We are called not to be victims but to be victors in Christ. An Ahsanti proverb says, “If you understand the beginning well, the end will not trouble you.” If we understand “In the beginning was the Word, the logos, the Christ—”, if we truly understand and embrace Jesus, and not the Pharisees and Sadducees, the end will not trouble us. Jesus Somehow Became Chinese Hong Tan Excerpted from a sermon for UFMCC’s worship during the World Council of Churches Padare (“marketplace” of ideas) December 11, 1998 at the University of Zimbabwe in Harare, Zimbabwe. (For more information on the WCC meeting, see the Connections column in the Fall 1998 issue and the story in Movement News in the Winter 1999 issue of Open Hands.) All I saw were images of a beautiful Renaissance blue-eyed blond Jesus and of porcelain-skinned Madonnas that had more to do with the [unjust] headmistress than my mother. Spring 1999 5 Why? Because nothing can separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus. There is more that binds us together than that which separate us. We need to forgive— especially our enemies. The real issue here is more than world debt, it is more than racism, sexism, homophobia, ethno-nationalism, ableism, ageism. We can try to remove these, but the underlying causes will still be there. “The real disease is fear of life, not death” (Haguib Mahfouz). The greatest obstacle to life, to love, is fear. It has been the source of all defects in human behavior throughout the ages (Mahmoud Mohammed Taha). Humiliation, slavery, and fear have perverted us to the bone; we no longer look like men and women. Humans must be granted the respect due to them (Mohammed Dib). I am an optimist. I believe God’s Spirit has blown through this WCC Assembly, inspiring millions of new visions in all of us. Dare we give words, voices, spirit to these? Or do we kill the visions by the death of silence? Conrad Raiser challenges us, “Any vision which does not inspire new forms of acting remains a distant utopia.” Our gospel words come abruptly alive in the flesh of Jesus, who shockingly redeems all, forgives all, welcomes all, hopes for all, gives new life for all. The words of God transform as they tell of miracles that happen, of mountains that move, of lives forever changed, of temple tables of power turned over, of curtains of status quo torn open forever. All things are possible. To paraphrase the words of Desmond Tutu, my humanity is bound up in yours, for…we shall be free only together: lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered, and heterosexual. We shall survive only together: lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered, and heterosexual. We can be human only together: lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered, and heterosexual Christians. Hong Tan is the founding pastor of Metropolitan Community Church of North London, England, and a member of the Board of Elders of the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches. He is Director of London’s Globe Centre, which provides health care and community support to persons living with HIV and AIDS. 6 Open Hands Marilú González Marilú González, 42, was born in Cuamila Tlaola in the state of Puebla. She studied two years in a Pentecostal Bible institute and later obtained a bachelor’s degree in electronic engineering. In a career change, while an instructor in engineering, she is now halfway through medical school and hopes to specialize in homeopathic medicine. She is a board member of Génesis. My first recollections concerning my attraction toward women are of when I was nine years old, and I liked some of my older sisters’ friends very much. My father was an atheist and didn’t permit us to attend any kind of religious meetings. Nevertheless, when I was about to turn 16 and my father was no longer with the family, I discovered by personal experience that God loved me. That was how my conversion to Christ occurred, in a Pentecostal church. A year later I decided to study in the Bible institute sponsored by our movement because I wanted to learn more of Jesus and to serve him. The institute was a boarding school, and when students finished the first year they were sent out to do missionary work for two months. We went out in pairs, two men, two women. In those two months I became aware of the attraction I felt for the young woman I was working with. At the beginning of the second year a woman 15 years older than me came to the institute to work as a secretary in the administrative offices. I fell in love with her and we maintained a special relationship during that year, although she insisted that we were not lesbians. When those around me found out, they reacted with a “nothing’s going on here” attitude, but I then lived the greatest isolation of my entire life because my roommates and classmates withdrew from me. At the end of my second year two things happened that involved my sexual orientation. In the graduation ceremony—those who finished the second year graduated as Christian workers and those of the fourth year as pastors— I was to graduate first in my class because of my grade point average and I was also to be awarded a scholarship for my third year of studies. Although my name appeared as such in the invitations to graduation, in the ceremony first place was awarded to another person and I heard nothing about the scholarship. Second-year graduates were to go out for one year of mission service, and when the time of departure came, I asked to speak to the highest authority of the movement, a woman. She told me that I could go to the mission field only if I promised to never see my girlfriend again. I didn’t accept such a condition and left the institute, although not my church. Nevertheless, I was stigmatized and more than once in the ensuing years the women in the church who were my friends were “warned” by the pastor to be very cautious of me. I believe that these experiences have been the most painful of my life, and added to them were my feelings of guilt for being attracted to other women and of thus failing God. I struggled against this internal conflict for a period of some 15 years and lost all hope of growing spiritually, since I had the feeling that being a lesbian was not acceptable to God. I considered myself defeated, although I never renounced my faith in Christ and continued to at least attend church. But neither could I accept myself as a lesbian. Finally, when I was 36, I met some people with whom I could openly talk about what was happening and what I was feeling. I talked and gave vent to my feelings as many times as necessary and it was in this way that I was able to accept the fact that I am a lesbian. I met Diana 10 months ago and had the blessing of loving her and being loved. For the first time in my life I experienced a full, meaningful relationship with another woman, although the Rev. Gerard Cleator, O.P. (Catholic) and John Doner (former Free Methodist and MCC) work with lesbians and gays in Mexico City under the auspices of the St. Louis-based organization Other Sheep, of which the Rev. Dr. Tom Hanks (Presbyterian) is the executive director and Chris Glaser is an advisory board member. One of their ministries in Mexico City is a weekend retreat during which participants explore the relationship between their homosexuality and their Christian faith. Génesis is an ecumenical Christian support group for lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transsexuals formed two years ago as a follow-up to these retreats. The group has grown and now 50-60 gays, lesbians, transsexuals, and heterosexuals meet every Sunday evening for a time of song, prayer, reflection, and fellowship. Three of the group’s leaders give their testimonies here. I could go to the mission field only if I promised to never see my girlfriend again. Mexico City’s Missionaries of the Realm of God Personal Stories from Genesis Spring 1999 7 relationship lasted only a few months. Six months ago I was invited to a meeting of the group Génesis, which for me is a space where I can live my faith in Christ and at the same time be totally who I am. Never before had I received understanding and acceptance of my sexuality in a Christian environment. In the way of conclusion and in an attitude diametrically opposed to that of the authorities of my church, I can say this: The denial of our sexual orientation is NOT the best solution. Alvaro Olvera Alvaro Olvera was born in Mexico City. Trained in Catholic schools, he spent five years in religious communities and has the equivalent of an associate degree in theology. The past five years he has been working as a social worker with the Daughters of Charity, the last two in an AIDS service center in a depressed area of Mexico City. He lives an option for the poor. I am a Catholic Christian, 28 years old, and I am a homosexual. Some time ago I attempted to be more radical in my following of Jesus and decided to enter a religious community. I wanted to be a priest. I entered the seminary and it didn’t take me long to discover that what the church writes about the acceptance of the homosexual person is very good, but the persons leading the church must not have read these statements. I was publicly accused of being a homosexual. No one believed me when I explained that even though I was gay I was living a celibate life. They threw me out. My presence alone was a threat. They thought that in this way they were liberating the church from homosexual priests. The truth is that gay seminarians hide in the closet and make homophobia their credo so as to avoid any suspicion. I am thankful to God that I realized that as a lay person I had the same responsibility and the same right as the Pope to work for the building of the Kingdom of God. It is not easy in my tradition where all authority comes from being “consecrated” as a priest or a religious [as in an order]. At the present time I minister to persons who live with AIDS or HIV in the poorer areas of the city, giving special attention to homosexuals. I am about to begin the program “Frassati” in a Catholic parish. The mission consists in three parts: 1. Education about AIDS and HIV in order to eliminate fear concerning the disease and those who have it; 2. The development of “Christian Companions” to assist the sickest in their needs; 3. Aiding people to accept their homosexuality and to live it from the perspective of their Christian faith. Sometimes I also perform other pastoral activities. Friends invite me to help them in their groups even though they know I am gay. In June I will work with the coordinators of youth groups in the diocese. I know that in this way I am opening space in the church for me and other homosexuals who will come after me. I believe that I am partly responsible for the lack of acceptance of homosexuals in the church because I am still in the closet. I ask myself if my failing to come out is because I still think it is shameful to be a homosexual. I think that if I accepted myself totally as a gay man and as a Christian, that it would not bother me that people knew my “secret,” and that I would be able to bear the rejection which some in the church would surely show me. I would accept that situation as part of the Cross I would carry because I was truthful and authentic. I am neither a priest nor a religious, so the reality is that any rejection would not be that strong, and would be even less so from the authorities. Despite that, I don’t dare to come totally out of the closet. At the same time, I have not found the answer to the question, “How can I convince my faith community that being homosexual is not bad if I am hiding?” I am convinced that if I do not fully accept myself I cannot cry because others reject me. Even though I am making progress toward my freedom, I have not yet conquered all my fear. I ask God for strength and courage to come out of the closet within my church because I think it is necessary. When I do, I will be able to show, with my life of service to the poor and sick, that the Holy Spirit blows wherever it will, and can even fill a young homosexual, making him a missionary of God’s Reign. Eduardo González Also born in Mexico City and also 28, Eduardo González studied computer programming and currently works free lance in graphic design. He formerly worked as a lay missionary among indigenous groups in mountainous areas of Mexico. He coleads the Other Sheep retreats with Jerry Cleator and is the chairperson of Génesis; he also edits the group’s fledgling magazine. My name is Eduardo and I try to follow Jesus. In the beginning, my experience as a homosexual Christian was a struggle. I was baptized in a Protestant church when I was 17, and I had the good fortune of knowing the love of God and homosexual love through the same person, a pastor of the church. I helped him when It didn’t take me long to discover that what the church writes about the acceptance of the homosexual person is very good, but the persons leading the church must not have read these statements. 8 Open Hands they invited him to preach in the rural regions of the country, and also when they invited me he would come along to assist me. It was a very full and satisfying experience. I am proud to say that we even formed a church together in the mountains near Monterrey. It was a wonderful blessing to bring so many people to a personal relationship with God and to baptism. The pastor and I had lived together for around four years when Armando died in an automobile accident. At that time the church discovered that we were homosexuals, and I had to appear before a disciplinary committee and defend a person who had worked hard for God. They wanted to take away part of his being, his sexuality. I had to confront a committee who wanted to excommunicate me. They gave me time to think about it: I could continue as a homosexual but remain celibate, or I could get married. These were really very difficult times for me. I hadn’t yet gotten over the loss of my partner and now I had to face an even greater loss, my relationship with God. Or at least that was what these people were suggesting would be the case if I didn’t follow their guidance because their concept of God would not allow me to express love physically as a homosexual. I decided to go as a missionary to the mountains in Michoacan, teaching people to read and write. Two years went by. I had time to reflect on my relationship with God and the promise I had made to God when I was baptized: “I promise to serve You and to make You known among the people so that they can love You.” It was at this time that I really accepted myself as a homosexual, that is, that I belonged to a community. I refused the conditional offers of my church not to expel me, and I faced my family concerning my sexual orientation. I defended my right to have a relationship with God and to maintain it regardless of the opinion of any church. And when I felt that my ministry would be curtailed by a few human beings, I discovered the “Iglesia de la Comunidad Metropolitana” (MCC) through an ad in a gay magazine, and I saw that it was possible to have a relationship with God without my homosexuality being a barrier. I also saw the tremendous spiritual need within the les-bi-gay community and I felt a new call from God to work with sexual minorities. I worked for almost five years in MCC and entered the student clergy program, preparing myself to minister and to deal with the special needs of my community. I began to see the necessity of creating another option due to the large number and different needs of gays in Mexico City, and now I am working in Génesis and Other Sheep. I am not affiliated with any institutional church; I am affiliated with God. I do not believe in the church as an institution and the holder of a monopoly on God; I believe, rather, in a personal relationship with God. I feel comfortable and take communion in any church. Before defending a church or a doctrine I defend God and Christ. I am not in conflict with any church; in fact, I sincerely believe that for many people a church is necessary. The only thing which makes me angry is when church people want to snatch from homosexuals their right to know and serve God. Churches have done that. There are people who leave their churches fighting with God because of the irresponsibility of their ministers. The advice I give to my brothers and sisters is, do not let others take away your relationship with God. Churches should be fountains of living water, not faucets to shut off that water. We must remember that the One who will judge each of us is God, and woe to that person who proves a stumbling block to the smallest of God’s children. I defended my right to have a relationship with God and to maintain it regardless of the opinion of any church. Spring 1999 9 Spreading the Word U. S. Roman Catholic bishops first published a pastoral letter to parents of homosexual children in December 1997. In Argentina, however, our Catholic leaders have provided no such document to guide and orient us regarding God’s gift of sexuality. When I first read the document I was deeply moved even by the title: “I Am Gay, But Before All a Son.” I took the English copy to a Catholic publisher here and tried to convince them to translate and publish the document, but to no avail. In 1998, however, Dignity sent me a copy of the document already translated into Spanish. So again I visited the Catholic publisher, this time with the Spanish edition in hand, to see if they would now publish it in Argentina. Two weeks later, the publisher called to tell me that they had decided rather to publish an announcement about the publication in their Sunday leaflet (which includes the lectionary scripture lessons and comments and is distributed free each week to all who attend mass in all our Catholic parishes)— and give my name, address and phone to permit interested readers to request a copy from me directly! With Argentina’s 30 million population, some 90% Roman Catholic, what kind of response should we prepare for?! The announcement was published the third Sunday of January, 1999.1 Soon the requests began pouring in, mainly from the interior, by phone, fax and letter—more than 150 to date—from parents, catechists, priests, and seminarians, many with moving expressions of need: • “I need this document to be able to give some answers and above all words of hope.” • “I’m praying for you, your plans and family.” • “I need a copy for my husband, because his brother is gay and he wants to understand him better.” • “May God put his good hand on you to bless you for undertaking this ministry.” Many who received the document wrote again: • “Profound thanks from a mother who loves God and her son very deeply.” • “The document is beyond reproach.” Coming Out: A Sacrament of Reconciliation As I reflected on this outpouring of response I recalled how from infancy my life had been signed by sacraments: baptism at birth, penance and my first communion when I was eight (penance was also known as reconciliation), confirmation when I was 13, marriage when I was 27, and the expectation of final unction before death. However, only when I came out as gay did I come to know fully God’s gift of the sacrament of reconciliation. And it is concerning this gift of reconciliation that the U. S. bishops’ letter speaks. This “coming out” stage of my life, providentially, was marked at the beginning with another gift from God. Initially in December, 1991 the Argentine Supreme Court upheld an appellate court decision denying legal status to the Community of Argentine Homosexuals (CHA), at that time, our country’s only gay rights organization. That decision provoked such a national and international scandal that our President, Carlos Menem, removed the director of the government office involved, whose replacement then granted the legal status solicited by the CHA. That entire conflict, at times thunderous, was amply covered by the media. However, throughout the entire process the medical establishment, psychologists, and lawyers, along with their professional societies, maintained absolute silence about the case. Why such total silence? In face of this deafening silence on the part of university researchers, I began to voice my complaints and demand an explanation from the secretaries of research in various faculties in Coming Out as a Sacrament in Argentina A Personal Path to Reconciliation ArielBarriosMedina 10 Open Hands the University of Buenos Aires— and even managed to get an article published in an intellectual journal denouncing the shameful silence. The only professor who owned up to the situation and answered my complaints responsibly was Enrique Oteiza, who directed the Center for Research of the School of Social Sciences. “The absence of research in this area is a sign of backwardness, and lack of professional ethics,” he asserted, and committed his Health and Human Rights Section to prepare a research project on homosexuality. The resulting project, Homosexuality and Human Rights in the City of Buenos Aires, was prepared by a team of investigators in May, 1994, to be carried out from 1994 to 1997, and was approved with the highest classification by the University’s Secretary of Science and Technology. In 1997 this investigation of gay and lesbian identity, homophobia, and human rights was completed on schedule, published the following year, and remains the only such university investigation in this area in Argentina. When I read my name in the preface and was presented with a copy of the new publication I sensed that my coming out in my university had resulted in a kind of sacrament of reconciliation with my profession as researcher. Finding Love: Reconciliation with Myself Another dimension, however, proved more painful. In 1992 I was finishing my doctoral thesis in the School of Pharmacy and Biochemistry. This put me in an odd situation as a philosophy graduate student working on a history thesis in physiology, but I was glad for the company of other doctoral students on scholarship. One of them discovered that he could converse freely with me about AIDS, photography, the death of his grandfather and various situations in the university that bothered him. Our intimacy increased without my realizing it. But one day, when I realized that I was thinking of him constantly, I realized I had fallen in love. I had to recognize the truth in the assertion that often we don’t realize we are gay until we fall in love with someone of the same gender. In March, 1994 I was able to tell him that I was in love with him, but he responded with surprise, “So that’s what this was all about!” and recalled all the care and concern I had been showing for him. He also seemed to recognize, without being able to admit it openly, that I had touched his own deepest secret. My confession proved too great a challenge and turned out to be the last of our conversations. However, by falling in love with this person I was able to receive the gift of reconciliation with myself, experience inner healing from my own interiorized homophobia, and stop denying God’s gift of my sexual orientation. Already, in mid-1993, my wife and I had initiated a divorce by mutual consent, a judge rapidly dissolved the marriage, and I left the house I had shared for 15 years with her and my two children. When the divorce was over I felt that I could begin to speak more freely with those who were still family, even though we no longer lived together. However, when I began to share with them my experience of falling in love, both my daughter and her mother were devastated, and their homophobic anxieties separated them from me in a way the judicial sentence had never accomplished. Reconciliation with My Faith On that occasion my son, then 13 years old, expressed solidarity with me and reprimanded his mother and older sister, reminding them that Paul’s letter to the Galatians says “In Christ Jesus… the only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love” (Gal 5:6). Later, when I was able to converse more tranquilly with him to see how he felt, his response was still firm: “How could I feel ashamed of my father for being honest about who he is. I’m really proud of you!” That solidarity I experienced as a sacrament of reconciliation with the fundamental elements of my faith. When our discussions about homosexuality appear to cancel each other out from the beginning with a Catholic who insists “The Catholic Church says that…,” we need to ask where our Catholic friend is coming from, since he or she also is church. With such an exchange both the affirmation and response represent a cry for reconciliation. When I explained to my mother my sexual orientation, she responded that OTHER SHEEP International Ministries with Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgendered Persons, Their Families and Friends Rev. Dr. Tom Hanks, Executive Director Lavalle 376-2DE, 1047 Buenos Aires ARGENTINA; phone/fax 54-1/314-5989; e-mail: thanks@thanks.wamani.apc.org Websites: www.othersheep.org (English) www.swiftsite.com/otrasovejas (Spanish, pastoral) webs.satlink.com/users/t/thanks (Spanish, academic) Other Sheep has addresses in Argentina, Mexico, Germany, and the United States. For a brochure, contact: Other Sheep, 319 N. 4th St. Suite 902, St. Louis, MO 63102 USA; phone: 314/241-2400; fax: 314/241-2403; e-mail: giherzog@aol.com OR Otras Ovejas, Apdo. Postal 6-1040, 06600 Mexico, D.F.-MEXICO; phone/fax: 52-5/553-2103; e-mail: jpdoner@acnet.net Spring 1999 11 she really didn’t care whom I slept with. The conversation went in other directions and then we parted. But days later I began to feel angry about the indifference my mother had expressed. With her language my mother had now affirmed her indifference to my spiritual welfare, although years before this had been very important to her when she had attended my wedding. After that exchange, for almost three years I had little contact with my mother, who lived in another city. Then in 1998 my mother visited family members in Buenos Aires, and when I heard from my daughter that she wanted to see me, we arranged to meet. I was able to remind her about our last conversation and expressed my resentment about her attitude. She insisted that the Bible backed her up. Sensing that we had to agree to disagree, I let the matter drop. I accompanied her to the train station for her trip back home and she said she planned to return in two months for Christmas and the New Year, so we would see each other soon. But my mother then died suddenly just a week before Christmas. When I heard, I was glad I had listened to my daughter’s exhortation to meet with my mother again and not let resentment get in the way of our reconciliation. That was the way I experienced the sacrament of reconciliation with my mother and the mercy I hope to receive from God. When in 1992 I had criticized my fellow scientists for their irresponsible complicity in the Supreme Court’s homophobic judicial decision against the CHA, I really began a process of spiritual revelation communicated to us in the sacrament of reconciliation.2 Because in reality, what I was doing was to exhort myself to accept God’s grace present in my life now and to trust in the unfailing mercy of Jesus and begin to walk the road of reconciliation with myself in order to experience reconciliation with others.3 Ariel Barrios-Medina, Ph.D., (shown here defending this doctoral thesis) is on the scientific advisory board of Other Sheep—Mult icultural Ministries with Sexual Minorities. He lives in Argentina. Notes Notes 1El Domingo El periódico que nos une como iglesia, Instituto Pía Asociación San Pablo, Domingo 3° durante el año, 24 de enero de 1999. 2McFeeley, T., “Coming Out as Spiritual Revelation,” Harvard Gay and Lesbian Review, vol. 3, Nr. 4, pp. 9-11, 1996. 3Always Our Children, Conclusion. PFALyG Padres, Familiares y Amigos de Lesbianas y Gays Irmgard Fischer The group PARENTS, FAMILIES AND FRIENDS OF LESBIANS AND GAYS began in Buenos Aires in July 1996. It is member of the American PFLAG organization and is included in the Public Referral Directory under Argentina. The road towards the building of this kind of group was not easy. Parents find it difficult to let their situation be known, especially in Latin America. But little by little, as I let my situation be known through TV, radio, magazines, and newspapers, other parents, families, and friends joined the group. We meet twice a month, with an average attendance of eight persons. We have participated with workshops in congresses and the Pride Week of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Community. We have a close relationship with other lesbian and gays groups in Buenos Aires, Montevideo, and Santiago de Chile, and with groups of parents and friends that are related to them. Several times we have been asked for help by Latin Americans who found our address in the Public Referral Directory. We have little literature in Spanish for the Parents Groups, so we are translating what we get from English and German sources for our own group and for all Latin American people who need help. We do not only receive calls from parents and families, but also of young gays and lesbians. For just the experience of sharing with us their burden many have expressed immense gratitude. Also our appearances aim to open minds, overcome deep prejudices and teach acceptance. The help we can give in every respect is enormous. We have begun to experience and feel what is said in an article addressed to parents: “Persons who have suffered in their lives and have drawn their lessons from this suffering are of great value. These persons have become new and more mature beings. Are you conscious of how much you owe your gay children in this respect? You owe your children gratitude.” Irmgard Fischer is a 63-year-old widow and retired biochemist (Bayer) of German descent, active all her life in the Lutheran church. Three years ago Robert, her gay son who lives in Germany, came out to her and gave her a booklet for parents of gay and lesbian children, which she says opened her eyes, revolutionized her life, and enabled her to find God’s call to ministry for her retirement years. 12 Open Hands Last year poet-philosopher Pio Manoa, speaking before a university based group of gays and lesbians in Fiji commented, “Long before the North Americans discovered the pleasures of sex and began carrying placards declaring love not war in the l960s, Pacific Islanders already understood their bodies and the pleasures and joys of free sex centuries ago.” This he said in a tolerant grandfatherly tone encouraging young people’s continuing responsibility to respect and understand their bodies, both nature and functions. He conveyed the healthy attitude with which forebears in the South Pacific regarded male and female sexuality. Could there have been more freedom in exploring and expressing one’s sexual inclinations in the past, when elders in the community educated the young on responsible roles as sexual partners? Could there have been acceptance of crossing male-female gender roles before Western prescriptions of compulsory heterosexuality were ever imposed by church and western education? For even today, we witness the traditional place of fafafines in Polynesian society. The Female Body: Male Playground and Political Arena There is a widely accepted formula that female sexuality is male-directed, meaning that female sexuality exists for men. The images they give of “good women” are the quiet youngish looking innocent sexless virgin or the mother procreator replenishing the earth with her offsprings. When a woman does not fit into either of these models, she is bad. More so if she talks sex, including its wide diversity of expressions. Bad women talk sex, want sex, need sex, enjoy sex. Men also claim right to take pleasure from women’s bodies. Male fashion lords define ideal female proportions; the face she must have; the behavior she must cultivate. How many women feel diminished self-pride and increased self-loathing at their inability to meet male-imposed standards of sexiness? Out of 3.5 billion women the world over, only ten qualify as supermodel. For whose pleasure is cosmetic surgery, killer diet schemes and rejuvenating regimens? Is it to make female bodies attractive male playgrounds? As women begin exercising greater autonomy in decisions over their sexual lives, the reality of male violence is ever present. Silent submission is a mode of behavior for most women to guarantee domestic peace. Not only is the female body a male playground, but a political arena as to who exerts control over female behavior and sexual expression. How many women would admit that they have been battered by their male partners because they had refused sex? How many women have been assaulted in the streets, and blamed for it because they were wearing sexy clothes? Male violence is a weapon of control. Reclaiming Our Sexuality Yet there is a resurging political power realized by women as they reclaim their sexuality— it is like coming home to one’s self. Of course, this is a threat to men who once thought they owned women’s bodies. When women define their right to sexual self-determination, it is a personal and political decision as to who is the subject of our affection and choice of its expression. The female body finds its core expression in our sensuality and sexuality. Female sexuality is a powerful force undergirding our day to day behavior and motivations. If this is so, then how much power and control do women have in determining the expressions of their sexuality? Do women actually take ownership of their right to sexual selfdetermination? The effective way for dominators to wield power is to keep the dominated in a state of blissful ignorance or terrorized fear. This means setting systematic mechanisms of keeping the dominated in traps of silence, misinformation and isolation— systematic because it is institutionalized and long term. Men wield power by control and influence over societal institutions such as the economy, church, mass media, government and private homes. To this day, women in our villages still refuse to speak about their experiences unless it is with permission from male family elders such as a husband or father-inlaw. “Sexual Orientation” in Fiji’s Bill of Rights The right to sexual orientation is enshrined in Fiji’s Bill of Rights:“A person must not be unfairly discriminated against directly or indirectly on the ground of his or her actual or supposed characteristics, including race, ethnic origin, color, place of origin, gender, sexual orientation, birth, primary language, economic status, age or disability.” But this right is threatened with a parliamentary amendment to retain the penal law citing male consensual sex as a felony. There is no legal reference to women loving women. While this non-reference may put women of minority sexual orientation on seemingly safe legal ground, this at the same time reveals a dismissive attitude regarding women’s love for other women as inconsequential. While this may spare us any form of legal sanction, it also shows how truly Women Loving Women in Fiji Melinda Madew Spring 1999 13 invisible woman are. I hasten to add here that invisibility is not really a guarantee to safety. Keeping invisible the ability of women to love other women, thereby denying this as a healthy normal form of sexual expression, is a culturally institutionalized practice of marginalizing women. Love between women is disallowed because the only possible form of female sexual expression is male-directed. Our experience at the Women’s Action for Change tell us that there are women loving women in Fiji and definitely elsewhere in the South Pacific. We know that these marginalized women are driven underground by social censorship. There are women who occupy high profile positions in church and society, but would not speak in defense of the right to sexual expression, fearing sanctions and social ridicule. There are women who throughout their lives knew they were different from their peers, but could not find anyone who could help them understand why this is so. Believing they are possessed by devils or born with a dreaded disease, they suffer in self-condemning fear, isolation and silence. Then there are those who move away from mainstream social community, establishing a subculture of sports, bars, kava or beer sessions and fluid association with each other. We see them struggling to keep jobs; struggling to train in economically marketable skills; struggling to find answers to complex questions; struggling against insidious or pronounced social discrimination. Bereft of family support, denounced by churches, shunned by community, rendered socially unfit and neglected by social institutions; they are where they are—but survivors nevertheless. They are women known to each other, but not to the rest of the world. Characteristics of Women Loving Women in Fiji Women’s right to minority sexual expression, as raised earlier, is often wrapped in mystery and taboo. In my conversations with sexual minorities in Suva and elsewhere in Fiji, I have been privileged to learn characteristics of their lifestyle: • Often, women are not in monogamous relationships. • There is longing to be in a stable relationship with a partner, but often pressure from family, job and community contribute to destroy relationships. • Woman have dealt with questions about their sexual orientation in isolation and fear. • Until very recently, there has been no support group or support organization offering services for women sexual minorities. • The threat of AIDS and STDs is something not thought about because these are diseases of heterosexual women and homosexual/heterosexual men. • Young women often resort to sexual experimentation with each other because “nobody else will teach [them] what to do.” • Harassment from employers and blackmail from colleagues exist. • Women have experienced physical bashing from police who suspect them of “indecent acts in public.” The Right to be Protected by UN Instruments In the formulation of international commitments, the most contentious topic is often anything related to the right of women to sexual expression. International documents such as the Beijing Platform of Action explicitly uses the word “sexual expression” whose expanded meaning carries the right of women to choose their sexual partners. Feminists who lobbied their governments know how it took the whole assembly a full hour of intense debate to permit this in the final document. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) identifies reproductive health to mean the “ability to practice and enjoy sexual relationships and to be safe in having sex.” Furthermore, CEDAW also identifies the right of women to “set the terms of their sexual activity.” For sexual minorities who were actively present in the drafting of these two documents, these inclusions carry the expanded meaning to include the right of women to love other women in a sexual manner. Furthermore, the CEDAW does not limit its application only to women of heterosexual orientation. Inclusivity is a value that permeates the relationship of women in the movement. This value transcends differences in class, color, language, place of origin, and thus even sexual orientation. Excluding women of a minority sexual orientation from the coverage of CEDAW goes against the very spirit of the convention, which calls for the elimination of discrimination. The Women’s Tribune based in New York has recently identified Sexual Orientation as a UN Emerging Right. For many feminists, this is regarded as the last legal frontier to win. This has happened successfully in many countries with strong democratic traditions. We hope Fiji joins the ranks of these countries. Melinda Madew is a lesbian activist working in Fiji as a research consultant on issues involving gender violence. Formerly a project officer for NGO (Women’s Action for Change), she now associates with the Fiji Women’s Crisis Center. 14 Open Hands In the Beginning… A Favorable Ruling The Uniting Church in Australia was inaugurated in 1977 with a union of the Congregational, Methodist and Presbyterian Churches. Its first open discussion of the issue of sexuality was in 1982 when a presbytery (regional council) asked the Assembly Standing Committee (national council responsible for matters of doctrine, among other things) for a ruling on whether it could ordain a “practicing” lesbian. I happened to be a member of the ASC when it unanimously ruled that “Sexual orientation is not of itself a bar to ordination.” I recall being surprised at the time! That ruling created turmoil in the church and, soon after, the ASC decided to initiate a study on homosexuality and the church. It drew together a range of people into a task group and after some consultation in the church, the task group produced a rather ambiguous booklet for general distribution. It was radical enough for a conservative on the task group to insist on the right of a minority statement at the back, but it was not radical enough to give the church much in the way of clear guidance. In response to this, there was further outrage by some church members and councils. In 1991, the full Assembly of the church resolved to set up a “Sexuality Task Group” which was to consult even more widely in the church through a series of hearings and the circulation of a questionnaire through which church members could make comment on the issues. The intention was to have a wide discussion on human sexuality in general, but of course, in the end, the focus was on homosexuality and, in particular, ordaining homosexual people. After the Task Group issued a reasonably radical interim report to the church for comment, there was a flood of responses disapproving of homosexual people being ordained. The conservative wing of the church was highly organized, especially in rural areas. Where people attended the hearings and dialogued together, there was usually a greater recognition of ambiguities and fewer people holding black and white positions. Because it was not a referendum or plebiscite approach, the statistics from the questionnaire responses were not valid for the drawing of conclusions. Among other factors, it was evident that when people agreed with the Interim Report, they were less likely to make comment. However, the conservatives commonly claimed that, because the majority of questionnaire responses were negative on ordination of homosexual people, that the majority of church members held that position. The Sacrifice of Indecision The Task Group formally reported to the 1997 Assembly of the church. Even though its composition was diverse, its recommendations were careful but radical. By this time the church had shifted into a form of consensus decision-making for all its major councils. The Assembly is a body of about 250 voting members elected from all the presbyteries and synods of the church. During the 60-second speeches which were invited to open up the debate, I “came out.” Seeing I was the National Director for Mission of the church (I suppose the second most senior officer of the church, although we try not to think hierarchically), this was seen as a significant moment. There were also speeches from others like Jenny Byrnes, a highly regarded woman minister who had come out earlier in her state synod, when she was standing for its moderator, losing by a handful of votes. One of the conservatives told another church officer that he thought it most unfair that people were brought into a debate which should really be more objective! It was clear during the lead period of discussion that the Assembly was swinging in the radical direction. However, we are a multicultural church with special congregations for newly arrived migrant groups, mainly from Asia and the Pacific, and we have a commitment to Indigenous people. These groups in the Assembly asked for more time to discuss the issue of homosexuality and expressed concern. Without appearing to be patronizing nor ignorant of the cultural issues, I believe that this was Daring to Fly With Wings Like Eagles The Uniting Church in Australia and Homosexuality Dorothy McRae-McMahon Dorothy McRae-McMahon’s latest book is Everyday Passions (ABC Books, 1998), and is available for purchase on the Internet from: www.shop.abc.net.au Spring 1999 15 partly about our church reaping what it had sown in conservative missionary activities. In the end, the Assembly decided to defer a decision on homosexuality and ordination and referred the church to its 1982 Standing Committee resolution in the meantime. There was then a strong protest from the conservatives about the lack of decision, in spite of the fact that no conservative member of the Assembly called for a formal vote at the time— a permitted part of our process, if consensus cannot be reached. This was probably because it was obvious that the radical position would have been overwhelmingly carried, had the Assembly agreed to vote. However, the radicals in the Assembly wanted to respect Indigenous and minority culture concerns. We were all only too well aware of the injustices and racism that stood between us. One sign of the majority will of the Assembly was that it elected Jenny Byrnes to its 20 member Standing Committee and sent her as one of its 4 representatives to the World Council of Churches Assembly in Harare. It also made no moves to remove me as Moderator of the WCC Assembly Worship Committee. As soon as I returned to my work, it became clear to me that my position was rapidly becoming untenable. Had I been a parish minister, I probably could have stayed, but the Director for Mission has a national representative role. The conservatives began to threaten withholding of funding for the work which came under my jurisdiction, work in the areas of human and Indigenous rights and national social justice, work which I held dear. I decided that to stay there heroically would be pointless for me and not advance our cause in the process. At the meeting of the next Assembly Standing Committee I offered my resignation. After a two-hour discussion, it was accepted. I then retired, somewhat earlier than I had planned. After this, there were two disciplinary efforts to withdraw recognition of my ordination on the grounds of my sexuality. Both of these attempts failed. AD 16 Open Hands Resistance Builds During the Assembly, the debate and discussion was possibly one of my best experiences of the church. It was honest, costly and faithful. It was as though we were really walking the way of the cross with an agony of heart as we tried to respect many things about ourselves. Since then we have gone downhill considerably. There has been a huge and organized push by the conservatives who, as usual, have money and seem to have a commitment to work on nothing else except this issue, unlike the rest of us. Some time ago the conservatives formed themselves into a group called EMU (Evangelical Members Uniting). They have made “hit lists” of ministers who are single, most especially women, and have begun various forms of harassment. Their latest move is to ask congregations to declare themselves as “Evangelical Uniting Churches” with “evangelical” on their notice boards outside the church. These congregations would also have a special statement of faith which indicates they don’t approve of homosexuality and a commitment not to call ministers who don’t agree with this and to withhold funds from councils of the church which support homosexual persons. I understand that the Assembly Standing Committee at its most recent meeting has ruled that EMU may not put “Evangelical” on their church notice boards, regarding this as excluding some people from the church. There had been an earlier move by the conservatives to form an association of “Transforming Congregations,” which was countered by a suggestion for an association of “Open and Affirming Congregations.” The Standing Committee asked us not to proceed to divide the church in this way and the radical arm of the church honored this request but it is clear that the conservatives never did. A presbytery has recently refused me permission to take responsibility for a parish within its bounds for a few weeks while its minister is away, on the grounds that it has on its books the wellknown resolution regarding the expectation that ministers will be faithful in marriage and celibate in singleness. I think this came from the U.S. originally— thank you folks! It has been rejected twice by our national Assembly as an inadequate formula for describing human relationship and sexuality, but a number of our church councils have passed it and our polity is so complex that we get bitten in all sorts of ways. Anyway, I am now fighting this ruling on the grounds that it is a de facto withdrawal of recognition of my ordination. Trying to Keep the Church Together The leadership of the church is trying rather desperately to hold things together. The Assembly Standing Committee has put out a relatively strong statement about hate, rejection and harassment, but there has been little evidence of the effectiveness of that move. It is as though, because the church has deferred its decision, those who are radical are expected to respect differences of opinion and the dialogues in process and refrain from moving positive resolutions. Meanwhile the conservatives are busy moving negative resolutions and cutting off dialogue. There is a commitment now to organize retreats for the discussion of sexuality before the next Assembly in 2000. These retreats may be somewhat safe, if well run, for people who are already out, but we do not trust them as safe for those who are not. We are finding all along that we are handicapped by the fact that so many people whose voices we need are not free to speak because they cannot take the risk of exposing themselves. We also find that many of our supporters are brave in private and relatively gutless in public. This leaves the field to the conservatives who often terrorize people into silence, especially in smaller congregations. We are also always battling with the tyranny of a small group of people spread over a huge continent. Having said that, because of the response of the Australian community to my stand, (which was covered widely and sympathetically by the secular media) I am often invited and financed to move around the country leading discussions on life and faith. I believe I have more significant opportunities for mission than I ever had as Director for Mission! This gives me, at least, the chance to network with our people. The best strategy we have for strengthening our church life is to have a national “Daring” conference every two years. The themes for this conference are, for example, “Daring to speak, daring to listen,” “Daring to live.” Each conference is larger in numbers than the last. We study the Bible together, hear from international and national speakers, have workshops and generally celebrate our lives. In between conferences we have an e-mail network, a newsletter and state networks which arrange various activities. Finally, we are finding that, because they do not seem to have the same ethical constraints on their behavior as we do, and because the Christian imperatives to love and to tell the truth seem not to apply to them, the conservative forces in our church in the end often reveal who they really are. However, the cost to us in holding to all those Christian values is high indeed. But we have hope, for God is with us. The theme for our 2000 “Daring” conference will be “Daring to fly” from the text: “They shall rise up with wings like eagles, they shall run and not be weary, they shall walk and not faint” (Is 40:30). Our prayers and love go out to you all around the world— our sisters and brothers in the struggle for the lifting up of the Gospel of Jesus Christ for all people. Dorothy McRae-McMahon was a minister with the Pitt Street Uniting Church in Sydney for 10 years and then for five years on the national staff of the Uniting Church. The community has recognized her work over the years with a Jubilee Medal from the Queen for work with women in NSW (1977), an Australian Government Peace Award (1986), the Australian Human Rights Medal (1988) and an Honorary Doctorate of Letters from Macquarie University (1992). Spring 1999 17 Framing the Questions In Singapore, economics is everything. To maintain economic survival, the government argues that political stability is paramount. Preventing conflict between Singapore’s four racial groups around ethnicity and religion is a top priority. To achieve this, governmental policies forbid civic organizations, including churches, from any social commentary, for this is viewed as a challenge to the government. The acceptance of this status quo by Roman Catholics and Protestants has led to a Christianity that is pietistic rather than prophetic, failing to offer social critique from either left or right. Given such a compromise of Christianity’s traditional social witness, how is the public crusade led by the Anglican Church of Singapore against homosexuality and homosexual persons in both the domestic and international arena to be understood, when such social activism, were it over another issue, would have been considered by the government political involvement and hence prohibited? Curtailing Social Activism In 1987, several citizens, including a few prominent lawyers, linked up with some lay and ordained members of the Roman Catholic Church to organize for the rights of Filipina women, then working as domestic help in Singapore. This came to an end when 16 of the organizers were arrested by the government under the Internal Security Act (a piece of law left over from British colonial days, which provided for the detention without trial of political subversives) and charged with conspiring to overthrow the government. In the ensuing months, the government said that all social commentary was political. As such, professional groups (like the law society) and civic groups (like the church) which were not political parties were prohibited from commenting on social and political issues. In a television broadcast of a meeting between the Roman Catholic Archbishop Gregory Yong and then Prime Minister and founding father Lee Kuan Yew, the Catholic Church accepted these parameters. In an Independence Day speech later that year, Lee said: “I urge that…all those who claim divine sanction or holy insights, take off your clerical robes before you take on anything economic or political. …Come out as a citizen or join a political party and it is your right to belabor the government. But use a church or a religion and your pulpit for these purposes and there will be serious repercussions.” The government is not only concerned with the left but also with right wing activism of the church. Take abortion for example. The Singapore government in the 1970s embarked on a comprehensive family program (whose success also contributed to higher economic growth), of which cheap and accessible abortions (costing about US$3) was a mainstay. Eventually, abortion became the preferred form of contraception among women, because it was cheaper than the pill, and it did not require the negotiation with the male partner that a condom would otherwise have necessitated. Nevertheless, rampant abortions provoked no public commentary from Protestant or Roman Catholic church leaders, thus indicating their quiescence. Consider another right wing or evangelical issue: converting people of other faiths to Christianity. In Singapore, though one is free to practice any religion, one may not always be at liberty to convert someone else. The proselytization of the indigenous Malay minority (16% of the population), who are almost entirely Muslim, is prohibited. (This is true in Malaysia as well.) The reasons are several, but mainly have to do with preventing a reoccurrence of the riots of the 1960s between the Malay Muslims and Chinese (non-Muslims). Cosmic Battleground of Spirits Both Roman Catholics and Protestants (10% of the population) are mainly made up of ethnic Chinese (76% of the population). Several studies done by the National University of Singapore in the 1980s showed that younger Chinese people had converted from the traditional and syncretized Taoism-Buddhism (which is the majority religion) to Christianity. They had found the latter to be more rational and systematized than the magical superstitions of the former. This comparison may come as a surprise to people living in the West where Buddhism is often considered a sophisticated philosophy. However, it is important to note that the Buddhism and Taoism of the immigrant overseas Chinese are a folk, rather than a scholarly tradition. Magic and evil spirits are major elements in the Buddhism-Taoism of Chinese Singaporeans. When the Chinese person converts to Christianity, this basic orientation of a cosmic battleground where hierarchies of spirits do battle continues. In the previous generation, their parents sought a more powerful temple deity to combat a lesser deity. In Christianity, these new converts have found the King of Kings, Jesus Christ, to be the Colonialism’s Anti-gay Legacy A Case in Point: Singapore You-Leng L. Lim Taken from a much longer and thoroughly-documented background paper for last year’s Lambeth worldwide conference of Anglican bishops, originally entitled, “Homosexuality: How the economics and politics of Singapore have shaped the Anglican Diocese and its role in the Province of South East Asia.” 18 Open Hands supreme deity. Nevertheless, lesser spirits continue to work even in the lives of baptized Christians. This henotheistic rather than monotheistic orientation explains why a few years ago an antique table with Chinese dragons— symbols of benevolence in Chinese culture, but confused with the dragon of Revelation— at the Anglican Cathedral was hacked to pieces. By tapping into a culturally real vocabulary of evil spirits, charismatic Christianity has thrived. One consequence of seeing the working of spirits is that genuine psychological (and sometimes physiological) variations and dysfunctions are given a demonic interpretation. Homosexuality, infertility, behavioral and medical problems are often interpreted as oppression by evil spirits. Why does a sophisticated Western educated population believe more in evil spirits than in psychological analysis? First, most Chinese people do not think of mental illness as a disease but as the disgraceful and stigmatized condition of “madness.” Secondly, analytical psychology argues that a lack of wholesome parenting is a principal cause of personal dysfunction. This lays too much responsibility on parents, and directly undermines Chinese Confucian values of filial piety. Thirdly, the important psychological concept of individuation is often confused with the rightly criticized Western social concept of individualism. The net effect is that exorcism, whether by the church or by any other religion, is often preferred to therapy. The Church’s Campaign Against Homosexuality If the churches have been quiescent in social and political issues of both the left and right, how does one explain the public nature of the church’s campaign against homosexuality and homosexuals? A precursor circumstance in the Anglican Church was that the charismatic movement that began in the 1970s served to renew what had become a moribund and elitist ex-colonial church. The renewal of worship was a breath of fresh air, but now the pendulum has swung the other way, so that the vast majority of parishes (with the exception of the cathedral) have done away with Anglican forms of Prayer Book liturgy and have adopted a freeform, spontaneous, non-liturgical charismatic style. Then, in the last decade, the Anglican Church of Our Savior invited the U.S. organization Exodus to Singapore. The precipitating factor was the frequency of sex-change operations in Singapore, mistakenly seen as a homosexual issue. The local press gave this ex-gay ministry ample coverage, and church leaders were able to use overt religious precepts to condemn homosexuality. This religious publicization of a private social issue would appear to be a violation of the political settlement separating private beliefs and public commentary. Nevertheless, led by Anglicans, the churches’ anti-homosexual activism in both the domestic and international scene has grown. One can only conclude that such activism is possible because it exploits an already existing social antagonism and stigmatization of homosexuality. Colonialism’s Construction of Heterosexism But whence this stigmatization in Asian cultures? The Harvard scholar Brett Hinsch has shown that homosexuality was prevalent, accepted, and sometimes celebrated throughout the different Chinese dynasties. Nevertheless, he suggests that in the colonial encounter, national humiliation led China to both question its collective masculinity, and then to adopt the Victorian Christian mores against homosexuality. Interestingly enough, the anti-sodomy laws in Singapore, which provide for life in prison, were likewise inherited from the British colonialists. Today, such stigmatization is considered an Asian value. Prior to colonialism, sexuality and gender varied greatly among Asians. Among the Bugis people, now part of the Indonesian nation, a third gender consisting of men dressed in women’s clothes— akin to the Native-American berdache—was accepted. The Minangkabao people, also now part of Indonesia, were a matrilineal society. Among the Chinese, polygamy was practiced. Everyone lived in families that were multi-generational. I do not mean to suggest that these arrangements were better, but the situation was more diverse and complex. Homogeneity came with the advent of colonialism and industrial capitalism— abetted by Protestantism, Max Weber would say—so that today sexuality and family and gender roles have become monogamous, patriarchal, single-generational, and exclusively heterosexual. Asian family values of today are therefore historically relative and socially constructed. That these values may yet be reshaped by governmental legislation was given a rather strange twist in 1984. Then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, a Cambridge-trained lawyer, bemoaned the ironic success of family planning, especially the lowered birth rates of the higher educated (and economically more productive) classes. This had come about because women with graduate degrees were choosier and getting married later, or not getting married at all. Lee extrapolated from this and held forth the specter of national economic decline. At the National University, he then publicly ruminated about the wisdom of having abolished traditional Chinese polygamy in favor of Western monogamy. Social values are socially constructed, and must in the end serve the economy. How to Define Ourselves? What of the charge that Western values are contaminating Asia? In recent years, the government has variously encouraged more freedom of expression— particularly when it has felt that a vibrant arts culture would attract expatriate professionals to work in Singapore, hence adding to the economy— and opposed such freedom when it has deemed such expressions to be too Western and permissive and thus detrimental to stability. In any case, that which is “Western” is alternately emulated or castigated, with the government playing the role of arbiter. This same process of simultaneously assimilating and rejecting the West applies in the Anglican Diocese of Singapore. Several gay and lesbian Christians, who have been educated abroad— some hand-picked by the government and sent on scholarships to “Oxbridge” and the American Ivy League—had encountered a more tolerant Christianity while there. The Spring 1999 19 Internet had also connected gay Singaporeans with gay Christian groups from around the world. All these interchanges have been considered harmful Western influences. Nevertheless, the diocese’s own active courting of the American based ex-gay Exodus is likewise an instance of Western, albeit conservative, influence. Theologians from conservative seminaries advise the diocese on church growth. The larger question in Singapore is whether there is anything that is not foreign. The laws that provide for private property, detention without trial, and caning are British inheritances. Multinational corporations and freetrade are American influences. All religions and all races, apart from the indigenous Malays, are imports. It follows that a nation of immigrants whose success comes from the utilization of imported ideas and imported capital must necessarily go through bouts of anxiety about its own identity. In this process of self-definition, it must define itself against the “Other,” and the foreign becomes either something to emulate or to castigate. All Christian denominations have been part of the establishment: originally of the colonial classes, later of the English educated professionals. Where there have been losers in the economic game, the churches, in sync with colonial and post-colonial governmental policies, have performed its work of charity. But the structural defects of capitalism— the endless labor restructuring, the monotony of repetitive work, the susceptibility of the weak and ignorant to systemic abuse, etc.— are not even discussed (except to say God controls the monetary system), let alone questioned. A vulnerable and small island state—230 square miles and 3 million people— that also happens to be rich will have the odd mix of spiritual determinism, material drive, and social apathy. The confidence of Singapore and other South East Asian countries in matters of politics, economics, and church is accompanied by its shadow: the fear of subversion, deflation and heresy. This is not peculiar to Asia. The United States has the same phenomenon. The mistake is for any commu- ❑ Send me Open Hands each quarter ($20/year; outside U.S.A. @ $25). ❑ Send Open Hands gift subscription(s) to name(s) attached. Enclosed is my payment of $ _______ OR Charge $ ______________ to my VISA MASTERCARD (Circle one) # ______________________________________________________ Expiration ______/______. Name on Card __________________________________________________________________ Signature ______________________________________________________________________ My Name ______________________________________________________________________ Address _______________________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip ___________________________________________________________________ Daytime Phone (______) _____________________________ Local Church ___________________________________________________________________ Denomination ___________________________________________________________________ Send to: Open Hands, 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 Published by the Reconciling Congregation Program in conjunction with Affirming Congregation Programme, More Light Presbyterians, Open and Affirming Ministries, Open and Affirming Program, Reconciling in Christ, and Welcoming & Affirming Baptist programs. A Unique Resource on Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual Concerns in the Church for Christian Education • Personal Reading Research Projects • Worship Resources Ministry & Outreach nity to completely externalize this into an international “clash of civilization,” or to be cast into a Manichaean struggle of heretics and the orthodox. Walking the Anglican middle path with a measure of consciousness for the complex and symbolic might well provide a welcomed sobriety for all. You-Leng L. Lim was born and raised in Singapore, educated at Princeton University and Harvard Divinity School. Ordained as an Episcopal priest, he shares a home with his performance artist partner Hung Nguyen and cat Toey. Following Virginia Wolfe’s advice that one should have a room of one’s own and 550 sterling pounds a year (adjusted for inflation and exchange rate fluctuations) in order to achieve one’s vocation and voice in the world, he is enrolling in the MBA program at the Harvard Business School next winter. And proving that gay priests can be butch, he spent the summer of 1998 summitting three unclimbed peaks in Alaska. 20 Open Hands The world’s lowborn and despised, those who count for nothing, were chosen by God to reduce to nothing those who were something. In this way no one should boast before God. God has given you life in Christ Jesus— our wisdom, our justice, our sanctification and our redemption” (1 Cor 1:27-30, Inclusive New Testament). On the feast of St. Francis of Assisi (Oct. 4) I found myself reading a short biography of him. It both inspires and troubles me. Giovanni Francesco Bernardone lived in the time of the Crusades in a feudalistic society. The norms of the world were such that might makes right and even the church had taken on such values in conquering lands for God. Francesco himself was a wealthy merchant, an exuberant party-goer and a soldier. Yet it was the rebel-personality in him that proved to be his redemption. In Spoleto, where he fought in the Papal Army, he had a conversion experience which caused him to return to Assisi and sell his father’s cloth and horse to build a local church. His father was enraged, and followed him to a cave where he was hiding and locked his own son in a dungeon for his crime. Francesco was then put to trial before the bishop, at which time he stripped naked in public. Here we have a Francis who dared to challenge the norms of the day. He renounced wealth and security for the value of poverty, power for lowliness, and respectability for derision. Put in our modern context, he would have been accused of the same crimes that we lesbian and gay people are accused of, of being individualistic and refusing to fit into societal norms and even daring to disrupt the majority way of life. And as queer persons, we have the privilege of being in the class to which Francis belonged, the outcasts and the rejects. This was the very status that Jesus belonged to as well. He was born the bastard child of an unwed mother and hounded to his death by the religious institution of his days. The fact that Francis now is deemed a leader, a reformer, a peacemaker, and one of God, and that Jesus is risen and seen as God Godself, we can have the hope that our outcast status is one that will show the face of God, not by being converted into respectability but by being the transforming force of God’s love. Francis’s renunciation was complete. Not only had he renounced wealth, he renounced any expectation of respectability, of favor with society and church. I think there is a lesson there that matters much to us queer people. Can we, like him, give up on whining about how the church and our society not only look down upon us but also participate in our oppression? If the church or our communities have problems with our presence, then it is their problem and they have a long way to go in the process of learning. Our task is to witness to God’s love in communities that do not comprehend such love, and I trust that God will sort the rest out as God did with Francis. Francis was a happy pauper and this was a fascinating sight to the people then, proving a great power towards their conversion. Perhaps with our own renunciation of expectations, we too can be happy with our status and cause people to question and wonder. Francis not only identified with the poor but with all outcasts. We read of how he went out to kiss the lepers, the medical outcasts. By his example, I believe we are compelled to leave our gay ghetto and go out into the wider world of the powerless. This might have extremely frightening implications for a St. Francis in Singapore Tuck-Leong Lee With five other queer protestors, Tuck-Leong Lee unfurled a gay pride flag during the liturgy of St. Andrew’s Cathedral in Singapore (Anglican) and carried it with him to receive the Eucharist. A card attached to the flag read, “God loves all Bisexual, Gay, Lesbian, and Transgendered Persons too!” Ironically, the theme of the worship that day was “the suffering community” and the gospel reading was Matthew 10:16-22, which reads in part: “I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. So you must be as clever as snakes, but as innocent as doves. Be on your guard. People will haul you into court, they will flog you in the synagogues. For my sake you will be dragged before rulers and governors as witnesses…” “ Spring 1999 21 This is a purely personal reflection on the experience of being an Anglican (Episcopalian) priest and of being a homosexual in South Africa. In writing it I should from the outset say that I have only come out of the closet in my thirties. My experience is one for the most part of repressing and denying my sexuality. I will therefore focus most of my account on why I believe this has been the case, and then I will explain some difficulties that currently face me. I grew up in a middle class white family. Attending church, being involved in church activities, and practicing the Christian faith was part and parcel of family life. My mother believed in sex education for her children, but this never included any discussion of homosexuality. So the model I grew up with was that of heterosexual sex being the accepted norm. I attended an all-boys white high school that was a perfect example of white macho political dominance, thinking, and ideology during the apartheid era. We marched around playing at being soldiers, were compelled to attend first team rugby matches, and were given moral preparedness lessons on how to cope with terrorist attacks! In this world there was quite clearly no room for discussions on homosexuality, nor indeed any acceptance of gay people. If one was weak, or different in any sense one was labeled a “fairy” or a “moffie.” The church too was not a great deal of help in that it only discussed issues in terms of the evils of premarital sex, which was assumed to be heterosexual sex. An issue that bothered me during my teens was, why were my peers going out with girls while I was not? This led to a great deal of questioning as to whether I was normal or not. Thinking back on this time I believe that if there had been someone in whom I could have confided, or a broader discussion on sex and sexuality, I would have come to terms with my sexuality much earlier than I have. It was in fact only when I went to university to study theology that there was space for homosexuality to be discussed. This, however, did not make me more sympathetic to homosexuals, at least not in my first year. I remember writing a very moralistic and judgmental letter to a school friend of mine who had gone into the army and had written to me about his being gay. In my second year, however, I developed a deep friendship with one of my colleagues, which now with hindsight I can acknowledge as a love affair, at least from my point of view. I never discussed my feeling with him, nor mentioned my sexual attraction for fear of loosing the friendship. Later when I attended theological college I remember discussing the question of my sexuality with a friend who was a psychology honors student, but of being too frightened of the consequences of being gay to do anything about it. I certainly was not prepared to do anything more. I was not prepared to be vulnerable and reveal the fact that I was gay to anyone at theological college. Somewhere along the road in my theological studies I had worked out No Longer an Alien in the Household of God Growing Up as a Gay Christian in South Africa Douglas John Torr number of us, but it is not a step untrodden. Jesus did it, and so have many who have followed. This is a tough call, certainly for me personally, but perhaps we need to begin by allowing ourselves to be bothered by it. Whatever our discomfort in opening wide our solidarity, I urge us to follow this spirit of Christ and Francis and work toward ministries that reach beyond our own narrow interests. We must answer the plaintive cry to God from a character in Radclyffe Hall’s book The Well of Loneliness: “‘God’ she gasped, ‘we believe; we have not denied You, then rise up and defend us. Acknowledge us, O God, before the whole world. Give us also the right to our existence!’” I believe Jesus and Francis provided the answer to her cry. Do not be afraid, know that God is intimately tied up with you, an outcast. Do not be too attached to the acknowledgment of your existence, God will take care of that. Open up your love to those who are likewise marginalized, and know that you are not alone, and others will see your love and glorify your Father- Mother in heaven. “Those who try to save their lives will lose them, and those who lose their lives will save them” (Luke 17:33, Inclusive New Testament). Tuck-Leong Lee lives in Singapore and helps with the liturgy of Garden City Christian Community (Congregation at St Gregory’s) in the Anglican Diocese of Singapore, a small, welcoming community that includes several gay members. Professionally, he works as an education officer. 22 Open Hands that being gay was not really acceptable to the church, and so I decided that I definitely wasn’t gay! Since coming out I have heard of instances of other candidates being refused ordination because they are homosexual, or being made to promise by their bishops that they will be celibate. It seems that Anglican bishops have forgotten that celibacy belongs to the Catholic rite of ordination. Just recently a colleague of mine was made assistant of a parish of which he may only serve as de facto rector because he is gay, and according to his bishop cannot be the rector. Through my work in the field of HIV/AIDS education and counseling I was forced to confront my sexuality and own it for what it is. This has not been an easy process and has definitely been complicated by my priesthood. Since the Anglican Church has for the most part in South Africa taken a “fence-sitting” position or at times rather condemnatory stand when it comes to homosexuality, it places those of us who are homosexuals in the church in a very difficult position. The bishops are technically committed to dialogue, and condemn homophobia, but are not willing to allow blessings of same sex couples to take place. In South Africa, unlike Lambeth, bishops have not said they will not ordain homosexuals, but again this differs from bishop to bishop. Given this prevailing situation it is no wonder that being a homosexual and a priest can be and is for many a very lonely experience. We do not easily reveal our identities to other church people, never mind one another. We probably fear the consequences of what such a revelation might be. Nevertheless one is constantly confronted by one’s sexuality. Before I came out more publicly I was at a fraternal meeting of ministers during which a colleague from another denomination urged us to take note of how promiscuity and homosexuality were endangering our society. I wanted to say “Yes, just look at how dangerous I am,” but I didn’t. Recently I could not bless a couple who had been together for 16 years owing to my church’s ruling on same sex relationships. One partner was dying of cancer. I referred the blessing to someone from another denomination who can do blessings. As a priest and a gay activist in a country with a constitution that protects the rights of homosexuals I felt quite ashamed of myself, and this has again led me to question my position in the church. What has helped me in coming out to my bishop and my previous congregation, and now more widely through writing an article for a book dealing with gay and lesbian experiences in the church in South Africa, was a powerful experience of God’s love. I was on retreat wrangling with my sexuality while meditating in front of an image of the Christ figure. The image was that of the heart of Jesus, and it seemed to me that the love of Jesus embraced and overwhelmed me—I felt accepted just as I am. It was as if God was saying “go ahead, tell your bishop—it will be all right,” and it has been. My coming out to the congregation was emotionally exhausting, with me doing the explaining, supporting of others, etc. Pastorally there was very little support for me at the time, and it made me reflect on how it has been easier for my own family to accept my sexuality than the “family of God” I feel called to minister to and be a part of. The incredible experience of God’s love has continued to give me courage and hope at times when ministry feels very isolated, and particularly during those times when the church’s inability or unwillingness to deal with human sexuality becomes an enormous burden. As I have become more involved with gay and lesbian people I find that there is a real need for the church to move from rejection, fence-sitting, and indifference to real affirmation of us. It needs to do this not because we are a minority with a different sexual orientation to the heterosexual norm, but because we are people who, throughout the ages, have brought a richness to the church’s life and mission by using our creative talents and ministry. We present the church with both a pastoral challenge and a unique blessing. The question that remains for me is whether the church is open to the challenge of listening to the guidance of the Holy Spirit by not only accepting lesbian/gay/bisexual people, but also affirming their gifts and ministry, or will it simply forego the blessing. This was the question the World Council of Churches began to face in Harare, Zimbabwe, and it is my hope that through dialogue and through the experience of our witness as gay/lesbian/bisexual Christians the church may learn to embrace us and accept the blessings we bring. The alternative is for the church to continue rejecting us and to lose that dimension of spirituality and life we have to offer. We cannot forever remain aliens in the household of God! I hope and pray that the church will choose us and in so doing choose life. Douglas John Torr is an Anglican priest working in the Diocese of Johannesburg in charge of a small parish, St Margaret’s Noordgesig, as well as serving as social responsibility coordinator for the diocese. Involved in justice issues for years, he has focused on issues related to demilitarization. Currently he has been given the responsibility by the National Coalition for Gay and Lesbian Equality of South Africa to create a network among Christian churches to do advocacy and support work around gay and lesbian sexuality. Spring 1999 23 Eleven years ago in Geneva, the Group C+H was created. This may seem a strange and obscure name for a group of gay and lesbian Christians! It’s not so strange if one remembers that the designation for Switzerland is CH, standing for Confederatio Helvetica, the original Latin name of this country, and if one realizes that C+H stands for Chrétiens et Homosexuels (Christian and Homosexual). Some would say that homosexual is not an adequate word. It is probably true that, in English, the word gay is preferred. But many whose native tongue is not English are reluctant to incorporate Anglicisms in our language. This hesitancy works well in the present case: C+H has a little flavor of CH in it and the acronym is inclusive, as homosexual includes lesbians as well as gay men. Eleven years ago, AIDS was devastating the life of many gay men in Switzerland, which had one of the highest rates of HIV/AIDS within Western countries. Maybe it is not a coincidence that Dialogai, the gay association in Geneva, felt the need to have a Christian group among the other services and activities offered to the gay community. Dialogai invited a minister of the Reformed Church of Geneva, created by John Calvin, to speak about “The Bible and Homosexuality.” Openness describes the meeting of this pastor in the midst of these mostly lay folks, some very angry and opposed to the church. Openness! We shall meet it more than once. C+H was born after the visit of this pastor, invited by an open-minded gay association. The first meeting of C+H gathered fewer than 10 people but the group developed rapidly to its present size: a community of about 30 persons (remember that Geneva, although important, is a small city of only 300,000 inhabitants)— gays, lesbians, bisexuals as well as their straight friends and relatives. Openness is the key word here too. The group welcomes all who want to join: Roman Catholics, Old Catholics, Reformed, Lutherans, Orthodox. Some members are Buddhists, some have broken the links with their churches. The guests who are invited to meet and speak to the group come from all these religious origins and even more (Jewish, Muslim, and others). Most are ministers but the group makes a strong point to be in close contact with secular society by inviting journalists, politicians, social activists, etc. The life of the group is centered around faith, friendship and sharing of concerns. Concerns include personal development, struggles with sexual orientation, faith, loneliness, illness, and the homophobia of the church and society. The members of C+H seek to promote inclusiveness in church and society. Not surprisingly, these 11 years have been very rich for the members of C+H. Some examples will illustrate the life of C+H. Beside the monthly meetings, there are celebrations at Christmas and other special days. Also, once a year, a spiritual retreat is organized in a monastery in our region or with another Christian community. These special events nurture the faith of the attendees and reinforce the bonds which link the group together. On the side of activism, the members of C+H wrote a 40-page booklet— unique in French— discussing the issue of homosexuality and Christian faith. Written by more than one individual and widely debated within the group, the construction of this booklet was a fascinating experience. For the first time, the authors were forced to face acutely their beliefs and doubts, to express their deep feelings with clarity, to make themselves coherent in their personal debates. This work was a source of growth, received with gratitude as a gift of God. The first edition (500 copies) of the booklet was sold out in two months! The second edition is also out of stock. The booklet was sent to all the ministers of the Reformed Church of Geneva, to the local authorities of the Roman Catholic Church, to many churches in French-speaking Switzerland, France and Belgium. It triggered a number of interesting contacts. The general tone of the booklet— non aggressive and modest— was usually appreciated by the readers who would have been turned off by the sharp voice of an angry minority. They were surprised and impressed in reading the profession of faith of a group of humble human beings challenged by their particularity. What will be the next concerns of C+H? First, there is the everlasting debate on the integration of gays and lesbians in the ministry of the church. Secondly, there is also debate on the wisdom of creating a welcoming gay and lesbian church instead of working in the traditional churches for more openness. Thirdly, the issue of blessing gay and lesbian couples is on the agenda, boosted by the wide national discussion in nearby France about the PACS (Civil Pact of Solidarity—domestic partnerships). Finally, C+H should not only make its voice heard and speak to the Christian community, but also to the lesbigay community who believe Christians and Christian communities can share very little that is worthwhile or appropriate for their lives. Such reaching out would be to strengthen gays and lesbians in their search for an authentic spirituality. These are subjects in which a group like C+H has to make its voice heard in a clear way. This is not simple, as its members are not all on the same wave length. Consider the benediction of What Will John Calvin Think? Gay and Lesbian Christians in Geneva Alfred A. Manuel 24 Open Hands same sex couples. While everybody agrees that it should be part of the life of the churches, there are large divergencies about the form. Should it be a marriage or have a different form? In Switzerland, the German-speaking region is more in favor of a marriage and some churches have already included this practice in their life. This position is coherent with the culture of Northern Europe, where same sex marriages are already a reality in some countries. French-speaking Switzerland is more oriented toward the Latin tradition, where marriage is thought to be uniquely devoted to heterosexual unions. Same sex couples could possibly be blessed with a different ritual, still to be invented. For Geneva, being at the border of the two cultures, the advice is quite divergent. Let’s hope that openness will operate once more so that gay and lesbian couples will, in the near future, be welcome in the churches, breaking a de-facto discrimination. The issue of gay and lesbian ministers is a major concern of the local lesbigay community. In Geneva, little effort is made to dialogue on this subject with the Roman Catholic church. There are obvious reasons for that. The Reformed Church of Geneva has a position based on openness which makes the dialogue unnecessary. It does not consider the sexual orientation of ministers in discerning effective ministry: The Reformed Church of Geneva does not consider the sexual orientation of ministers in discerning effective ministry: the human and professional qualities of the candidates are what count. But, as this position is neither written in the constitution nor in the regulations, the situation is of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” variety. the human and professional qualities of the candidates are what count. But, as this position is neither written in the constitution nor in the regulations, the situation is of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” variety, not the most healthy and secure policy. C+H must keep an eye open for future developments, working toward a more open era for gay and lesbian Christians, not only in Geneva but with their brothers and sisters worldwide. Alfred Manuel is a physicist at the University of Geneva. Married with four children, he is a volunteer of the Geneva AIDS Support Group and member of the Reformed Church of Geneva. He is one of the founders of C+H, whom he thanks for their comments and advice on this article. On March 26, 1999, the Reverend Gregory Dell, pastor of Broadway United Methodist Church in Chicago, was found guilty in a church trial and suspended from his ministry for violating the law of his church by blessing a homosexual union. “We express our gratitude and admiration for the witness of Greg Dell, and we hope for the day when the ministry he performs will not be the occasion for division within the church.” — Resolution adopted April 14, 1999, by the Board of Directors Protestants for the Common Good Gratitude, admiration and hope for the day . . . Protestants for the Common Good People of faith advancing justice in public life 200 N. Michigan, Suite 502, Chicago, Illinois 60601 • (312) 223-9544 Spring 1999 25 The Lesbian & Gay Christian Movement (LGCM) of the United Kingdom has planned a series of regional meetings for congregations to consider joining a list of “inclusive churches.” (See Movement News, Winter 1999 issue.) The church of which I’m minister, St Columba’s, Cambridge, is hosting the last of these in December for interested congregations in the east of England. The elders of the congregation agreed some time ago to permit the blessing of same-sex unions, provided the minister used the same care and preparation as for a heterosexual wedding. After a long debate they agreed to this unanimously, which impressed me as, in other ways, they’re fairly cautious, even conservative. Since the formation of the United Reformed Church (URC) in 19721 we also have “church meeting” at least four times a year. If I had taken it to a full church meeting, I might have had a slightly different result, but the elders believed that it was the “session” (as we’re not called anymore!) to decide matters of worship. In 1997 the Assembly of the URC set up a number of working groups to consider the matter of human sexuality, especially in relation to the ordination of ministers. The working groups’ reports (and that of the “core group”) are to be presented to the Assembly this year. What concerned the conservatives is that the 1997 Assembly passed a resolution (number 19) affirming that, “during the process of further reflection and discussion…the fact of a homosexual relationship shall not be the ground for rejecting a candidate for ministry during the process of selection, assessment, entry to a college or course of ministerial training.” Candidates for the ministry (“ordinands”) are accepted as such by the national church at the very beginning of their three or four years of theological education; ordinands/ministers receive their “call” from a local congregation or group of congregations, which then needs the concurrence of the district council (presbytery) for it to proceed, and it is the council which conducts the ordination/induction service. The conservatives took resolution number 19 to mean that the URC had adopted a new policy which accepted the ordination of lesbians and gay men. In fact, as the clerk to the General Assembly (who happens to be a member of my congregation!) pointed out, the resolution was simply clarifying what has always been the case—i.e., that, as we have never used a person’s sexual orientation as a means to bar before, we needed to make it clear that during the period of study the status quo would remain in effect. In the two years since, the conservatives have mobilized well (the URC is, in general, a “liberal” church), with threats from a few congregations and ministers to leave. The General Assembly’s “mission council” (not a council of the church but the Assembly’s executive or central committee) is so frightened of disunity and threats to leave that it has come out with a new resolution for this year’s Assembly which reads, “…the URC affirms and welcomes people of homosexual orientation within the life of the church and society, but does not believe that there is a sufficiently clear mind within the church at this time to affirm the acceptability of homosexual practice,” and has invited the national church to accept this as policy. This is an ambiguous statement which pacifies the conservatives and seems to be not as inclusive as resolution 19 of 1997. If passed at this year’s Assembly it will be sent to the other councils of the church—provincial synods, district councils, and local church meetings. If more than a third of any of these pass a resolution stating “the statement be not accepted” then the resolution will not go to the General Assembly 2000 to be voted on as policy. To many, the whole process seems full of holes! LGCM is therefore working to amend or defeat it either with a simple ammendment making clear that the national church is divided (amending “to affirm” to “to affirm or deny”) or with an alternative fully inclusive resolution. 1The URC was formed in 1972 by the union of the Presbyterian Church of England and the Congregational Church in England and Wales. In 1981, the Churches of Christ joined (known as Disciples of Christ in Canada and the USA), and in 1999-2000 the Congregational Union of Scotland joins. The URC, like the Church of Scotland, is a Reformed church. Keith Riglin is minister of St. Columba’s Church, Cambridge, England (URC), and of the Church of Scotland chaplaincy to the University of Cambridge. Debate on Ordination in the United Reformed Church of the UK Keith Riglin 26 MINISTRIES Open Hands Individual Integrity vs. Institutional Injunction Leslie Penrose It is with prayers for its future well-being that I initiate the process of withdrawing from the United Methodist Church. The primary reason for my withdrawal after 18 years of ministry is the increasing focus on complaints and charges regarding my ministry of blessing same-sex covenant relationships. It seems that the options have finally been reduced to either withdrawing or preparing for trial. I simply will not participate in putting God’s grace— or my privilege as a pastor to bless and celebrate any and every relationship where the fruits of the spirit bear witness to that grace—on trial. Nor will I hide or lie about the ministry I do. From the time six years ago when I was sent by the Oklahoma Conference to create a reconciling base community ministry in Tulsa, those who gathered to become the Community of Hope have worked to be honest about who we are and what our ministry is, without insisting that others agree with or embrace our ministry. We have consistently insisted Greg Dell On March 26 the Trial Court of the Northern Illinois Conference found me guilty of “disobedience to the Order and Discipline of the United Methodist Church” because I had celebrated a service of Holy Union for a gay couple in our congregation. The imposed penalty was for me to be suspended from pastoral office. The suspension begins July 5, 1999 and continues until either I sign a statement that I will not do such services or until the restriction prohibiting them is lifted. If we appeal the decision of the trial court and the appeal is successful, that could also result in the suspension being modified or lifted. Since the verdict my wife and I have received hundreds of communications, the overwhelming majority from people who are supportive. They are people in and well beyond our congregation, clergy and lay, gay and straight, old and young, of every color in God’s human rainbow. What they have in common is a deep support for this congregation, me, and the ministry we and others like us represent. In every category they were about equally divided in their passionate advice that I either should or should not sign the statement of agreement. Those who wanted me to do so said that we had already made our point and that there was no use in further injuring my or the congregation’s ministry. Some of them also felt that the issue of Holy Unions was not the issue to “go to the mat” over in the struggle around sexual orientation. On the other side were those who argued that all would be meaningless if we “caved in” to a demand for a loyalty statement. If I signed, the church could once again ignore or cynically minimize the cost its exclusionary pronouncements exact. I finally decided that while I couldn’t ignore what people were saying I had to go to a deeper place to come to an answer. As I said in October at the beginning of all of this, I did not conduct Karl and Keith’s service in ignorance of what its political or practical consequences might be. But those consequences were not what were most important. I did what I did In the aftermath of Jimmy Creech’s trial (See the Leadership column of the Spring 1998 issue.) and 95 United Methodist clergy blessing a lesbian couple in the California Nevada Conference (See Movement News of the Winter 1999 issue.), two other United Methodist clergy have responded in uniquely faithful ways to their denomination’s ban on the blessing of same-gender relationships. In March, Leslie Penrose turned in her credentials to the Oklahoma Annual Conference, and Greg Dell, found guilty of “disobedience” in a church trial, has resisted signing a statement that he will not perform same-gender blessings. Here are their letters written to friends and colleagues. L E A D E R S H I P Photo: Dale Fast Spring 1999 MINISTRIES 27 that ministries of healing and hope, and not gay advocacy, be our focus; while at the same time naming homophobia and inhospitality as antithetical to the Gospel, refusing to be silent in the face of them. We have asked only for tolerance and respect, and have tried to offer the same. However, increasingly, the goodness and dignity of gay and lesbian persons and their loving, committed relationships are so consistently and officially devalued and dishonored within in this conference and by this denomination, that I can no longer maintain my affiliation with integrity. Secondly, I have decided to withdraw because the ministries of justice and compassion, to which God’s church has been called and in which this congregation is engaged, are too urgent and too important for us to faithfully allow any more time or energy to be diverted by denominational arguments about whether or not gay and lesbian persons are part of the body of Christ. Since the day this congregation was called into existence, gay and lesbian persons have been being the body of Christ— offering their gifts and graces, their time and energy, their hearts and hands, in loving service to God and neighbor—while the broader church has debated their acceptability. “Anyone who does the will of God is my brother or sister,” Jesus said (Mark 3:35). That debate was settled long ago. And yet, women, men, and children in Oklahoma, in the U.S., and around the world continue to be robbed of life every day by hunger, homelessness, abuse, addiction, and violence, while the UMC spends more and more of its time and resources fighting over who is allowed to love whom. Internal struggles over control and authority have seduced the broader church into forgetting its call to be the bearers of God’s gospel of hope and love to a hurting world. I am weary of the forgetting and of the fighting, and want my life and our ministry as a community of faith to once again be about remembering Jesus in ways that honor the life he lived among and for us. Leslie Penrose is in the process of transferring her clergy credentials from the United Methodist Church to the United Church of Christ. A graduate of Phillips Theological Seminary, she has served in parish ministry for 18 years. Since 1986 she has facilitated annual trips to Central America for groups seeking reconciling partnerships with communities in Guatemala and Nicaragua. Her two children are grown, and she and her husband are delighted to have an 18-month-old granddaughter, Emily (in the photo with Leslie). guided by what I felt I would or wouldn’t be as a pastor, as a Christian, and as a human being by doing or not doing it. That meant that for that decision and now this one, I needed to pray, think, feel, and try to listen to my heart, which, biblically, is where God always speaks. I decided I could not sign the statement. On April 14 we had a church council/congregational meeting attended by over 60 persons. At that meeting the staffparish relations committee presented a proposal to respond to the situation of suspension. After considerable, spirited discussion a proposal was adopted unanimously by the church council. There was a lot of pain, even more excitement, and a few disagreements, but I didn’t sense a contentious or hostile moment in anything that took place. [The result was a decision to hire] me as director of “In All Things Charity.” I.A.T.C. is a national movement begun in 1997 to protest the denomination’s negative policies on sexual orientation. Its work is directed toward influencing the United Methodist General Conference in May of 2000, and is currently in coalition with the three other national groups in our denomination which are working on this issue. In 1998 Broadway Two Responses to a Ban on Same-Gender Blessings adopted the movement as one of its ministries and it is funded under Broadway’s tax exempt status. On Sunday, April 11, we began a new membership exploration series. Normally the spring offering of this opportunity has the smallest enrollment— usually four to 10 persons. On that day— a few weeks after the verdict and only three months from the beginning of the suspension— 27 persons came together to consider being part of this church! They did that, I believe, because they see this church as “on the way.” I agree with them. We have only just begun. Greg Dell has served as a United Methodist pastor for 29 years and has been married for 31 years. He will now serve as director of In All Things Charity, a gay-affirming program supported by Chicago’s Broadway United Methodist Church, and will serve as a consultant to Broadway’s interim pastor. On April 14, the church council and congregation adopted a statement of support for their pastor and their “celebration of their diversity” that reads in part, “the ministry of Greg Dell has been a blessing to all in our congregation and community.” 28 MINISTRIES Open Hands For the Least of These The Current Class Divide and the Obligations of Christian L/G/B/Ts Amanda Udis-Kessler Class divide? What class divide? Don’t the major newspapers say that our country’s economic situation is the best in years? Aren’t we mostly doing well individually? Given that we have to deal with homophobic violence, rejection in many churches, and conservatives stifling legalized same-sex marriage, can’t we at least breathe a sigh of relief that things are going well on the societal financial front? Unfortunately, we can’t. Economic inequality (in wages, income and wealth) has been increasing since the early 1970s, and its effects are causing profound damage to the physical, mental and spiritual well-being of those on the bottom. Downsizing, wage and benefit cuts, and the closing of factories are examples of business reneging on the social contract that sustained working-class America from the 1950s into the 1970s. In the 1980s, “bottom line” mentality won out over generosity of spirit, and Wall Street made a religion of greed. Corporations are becoming less accountable, more powerful locally, and more global in their reach, and are increasingly able to have an impact even on those government entities that ought to favor the well-being of the poor over worship of the market. Accordingly, the notion of public responsibility is losing its credibility as previously public (governmental) functions are privatized. Our municipal, state and federal governments are literally withdrawing from taking care of “their” publics. Among the many results of these shifts, one out of every four American children lives in poverty. Communities that relied on manufacturing jobs to move from poor to working- and lower-middle class are finding themselves in trouble as the jobs are automated, or simply moved overseas. The poorest are barely surviving physically, let alone spiritually.1 How can those of us who are flourishing materially be unaware of such troubling social patterns? One important answer is the increasing physical divide between the rich (and sufficiently well-off) and the poor (and almost-poor). The most successful persons flee to suburbia or buy safety in gated communities, withdrawing their money from towns and cities desperately in need. In the meantime, the quality of life, and the range of life chances, shrink in areas where there are not enough resources to provide sufficient safety nets, let alone opportunities to flourish. It is impossible to love our neighbors if they are invisible, which the spatial separation between rich and poor more or less guarantees. At the same time, both the well-off and the poor are spiritually devastated by the physical and moral barricading.2 If we are to follow Jesus’ command to love our neighbors, we must take this situation seriously and develop a compassionate gospel response, as difficult as that may be. It’s worth remembering that Jesus was a peasant, and that his teaching and healing mostly took place among other peasants, whom he called blessed. His commands to turn the other cheek, offer one’s coat as well as one’s shirt, and “go the extra mile” (Matt 5:38-41) were not about being kindly; they were survival instructions to a humiliated, financially strapped, occupied people. His valuation of the socially devalued, including his open table fellowship, challenged the socioeconomic inequality of his day; his parable of the sheep and the goats reminds us that we serve the Rabbi now by serving those in need today. Who are today’s “peasants”? Inner-city youth? Those people in rural areas cruelly insulted as “trailer trash”? Who else might need our economic neighborliness? We are called to take care of them—structurally, as well as personally.3 What does this have to do with lesbian/gay/bisexual/ transgender people? Even if we are doing well economically, we share a certain kinship with the poor of Jesus’ time and of our own: our limited life chances in a heterosexist society, which have to do with our status devaluation as sexual minorities. We would be able to marry legally, be ordained, and live free of the fear (or experience) of attack, were we were not a socially devalued group. We would not risk the loss of jobs, housing, or family approval. Everyone on the underside of the great economic divide faces their own kinds of diminished opportunities4; perhaps even those of us who are not financially struggling can see from our own experiences how diminished life chances for anyone damage the spirits of everyone. What, then, are we to do concretely? God’s House is built, not just with our prayer and personal kindness, but with our money, votes, activist energy and will to confront what theologian Walter Wink calls “the Powers that be.” We are called to educate ourselves and others; to buy, invest and vote in socially just ways where possible; to call our politicians and our corporations to accountability; to organize5; and to use our economic privilege on behalf of those without. We have a place in healing the class divide, and a commandment—or two Great Commandments—to get to work. Amanda Udis-Kessler is a writer, sociologist and musician in greater Boston. Notes 1See Charlie Derber, Corporation Nation (New York: St. Martin’s, 1998); James Galbraith, Created Unequal (New York: Free Press, 1998); Jonathan Kozol, Amazing Grace (New York: HarperCollins, 1995); Holly Sklar, Chaos or Community? (Boston: South End Press, 1995). 2See Edward Blakely and Mary Snyder, Fortress America (Washington, DC: Brookings Institute, 1997); Mike Davis, City of Quartz (New York: Vintage, 1990); Michael Sorkin, ed., Variations on a Theme Park (New York: Noonday Press, 1992). 3Marcus Borg, Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time (New York: HarperCollins, 1995); John Dominic Crossan, Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography (New York: HarperCollins, 1995); Walter Wink, The Powers That Be (New York: Doubleday, 1998). 4As do women and people of color more generally. I don’t mean to ignore the various overlapping and interwoven kinds of inequality, nor to suggest that all l/g/b/t people are well-off. 5United for a Fair Economy, my suggested starting point, can be reached at 617-423-2148, stw@stw.org (email), or www.stw.org (web site). CONNECTIONS Spring 1999 29 “Lord, if you were here…” we cry, helpless, forgetting “Greater works than these….” Christian Haikus Philip W. Gilman Sustaining the Spirit Philip Gilman is a retired land surveyor, long-time student of the Bible, an elder and deacon of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), and the “token gay” for Monmouth Presbytery (NJ) since 1973. Skills of rhetoric, clever arguments, do not proclaim the gospel. Salt and light can be used to fester wounds and blind, or to cure and guide. “Behold, I’m making a new heaven and new earth.” “No need, Lord. I’m saved.” “Who will go for us?” God pleads. We decline: “I’m on my way to worship.” On the first day of creation, God said: “Light, be!” Then Jesus: “Be light.” If Christ died just once, why must I be baptized twice: Red Sea and Jordan? “I am who I am,” God said. “By God’s grace,” said Paul, “I am what I am.” Christian, why do you struggle for supremacy and control, not love? 30 Open Hands [For news on the trial of UMC minister Greg Dell, see Leadership column, p 26.] National L/G/B/T Religious Leaders Roundtable Forming; International Ecumenical Coalition Proposed Over 70 representatives of l/g/b/t-affirming religious organizations met in Washington, D.C. in late January to plan for the future of a new interfaith coalition. The Public Policy Institute of the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force and Equal Partners in Faith convened the Religious Roundtable in July, 1998. Its purpose is to develop stronger relationships among leaders of groups addressing our concerns in religious contexts and to provide a stronger religious voice in the public forum advocating for justice. During the recent meeting, a steering committee was designated to refine the group’s mission statement and to develop a plan for the operations and staffing of the Roundtable. The next meeting in Colorado Springs in August will include a public education event. Independently, a call for an Ecumenical Coalition for International Human Rights in regards to Sexual Orientation has emerged from discussions among churches sponsored by The United Church of Canada at the 8th Assembly of the World Council of Churches in Harare, Zimbabwe, in December, 1998. The Coalition would be an informal grouping of denominations and religious organizations which support protections for g/l/b/t people within the framework of international human standards and agreements. The group would facilitate communication between churches and governments, as well as advocacy on issues related to our concerns, including much needed study by the UN Human Rights Commission of our need for human rights. The proposal is being circulated for responses, and may be obtained in full from The United Church of Canada, ATTN. Dr. David G. Hallman, 3250 Bloor St. W., Toronto, Canada M8X2Y4; Fax 416/232-6005; Phone 416/231-5931; 24hr voicemail 416/231-7680 x 5051; e-mail: dhallman@web.net Open Hands Begins Process of Independence Open Hands, founded and funded initially by the Reconciling Congregation Program, has entered a new phase of its growth and development. Though the RCP currently underwrites one-third of publication expenses, six ecumenical partners have begun in recent years serving on the Advisory Committee and contributing to the quarterly’s financial support. At its fall meeting, publisher Mark Bowman initiated talks on increasing independence of the publication from the RCP. The RCP also discussed this possibility at its fall meeting. During a special meeting of the Open Hands Advisory Committee in Chicago April 9-10, a tentative initial phase was developed for Movement News comment from the leadership of the sponsoring welcoming programs. This is intended to be a slow and careful process that may take years to realize, intended to improve Open Hands’ editorial content, marketing, and business administration, while freeing up some RCP resources to address other needs. Presbyterian Official Tries to Block Award to Janie Spahr The Rev. Jane Adams Spahr, known affectionately as a “lesbian evangelist” in her role as executive director of That All May Freely Serve, a l/g/b/t-affirming ministry of a More Light congregation (Downtown Presbyterian Church of Rochester, N.Y.), has been named one of three recipients of the prestigious Presbyterian Women of Faith awards for 1999. But not without difficulty. A committee representing five official Presbyterian women’s groups selected Spahr, along with Elder Jane Dempsey Douglas, a retired professor at Princeton Theological Seminary (who has voiced support for gay rights in the church) and Elder Letty Russell, a professor at Yale Divinity School, liberation theologian, and feminist, who recently came out as a lesbian and resigned from her presbytery as a minister, declaring herself “in, but not of, the Presbyterian Church.” But the Rev. Curtis A Kearns Jr., head of the National Ministries Division (NMD), parent to the Women’s Ministries Program Area, the umbrella group sponsoring the award, directed the NMD steering committee to “review” the award because, he said, “To recognize her would appear to endorse the position for which she’s been advocating”—i.e., the full acceptance of l/g/b/t Presbyterians. That committee also rejected the honor for Spahr. Significantly, Spahr received word that the award had been denied her on Good Friday, April 2, well before the NMD steering committee had been consulted, according to the Presbyterian News Service. Typical of her pastoral and prophetic style, she then initiated a meeting with Kearns to discuss the attitudes that prompted his opposition. In an apparent rebuke to Kearns and the NMD steering committee, however, the executive committee of the General Assembly Council voted 9-2 on April 26 to reverse their decision. The award will be presented to the Rev. Spahr during the women’s breakfast at the annual Presbyterian General Assembly, meeting this June in Fort Worth, Texas. UCC Outreach to LGBTQ Youth The UCC Coalition for LGBT Concerns has begun a new listing called “ONA-Spirited Youth.” Its intention is to recognize and celebrate the “ONA Spirit” of many of the youth and young adults in the United Church of Christ. Groups of youth and young adults may submit any event, action, or activity which raises awareness or extends a welcome to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning (LGBTQ) young people. Through this listing in publications and on the Web, it hopes to spread the word in the UCC, the wider church and society of the inclusive thoughts and actions of the denomination’s young people. For information contact: Tim Brown, Youth & Young Adult Program, The Coalition, P.O. Box 428, Greeley, CO 80631 or e-mail: gayyouth@ecunet.org Spring 1999 31 Welcoming Communities RECONCILING IN CHRIST Holy Spirit Lutheran Church Kirkland, Washington Sometimes success comes out of an apparent setback. The idea of welcoming gay and lesbian people was introduced to this 1,000 member suburban Seattle congregation at their synod assembly. Although a Reconciling in Christ resolution introduced at the synod assembly did not pass, it gave visibility to the program and planted the seed of an idea. Members of Holy Spirit took the idea back to the congregation for study. The pastor was concerned that it would cause too much controversy. The lay people, however, were enthusiastic and moved forward. The pastor wanted to move slowly but the church council said, no, we’re ready now. They took a congregational vote which was overwhelmingly positive. Only one family left as a result of the vote. The pastor now leads a fourweek series of discussions on welcoming people of all sexual orientations, intended to help members better understand the significance of their affirmation of welcome. Urban Servant Corps Denver, Colorado This local service organization is composed of 10 young people who live in Christian community for a year at a time. They are placed in social justice agencies in Denver and are paid a small stipend for their volunteer work. The Urban Servant Corps was started by a Lutheran pastor and has a board of directors from local Lutheran congregations. After attending a workshop on the Reconciling in Christ program sponsored by the Rocky Mountain Synod (ELCA) last fall, members of this group took the idea back to consider how it would apply to them. The community discussed the meaning of adopting an affirmation at their weekly Monday night community time, and, after a few months, presented a proposed statement to the board of directors. The board approved the affirmation to welcome g/l/b/t people to their community. In addition, the board agreed to place a future volunteer with the local chapter of PFLAG and Equality Colorado, a local faith-based justice organization which focuses on gay rights issues. RECONCILING CONGREGATIONS John Street United Methodist Church Camden, Maine John Street UMC was formed 10 years ago by the merger of two United Methodist churches. The merged congregation built an attractive, new church facility. Since it is located in a resort area of Maine, many of John Street’s 230 members do not live there the whole year round. A strong music program attracts many persons to John Street. The congregation supports a food pantry and other local missions. UPCOMING GATHERINGS June 18-20 First Welcoming Lutheran Conference: “Tough Faith for Tough Times: Equipping Our Communities for Justice, Peace, and Reconciliation.” Campus of Augsburg College, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Keynoter: Dr. Walter Wink, professor of Theology at Auburn Theological Seminary, author of the widely-read booklet, Homosexuality and the Bible. Jointly sponsored by Lutherans Concerned/North America, Lutheran Human Relations Association, and the Lutheran Peace Fellowship. Other speakers include Rev. Gladys Moor, Assistant to the Bishop, New Jersey Synod, ELCA; and Barb Rossing, professor of New Testament, Lutheran School of Theology in Chicago. October 8-12 GLAD Alliance 20th Anniversary Gathering in conjunction with the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) 150th General Assembly in Cincinnati. Worship, celebration, socializing, eating, and fun. Hospitality suite at the Regal Hotel for information. For G.A. registration and housing, contact G.A. online at www.disciples.org/ga99/ index.htm POSITIONS AVAILABLE Marketing Manager for Open Hands magazine. This parttime contract position works with the Open Hands Advisory Committee to develop strategies and activities to promote subscriptions to the magazine and to oversee implementation of this work. $500 per month (25-30 hours) plus expenses; provide own office space and equipment; begin in September 1999. Worship Resource Coordinator to publish ecumenical welcoming worship resource book. This part-time, temporary contract position works with the leaders of eight welcoming church programs to solicit, compile and edit worship resources from welcoming churches and to oversee design and publication of this new resource. $7,500 plus expenses; provide own office space and equipment. Publication by late spring 2000. To apply for either position, send letter of interest and resume to RCP office; fax: 773/736-5475; e-mail: mark@rcp.org. MARK YOUR CALENDARS NOW! Witness our Welcome 2000: God’s Promise is for You Mass Ecumenical Gathering of Welcoming Congregations Northern Illinois University in DeKalb, Illinois August 3-6, 2000 DON’T MISS THIS HISTORIC EVENT! Sponsored by: • Affirming Congregations (United Church of Canada) • Association of Welcoming & Affirming Baptists • More Light Presbyterians • Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ) • Open and Affirming Program (UCC) • Reconciling Congregations (United Methodist) • Reconciling in Christ Churches (Lutheran) • Supportive Congregations (Brethren/Mennonite) 32 Open Hands St. John’s United Methodist Church Lubbock, Texas A university church located across the street from the campus of Texas Tech University, St. John’s is noted for its excellence in worship and music and has a long history of being a leader in the city and annual conference on social justice concerns. This racially diverse congregation of 575 members is largely comprised of persons working in educational, medical and legal fields. St. John’s provides food vouchers for poor persons. It sponsors a pro bono legal clinic and a chapter of Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG). St. John’s motto is “Open Hearts, Open Arms, and Open Minds.” St. Paul’s United Methodist Church Ithaca, New York St. Paul’s is a historic church which has been in its present location since the early 20th century. The trademark of this congregation of 750 persons is that it is a community with an “open and welcoming heart.” Ithaca is a university town, so a large number of students are included in this intergenerational congregation. Congregational life seeks to integrate spiritual development with being in mission. Educational programs explore spiritual gifts and the Bible. A Volunteers in Mission group will travel to Lithuania this summer. A strong Reconciling Ministries group has held numerous educational events in the community and is planning a g/l/b art show this fall. St. Stephen United Methodist Church Mesquite, Texas St. Stephen UMC was formed in the 1950s in an area of new suburban development. Its unusual building, modeled on the catacombs, was dedicated in 1962. The congregation was active in the civil rights and antiwar movements of the 1960s and 70s. Its current membership of 325 persons includes working and middle class families with some racial diversity. St. Stephen currently engages in three primary ministry areas: music, youth, and anti-hunger. Youth will go on a mission trip with Habitat for Humanity this summer. Members volunteer in different feeding programs in the Dallas area and participate in the CROP Walk. The congregation is currently exploring options for ministry as a Reconciling Congregation. Uncasville United Methodist Church Uncasville, Connecticut Uncasville UMC was formed 21 years ago as a live-in church community or house church in southeastern Connecticut, near New London. The concept of the community was to pool time and resources in order make a significant impact in one area of mission. Currently sixteen adults and children live in seven apartments in three buildings. Other persons who do not live in the Uncasville community participate in the mission. The mission focus for the past fourteen years has been Nicaragua. Uncasville is in covenant with a Nicaraguan church body working together to help villages become self-supporting. Uncasville supports one community worker who lives in Nicaragua and regularly sends volunteer workers. Uncasville also supports a community transformation project in rural Maine. OPEN AND AFFIRMING PROGRAM Tolt Congregational Church, United Church of Christ Carnation, WA The 105 members of this rural-becoming-suburban church have as their motto: “Journeying in faith—Growing in the Spirit.” Desiring to nurture adults and youth in their connection to God, they have developed active Christian education and children’s ministry programs. Desiring to strengthen their relationships with each other, the congregation is exploring consensus decision-making and related listening and problem- solving skills. With its ONA commitment stated in bulletins, publications, and on the church sign, it continues to proclaim this part of its identity. United Church of Hayward Hayward, CA Located across the east bay from San Francisco, this congregation which “grew up with the neighborhood” from the 1950s is celebrating its 40th anniversary! Its 100 adult members are largely older persons who, over the years, have come to know church youth and some of their own grandchildren who are gay or lesbian. So when it came to ONA, they wanted to be clear that the church is a place for “all God’s children”! It shares this message (along with other area churches) in regular street demonstrations—standing at the busiest intersection during the afternoon commute with signs reading “No room for racism,” “No room for homophobia” etc. (They get a lot of “thumbs up”!) The congregation is now attracting some new younger members who like its spirit of inclusiveness and its great choir. Fauntleroy Church, United Church of Christ Seattle WA In an older suburb of Seattle, this is a growing church of some 500 members. With more than 120 children in Sunday School, they are eagerly seeking a new Director of Christian Education. Members represent a wide spectrum of opinions on political and social issues. Thus, theirs is a Christian community where people can learn to care for one another even as they disagree. Although members have differing opinions on the issue of “same-gender marriage,” the church recently declined to sign a “marriage agreement,” which a number of other area churches supported, because of its implied bias against same gender commitments. MORE LIGHT PRESBYTERIANS First Presbyterian Church of Cottage Grove Cottage Grove, Oregon The decision to become a More Light Church is an expression of the Cottage Grove Church’s years of involvement with issues of social justice and human rights. The congregation of approximately 150 members was active in the Sanctuary Movement and has a continuing involvement with the struggle for affordable housing. Its pastor, the Rev. Ben Dake, describes the church as the liberal option in its rural 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 Open Hands Vol 14 No 4 - Welcoming The World https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/d04b4ede8cc8ce273852239f382b5b4c.pdf 3dcb6767034f665a7ec22b969f8019cf Issue An issue of a recurring publication. Volume Number The volume number of the issue 15 Issue Number The number of the issue (within a volume) 1 Publication Year The year the issue was published 1999 Publication Date The date the issue was published Summer Text Any textual data included in the document 2 Open Hands Vol. 15 No. 1 Summer 1999 Resources for Ministries Affirming the Diversity of Human Sexuality Open Hands is a resource for congregations and individuals seeking to be in ministry with lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons. Each issue focuses on a specific area of concern within the church. Open Hands is published quarterly by the Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (United Methodist) in cooperation with the Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada), the Association of Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (American), More Light Presbyterians, Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ), Open and Affirming Program (United Church of Christ), and the Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran). Each of these programs is a national network of local churches that publicly affirm their ministry with the whole family of God and welcome lesbian and gay persons and their families into their community of faith. These seven programs—along with Supportive Congregations (Brethren/ Mennonite), and Welcoming Congregations (Unitarian Universalist)—offer hope that the church can be a reconciled community. Open Hands is published quarterly. Subscription is $20 for four issues ($25 outside the U.S.). Single copies and back issues are $6. Quantities of 10 or more, $4 each. Subscriptions, requests for advertising rates, and other business correspondence should be sent to: Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773 / 736-5526 Fax: 773 / 736-5475 Member, The Associated Church Press © 1999 Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. Open Hands is a registered trademark. ISSN 0888-8833 Printed on recycled paper. Publisher Mark Bowman Editor Chris Glaser Designer In Print—Jan Graves CREATIVE CHAOS Creative Chaos 4 How God Did it and Does it CHRIS GLASER God mudwrestles with chaos—material, moral, and ecclesiastical. Chaos, Uncertainty, Relativism 7 How Do They Speak to People of Faith? D.S. CARLSTONE From the Clockwork Universe to Chaos Theory, science influences our theology. When Love Stirs the Swamp of Our Psyches 10 Restructuring Spiritual Understandings DANIEL A. HELMINIAK Spiritual fecundity in personal chaos. Hannah’s “Disorder” 11 Her Faithful Response to Chaos ALLEN HARRIS “God’s fierce whimsy” seen in Hannah’s and LGBT experience. Gracious Chaos in the Early Church 13 God’s Radical Grace JUDITH HOCH WRAY Early Christianity’s challenges to rethink the family of faith. Turning the Church Rightside Up to Bless Same-Gender Love 14 ALICE G. KNOTTS AND JOANNE CARLSON BROWN God said, “Do not call unclean anything that I have made.” Turning the World Upside Down 16 A Gay Jewish Perspective JEFF MOSES Order in chaos, even if not readily apparent. Homoerotic Mysticism 17 Finding God in Unexpected Places MICHAEL POZAR Chaos to some is mystery to the mystics. Disorderly Conduct: Doing a New Thing 20 Reflections on Ordination LISA ANN PIERCE Seeking the transformation of the church rather than a place at the head of the table. Summer 1999 3 Program Coordinators Mark Bowman Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (UMC) 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 773/736-5526 www.rcp.org Ron Coughlin Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada) P.O. Box 333, Station Q Toronto, Ontario CANADA M4T 2M5 416/466-1489 acpucc@aol.com Ann B. Day Open and Affirming Program (UCC) P.O. Box 403 Holden, MA 01520 508/856-9316 www.coalition.simplenet.com Bob Gibeling Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran) 2466 Sharondale Drive Atlanta, GA 30305 404/266-9615 www.lcna.org Dick Lundy More Light Presbyterians (PCUSA) 5525 Timber Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 612/470-0093 http://www.mlcn.org Brenda J. Moulton Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (ABC/USA) P.O. Box 2596 Attleboro Falls, MA 02763 508/226-1945 http://users.aol.com/ wabaptists Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ) P.O. Box 44400 Indianapolis, IN 46244 http://pilot.msu.edu/user/ laceyj/ Editorial Advisory Committee Vaughn Beckman, O&A Howard Bess, W&A Ann Marie Coleman, ONA Bobbi Hargleroad, MLCN Tom Harshman, O&A Dick Hasbany, MLCN Alyson Huntly, ACP Bonnie Kelly, ACP Susan Laurie, RCP Samuel E. Loliger, ONA Tim Phillips, W&A Lisa Ann Pierce, SCN Caroline Presnell, RCP Paul Santillán, RCP Julie Sevig, RIC Kelly Sprinkle, W&A Margarita Suaréz, ONA Judith Hoch Wray, O&A Stuart Wright, RIC Next Issue: Holy/Wholly Movement News ............................................ 30 Welcoming Communities ............................... 31 Call for articles for Open Hands Spring 2000 FOR ALL THE SAINTS Stories of the Welcoming Movement Theme Section: Lest we forget the foundations on which we build, a look back at individuals, organizations, themes, and issues that have emerged in our movement to welcome LGBT people into the church, on the occasion of the 15th anniversary of the magazine. Ideas, personalities, anecdotes, and photos are welcome along with articles. Ministries Section: We continue to expand the themes of these columns, which now may include: Welcoming Process, Connections (with other justice issues), Worship, Spirituality, Outreach, Leadership, Health, Youth, Campus, Children, and Parents. These brief articles may or may not have to do with the theme of the issue. Contact with idea by January 1, 2000 Manuscript deadline: March 1, 2000 Chris Glaser, Phone/Fax 404/622-4222 or e-mail at ChrsGlaser@aol.com 991 Berne St. SE, Atlanta, GA 30316-1859 Troubling the Waters of Gender Expectations 22 Religious and Queer Vocations LUDGER H. VIEFHUES, S.J. How celibates, virgins, and queers threaten a reality ordered by gender. MINISTRIES WELCOMING PROCESS God Is Up to Something, Even in Congregational Conflict 25 Listening Leaders Bear Fruit PAT TAYLOR ELLISON PARENTS How Can We Reach More Parents? 26 PAUL BEEMAN SPIRITUALITY Profound Holiness at the Heart of Gay Love 27 Meeting AIDS Honestly and Lovingly DANIEL A. HELMINIAK SUSTAINING THE SPIRIT A Litany for Worship 28 RON COUGHLIN 4 Open Hands Creative Chaos In recent years, more than once during my morning prayers on our backyard deck overlooking a kudzu-covered ravine dotted with hundred-year-old oaks, I marveled at how wonderful the life God had given me was. Everything was going so well, I could hardly believe my good fortune. I thanked God with great joy, and told God it just didn’t seem like I deserved to be so happy. Then chaos struck. I grieved the loss of my spiritual mentor, Henri Nouwen. I grieved the loss of my denomination to those who would codify their inhospitality (the true sin of Sodom according to one Rabbinic midrash). Earlier this year, I grieved the death of my mother, my chief fan, best friend, and earthly and spiritual anchor. Then I was astonished and devastated by the loss of my lover, who announced his desire for separation. Now I cried to God, how could it get worse? What is this all about? It seems only yesterday I had it all together. I’ve always been an existentialist, but now, more than ever, I take life one thing at a time, to paraphrase the 12- step slogan. “One day at a time” seems like more than I can handle. And I realize that whatever comes from this chaos, nothing will remain the same. My re-reading of Henri’s work continues to bear fruitful change in my life, from his In Memoriam, about his own mother’s death, to The Inner Voice of Love, about his own disappointed love. If my church and I ever reconcile, both of us will need to change a great deal. My mother’s death has deepened my relationships with my sister and brother and other family members, bringing us closer than we have been since we all shared a home. And if my partner and I are to live together once more, both of us will need to change and the relationship transformed—or we will have to go our separate paths, forever changed by our encounter as well as our farewell. Our next relationships at least have an opportunity to avoid the same mistakes. Chaos, to whatever degree, leads to change.You’re not going to believe this, but at the end of the last paragraph I was interrupted by a phone survey. One of the self-descriptions to which I was asked to respond on a scale of one to five, one being, “No, I don’t see myself that way” and five being, “I view myself that way” was: “I like change.” I answered “four,” but I wonder how honest that was. I am so habit-oriented that my friends in California were astonished when I agreed to move to Atlanta six years ago. I like change “out there,” perhaps— I’m politically progressive. But “in here,” close to me, I should have answered a “two.” Not all change is creative. Creativity is the artful response to chaos. Chaos, Creativity, and the Word of God A ny of us who vacation in natural surroundings this summer, whether the shore or the mountains or a national park, will return with the conscious or unconscious confirmation that God made an artful response to chaos, when the divine Spirit blew over its shadowy substance and called the Chris Glaser Chaos and Creativity A nyone who’s seen my desk when I’m putting together an issue of Open Hands has witnessed creative chaos. I’d be embarrassed if the magazine’s methodical designer, Jan Graves, or its former meticulously- organized editor, Mary Jo Osterman, ever saw the disarray from which emerge the computer files I e-mail to Jan for design. “Phoenix resurgens,” could be not only the motto of the city in which I live, much of which was burned by General Sherman in that “war of northern aggression,” but the mess from which arises yet another issue of Open Hands. Hey, lest any of you dare throw the first stone, I’ve seen many pastors’, professors’, and students’ and home and business offices that make my office look like Spic N’ Span. My thought process is not dissimilar. I have a mess of ideas and facts rolling around in my head and a myriad of feelings coming from my heart from which I choose bits and pieces when sitting down to write or organize anything. Sometimes my working with words feels like mudwrestling: I slip and slide and try to grab hold of that evasive word or thought or metaphor or analogy or analysis or broader outline. I’m not a person who outlines—I sit down and write, and the outline reveals itself and then I whack those things that stick out into line. I understand the notion of “automatic” writing, even of those self-proclaimed channelers who give voice to ancient spirits. Except I’m giving voice to something in me “that loves a wall,” that loves order brought from chaos. There was a New Yorker cartoon with an elderly couple seated in highback chairs in front of a fireplace, presumably a husband and wife at home. One says to the other, “It seems like only yesterday I was on the verge of getting it all together.” How God Did It and Does It Summer 1999 5 cosmos and creatures into being. Obviously, creation and creature come from the same root as creativity; so the cosmos and we ourselves are creative responses to chaos. As a writer, I have great affinity for a God who called things out of chaos by speaking a word, such as “Let there be light…and there was light.” The Bible is testimony to the faith that creation was not God’s last word. Moral chaos was swept away by a chaotic flood, while creatures were saved in an orderly fashion two by two on an ark designed by God. The chaos of injustice in Egypt was relieved by the Hebrews’ liberation, and the potential for social disorder in the wilderness and the yet-to-be-achieved promised land was diminished by the covenant on Mount Sinai, in which God called forth communal harmony and individual integrity through the Law given to Moses. The judges adjudicated chaotic differences among the people, the priests facilitated atonement (overcoming chaotic division) between Yahweh and the community, and the prophets proclaimed a new order in the face of the institutionalized chaos of injustice even in our “best-laid plans” and social orders. Then God spoke the last Word for Christians, the Word (logos=action) made flesh among us, full of grace and truth: Jesus. This to deliver us from ultimate chaos: sin and death, separation from God in this life and the next. That Word echoed in the whisper of the breath of Jesus on his disciples after the Resurrection in John and the mighty wind of the Spirit at Pentecost in Acts, to call out a new community of faith (ecclesia: the called out ones), a new order to proclaim the gospel of God’s commonwealth in word and deed. Jesus, the Holy Spirit, and the church was and still serves as God’s artful response to the mess we were making of God’s creation, even the sacrificial mess of religion, with its insider/outsider, pure/impure mentality. into something beautiful, meaningful, or useful. In Romans, where Paul’s discussion of things working together for good takes place (chapter 8), the apostle earlier (5:3-5) proclaims “suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not disappoint us, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts…” Even the world’s chaos is viewed as giving birth to a new thing as “the whole creation has been groaning in labor pains until now…” (8:22). What’s born are the children of God, the dawning realization of our “adoption” as God’s beloved, like Christ and through Christ, as “the first fruits of the Spirit.” Remember in Acts 1 the first fruits of this Spirit lead to the apparent chaos of Pentecost, the babbling in tongues from which strangers nonetheless heard the Gospel in their own languages— and then to Acts 17 where “those who have turned the world upside down have come here also.” The marginalized and disempowered and disfranchised and excommunicated suddenly were “blessed” with a Gospel message that they were beloved children of God, joint heirs with Christ, and citizens of the commonwealth of God because the commonwealth of God was already in their midst, albeit with more to come. Women, lepers, fishermen, eunuchs, tax collectors, prostitutes, the poor could all take their place at the right and left sides of Jesus at a common table that took no regard of class, condition, or various forms of condemnation. Chaos, Creativity, and Biblical Spirituality T homas Moore, the author of the bestselling Care of the Soul, contrasts spirituality and soulfulness. Spirituality for most people means rising above one’s personal chaos, gaining perspective to see that ultimately “all things work together for good,” recognizing, as the once popular song goes, that “from a distance” (where “God is watching us”!) everything is okay—a revisiting of the cliché that our experience of the world is like seeing the backside of a beautiful tapestry that God can see from the front. For Moore, soulfulness is to be preferred over spirituality. Instead of rising above one’s personal chaos, one embraces life’s challenges and opportunities, allowing one’s chaos to transform the soul into a healthier, stronger, and wiser entity. Thus, the contrast between (supposed) spirituality and soulfulness is like that between hanggliding and mudwrestling (my metaphors, not Moore’s). I agree with Moore’s concept of spirituality insofar as it is descriptive of what many people in our culture think about spirituality. But I believe the spirituality of the Bible is more akin to mudwrestling than hanggliding. From a Hebrew God who wrestles mud into the first human form to a Christian God who wrestles into human flesh, the paradigm for the divine-human encounter is “hands on” not “flighty,” “down home” not “above it all.” “All things work together for good” for those “who are called, according to God’s purpose” because what matters is “not what goes into a person,” i.e. not what happens to a person, but “what comes out of a person’s heart,” i.e. how personal chaos is transformed within a person’s heart (See Matthew 15:1-20). For those who are called out according to God’s purpose, all things work together for good, because “nothing can separate” them from the love of God; indeed, everything can connect them to the love of God— every bit of personal chaos may be an opportunity for us to become co-creators with God, getting down-and-dirty shaping chaos 6 Open Hands God turned chaos upside down and created a world. Jesus turned the world and its religion upside down as he reached to touch and to heal the spiritually abused. The Holy Spirit turned and turns believers upside down so that yet more strangers may be included in the common spiritual wealth of God. That’s the kind of chaos that has always frightened the church. But that’s the kind of chaos out of which the church was created and is re-created. In the new edition of my first book, Uncommon Calling, I concluded with this story: During a retreat at the Presbyterian Conference Center of Ghost Ranch, New Mexico, I visited a church in Taos named for St. Francis of Assisi. Its thick adobe walls of brick covered by mud and straw were made famous by a painting by Georgia O’Keefe. I learned that every year the church members gather to restore the mud on the walls after the rainy season. Someone once offered them a permanent solution— a substance that could be put on the adobe to keep it from being worn away. But what they discovered was that the new material prevent the walls from breathing, and the interior brick walls, which are the foundation for the adobe’s mud and straw, began to crumble. In order to keep the church standing, the church had to remove the “permanent” solution and return to its annual re-formation of the church. What a spiritual metaphor! It’s a dirty and arduous task, but we must keep re-forming, remolding, reshaping the church. As much as we might want walls and boundaries and divisions to be permanent, churches are stronger if they are permeable—open to the breath of the Spirit, which blows where she will and blesses love where she finds it. Chris Glaser is the editor of Open Hands and the author of seven books, including his latest, Communion of Life— Meditations for the New Millennium. AD Summer 1999 7 Chaos, Uncertainty, Relativism Determinism. Uncertainty. Absolutism. Relativism. Order. Chaos. The words could be extracted from a textbook on modern physics. However, they also reflect issues that face post-modern society. On the one hand are traditionalists, who see the world in terms of certainty, absolutism, and order. On the other are the post-modernists to whom the world is by no means so certain and clear. To the latter, the world is filled with uncertainty, relativism, and chaos. Conflict arises between the two groups because of their fundamentally different frameworks of perception. It is not surprising that the terminology employed above has been borrowed from physics. Science has always deeply influenced philosophy and theology, from the time of Aristotle, and the geocentric views that emerged from his teaching, through the helio-centric system of Copernicus, to Newton and his view of the universe, and to the present where concepts of modern physics— relativity, quantum theory, and chaos— are beginning to influence our thought. The Clockwork Universe Modern thought, it might be argued, begins with Isaac Newton and his famous synthesis in which he showed that the laws that govern the motion of the heavenly bodies are the same as those which act on earth. His work changed the way we think about the universe, and ourselves. The structure that evolved is sometimes referred to as the “clockwork universe.” Start the universe on its path, with gravity connecting the bodies, and it evolves in a clockwork-like, deterministic motion. More generally, if the initial conditions of any physical system and the influences which act between the different bodies (in physics such influences are called forces) are known, then, in principle, the future behavior of the system can be determined. Hence Newtonian Determinism refers to the supposed certainly of the determination of the evolution of a system of bodies. Of course the mathematical problem is formidable. Even in the immediate post- Newtonian era it was realized that the general mathematical problem could not be solved except for very special cases. Still, the notion of determinism survives. Newton assumed that space and absolute time are absolute. He meant that fundamental measurements of length and of time (and presumably mass, as well), taken in his laboratory, should agree with those taken in an identical laboratory, regardless of the relative state of motion between the two. The Newtonian world, which came into being after Galileo helped eliminate certain unfortunate Aristotelian influences, therefore, is in many ways a very comfortable and safe world to us. It is a world of cause and effect, in which bodies move predictably according to the influences exerted upon them. Space and time are absolute; motion is deterministic. The moral equivalent of such a world, perhaps, is one of absolute certainty in which truth is always clearly spoken, and in which some actions are always wrong. It is the world in which many of us have been nurtured. This is not necessarily a bad world. Indeed we can find many good things in this philosophy. Yet, it is not a realistic world. Just as physicists have found severe limitations on the Newtonian perspective, our interactions with the world have shown that many of the assumptions with which we were raised are no longer valid, and new principles must be stated if we are to live effectively. Not surprisingly, conflict arises when new paradigms come into conflict with tradition. Relativity and the Quantum Theory The first threat to Newtonian thinking came at the turn of the twentieth century when Einstein showed that the Newtonian assumptions on absolutism did not hold. According to the special theory of relativity (and we will not consider the General Theory), space and time (and mass) measurements made D.S. Carlstone How do they speak to people of faith? The Newtonian world… is in many ways a very comfortable and safe world to us. It is a world of cause and effect, in which bodies move predictably according to the influences exerted upon them. 8 Open Hands by two different observers depend upon the relative motion of the two systems. It is incorrect to say Einstein showed, as we sometimes hear, that “everything is relative.” Certain invariants (absolutes in that every observer will measure the same value for these quantities regardless of the state of uniform motion) do occur in the theory. Nonetheless, our world of absolute thinking has been shattered. Quantum theory imposed an almost simultaneous assault upon Newtonian physics. (Einstein was deeply involved in formulating some of the fundamental concepts, although he later rejected many of the notions that came out of quantum theory.) Through a series of agonizing, almost unbelievable, discoveries, it finally became accepted that determinism did not apply on the small scale, at the level of atoms and molecules. Newtonian mechanics has been replaced with a probabilistic theory known as quantum mechanics. For example, the quantum theory recognized that it is not possible to measure the trajectory (path)— a deterministic concept— of an atom or subatomic particle. Only the probability of finding a particle in a certain region of space could be measured. Determinism has given way, on the small scale, to probability. In such a theory, no longer is it possible to say with certainty how a particle or a system of particles will behave. There are other consequences of quantum theory. The Uncertainty Principle (or Indeterminacy Principle) is a statement of the fundamental limitations which nature imposes upon our knowledge of any physical system. Neils Bohr, the Danish physicist who formulated the concept of complementarity, introduces us to a dualistic world in which it is impossible to simultaneously claim absolute knowledge about certain complementary quantities. In the physical realm, examples would be: position and momentum, or time and energy. The concept has been generalized. Bohr was once asked what is complementary to Truth. His answer: Clarity. (If a statement is perfectly clear, it cannot be completely true. If it is “absolutely” true, it will be filled with ambiguity.) This is the nature of the world which we are now beginning to perceive. When the quantum theory is combined with relativity, the view of the immutability of matter also breaks down. Atoms, at one time thought to be immutable objects, decay. Even those objects thought to be fundamental (absolute in some sense) have lost that status as the concepts of process have come into play. Process Thought and Theology Alfred North Whitehead, a mathematician as well as a philosopher, is sometimes said to be the first philosopher who understood the claims and implications of relativity and quantum mechanics. They deeply influenced his thinking. His book Process and Reality was published in 1929, when the structure of quantum mechanics was still emerging. The result has come to us as Process Theology. It is impossible to provide more than a few of the aspects of process thought here. It is a way of thinking about God that in some ways parallels how physics describes the nature of reality. Process Theology (PT) is concerned with the nature of change. Reality is seen more in terms of process than in substance. (Roughly speaking, the physicist may see a system not so much as a collection of particles, but in terms of the reactions between them.) As an illustration, perhaps it would be accurate to say that the Bible is seen not as the Rule Book that governs all of life, but rather as a source of wisdom. Beliefs are important not as absolute statements but as they invoke thought that influences what we become. Through the process of interaction with the Scriptures and doctrines, we may be changed into something new, and, hopefully, better. Instead of viewing God as the Cosmic Moralist, the Lawgiver, the one who zaps us when we stray, the emphasis in PT is upon God’s Divine Love. This implies that we are created in order to enjoy God. (Lest it be misunderstood, PT provides no excuse for amoral behavior. It is understood that for us to enjoy God, all others must also have the opportunity of doing so. Perhaps the greatest enjoyment is that of striving toward a life that incorporates the highest of the ideals that are imparted to us through our interaction with Scripture. Therefore, the process person must assume a commitment that others, too, may be permitted to enjoy God.) Process theology challenges many of the traditional concepts of a theistic god. In attempting to deal with theodicy (the question of why a loving God permits evil in the world), process theologians picture God as “shrinking” in order that mankind may have free will. In doing so, God gives up omniscience in that he neither knows nor controls the future. He is no longer seen as the Controlling Power of the Universe. In this sense, “God is responsible for the evil in the world, but not indictable for it.”1 The future is affected by all the decisions that you and I make today. (This thought, too, is greatly influenced by quantum theory, in which it is understood that the design of the experiment affects the observation. The observer can no longer be regarded as completely objective. In this sense, we create our own universe.) Whitehead saw time not so much as a continuum, but as a sequence of events, or actions. God does not control the decisions that we make, nor does God act coercively. God acts to persuade us to make decisions that are consistent with the greater good. Of course, human beings frequently make the wrong choices, and hence evil in the world is purely our responsibility, not God’s. If a statement is perfectly clear, it cannot be completely true. If it is “absolutely” true, it will be filled with ambiguity. This is the nature of the world which we are now beginning to perceive. Summer 1999 9 These concepts are perhaps difficult to communicate in our culture. “God is in control” is frequently heard in our churches. Part of our emerging mythology includes the notion of a “Force” which possesses a definite will, and determines that nothing happens by chance. Unfortunately, the language we use often reinforces such concepts. Chaos Theory and the Butterfly Effect The third event in the Twentieth Century that provided a challenge to Newtonian mechanics is so-called Chaos Theory. Even in the post Newtonian world it was recognized that the clockwork universe was an ideal that could not be achieved. As indicated, the mathematical problem was too immense to solve. Since the invention of the computer— even the hand calculator works nicely in many situations— it has been discovered that the behavior of certain systems, under a special set of initial conditions, is not predictable. (Certain nonlinear equations exhibit this behavior.) This is often described as a state of chaos. The word chaos usually describes a state of total disorder. It has been known since the nineteenth century that all systems, left to themselves, proceed from a state of order into disorder, or chaos, but today the word has come to have a different meaning. Chaos, as the word is used today in physics, represents an unpredictable, deterministic state. The apparent contradiction may be resolved as follows: Two apparently identical systems are never, in reality, absolutely identical. Their initial states of motion may be unmeasurably different, and if conditions are just right, then very slight differences in the initial conditions can have a profound effect on the resulting motion of the two systems. Such behavior is often referred to as The Butterfly Effect. One way of stating the principle is the following: the beating of the wings of a butterfly in central Asia in June may influence the weather in the U.S. Midwest in July. The statement is, of course, a metaphor, implying that under proper conditions small affects may accumulate and become significant. The irony is that chaos theory is deterministic, but not predictable. It is deterministic in that if two identical systems, under identical influences, are set in motion identically, they will behave identically. However, as observed above, the slight differences in their initial conditions are such that after a short time their trajectories begin to diverge and will continue to do so: they will follow different paths. Chaotic systems also are seen to possess an inherent order that may emerge under proper circumstances. The reader is invited to ponder the possible influence that such behavior might have upon philosophy. Process theology may also apply in the discussion of chaos. However, as observed above, the word chaos has more than one meaning in physics, and so it becomes more difficult to draw conclusions. In general usage, chaos is seen as bad, order as good. These are obviously imprecise statements. However, in physics a chaotic state may have an underlying order. In Process Theology, even a chaotic situation may have intrinsic value. The process of evolution, in which order is extracted from chaos, is seen as an expression of God’s creative action in which God expresses God’s redeeming love for the world. The work of Whitehead occurred long before the invention of chaos theory, or the big bang theory, but it seems to be amazingly consistent with recent scientific discoveries. There is clearly more to be understood. Science & Religion Great intellectual battles have occurred in science as new discoveries threaten old ways of thinking, and new, and sometime outrageous, theories have been proposed to explain new knowledge. It is the same, of course, in theology and philosophy. John Shelby Spong, the controversial Episcopalian bishop, has warned that unless the In physics a chaotic state may have an underlying order. In Process Theology, even a chaotic situation may have intrinsic value. Chaotic systems are seen to possess an inherent order that may emerge under proper circumstances. The reader is invited to ponder the possible influence that such behavior might have upon philosophy. 10 Open Hands The potential for renewal is what makes chaos welcome. When Love Stirs the Swamps of Our Psyches Restructuring Spiritual Understandings Daniel A. Helminiak church begins to recognize that modern science has changed the way we regard the world, and hence God, it stands in danger of being judged as hopelessly obsolete.2 We are still trying to accommodate the impact of twentieth century physics into our thinking. It will happen, but only as a result of conflict (another process). Therefore, it is appropriate to ask: How do Relativism, Uncertainty, and Chaos affect our understanding of the world? There is much room for speculation. Those who possess the biblical vision of hope might dream that understanding of these concepts will help bring on a new era, one in which: • A tolerant, healing community replaces our sense of absolute right and wrong. • Humility replaces our need for theological certainty. • Aspects of Liberation Theology that remind us of “God’s preferential option for the poor and oppressed” replace the greed and pride which motivate much of what we do. • Elements of Process Theology, which understands God to allow the laws of probability to work, and as being present in all the decisions we make, good and bad, replace our understanding of a fixed, unalterable Will of God. Changing paradigms can be frightening, but rather than fear them, we should strive to understand them so that we can help direct thinking in the right direction. D. S. Carlstone of Oklahoma holds a Ph.D. in physics, and has recently retired after teaching his subject for 31 years. He has a longtime interest in the influence of science on philosophy and theology. Notes 1Couch, John B. Jr, and David Ray Griffin, Process Theology, The Westminster Press, Philadelphia (1976). 2Spong, John Shelby, Why Christianity Must Change or Die, HarperSanFranciso (1998). Oftentimes our two steps forward lead to one step back. To continue our progress, we need to retreat. Only when things “fall apart” can we reassemble them in better form. Having proposed a stage theory of healthy normal development, Freud left room for times of “regression in the service of the ego”— backward steps that in the long run contributed to mental stability. Our growth is always precarious. Our most recent achievements remain fragile. Move to a new city, break up with a lover, lose your job or start a new one, face a health crisis, and you find your old dysfunctional behaviors emerging again. Your patience wears thin. Your foolish fretting returns. Your moodiness takes over. Your sleep and eating patterns go erratic. Your use of alcohol or drugs becomes a problem. When bedtime is long past, the five-year old begins to act like three. We all fall to lower levels of functioning when we are under stress. Setbacks provide occasions to redo growth work we thought we had finished. Renewed attention to old habits in a challenging time allows us to refine and consolidate our growth. Tried and tested, our tentative growth then becomes stable enough to support a next forward step. Love and sex tell a similar story. They bring out the childish and primitive in us. The roller coaster of romance strips off our polished social facades. Conflicting feelings, old hurts, vicious jealousies, foolish fancies, irrational fears, overwhelming needs are suddenly all hanging out. Making love releases memories that were locked away for decades. Passion looses near-violent intensity that we did not know was in us. Christian thinkers like Augustine and Aquinas allowed sex only for procreation because, as they saw it, one loses one’s rationality at the climax, and it is wrong for people to risk their humanity without sufficient reason. Current psychological understanding recognizes that such “regression” is rather one beauty of sex. Like meditation or a retreat, lovemaking offers a holiday from our, oh, so heady daily living. A break in our rigid control makes room for healthier perspectives. When love stirs the swamps of our psyches and the debris comes to the surface, we have a chance to clean up our emotional environment. Then free from unconscious bias, our rationality turns crystal clear. Then we are more open to transcendent experiences. Not wary repression but an integrated psyche and a free-flowing inner life best serve the flowering of our spiritual potential. Regression into chaos can be positive. The polymorphic complexity of a human being often finds healing in the caldron of turmoil. But in our fastchanging and fragmenting world, giddy with new found freedoms, we must remember that chaos is not valuable in itself. Unfettered whim, intoxicating fervor, love without law, is not the road to human salvation. The potential for renewal is what makes chaos welcome. The challenge is to dip into the chaos without being permanently sucked down. Even in the depths, we need to follow the high road. Daniel Helminiak is a psychotherapist and educator in Atlanta. He is author of What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality (Alamo Square Press, 1994) and more recently, The Human Core of Spirituality: Mind as Psyche and Spirit (1996) and Religion and the Human Sciences: An Approach via Spirituality (1998), both from State University of New York Press. Summer 1999 11 Hannah’s “Disorder” Her Faithful Response to Chaos Allen Harris new life born of that bedlam (1 Samuel 1:4-20). Hannah comprehends the powerful holy character of disorder. Hannah’s “disorderly” barrenness marks her as a person outside of the normal expectations of her society. She is a blessed woman, and yet she cannot bear the child which her community demands of her and of all women, specifically a male child. Even in the face of the passage of years, the ridicule of her husband’s other wife, the pity of her husband, and the misunderstanding of the temple priest, she remains faithful to God. Hannah comprehends chaos firsthand and accepts it as a part of her lot in life. “What’s the plan, Hannah?” Her response is to pray and wait. Hannah does not choose her “disorder.” Neither do we. Even so, we see in Hannah’s response that the chaotic aspects of life are part and parcel of our existence and can be occasions for new life. This reestablishment of the sacred place of chaos in life is fundamentally a creative process. In the book, God’s Fierce Whimsy, African American theologian Bess Johnson recognizes the spiritual aspects of chaos. She reflects, I often say to myself— I love to say this to myself over and over— “In the beginning was chaos, and then the Word…” It makes me respect the chaos so much as a part of creation… I’ve been afraid of the chaos… I’ve begun to really understand that creation can only come out of chaos and that chaos is the mother of creation and the source of our validity. This has been a great learning for me, and it’s one of the resources I use.2 Chaos and the LGBT Community C ertainly none of us escape the effects of chaos in our day. With each turn of the season it seems like our local, state, and national lawmakers decide a different conclusion for our fate as lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender folks. I feel paralyzed, unable to plan anything when, at least in my own political perspective, the forces of intolerance and division are in power. Like Hannah, I feel barren, as if my actions on behalf of justice for all people, community values, and tolerance have yielded nothing. Like Hannah, out of my great anxiety, I am simply compelled to pray. As persons outside the perceived norms of our culture, we queer folks know chaos as a constant companion. Few of the usual tools of social life are readily accessible to us. We feel like we recreate a new order to life every day. As I counsel couples for Holy Unions, I oftentimes feel as if we are giving birth to the very first same-gender ceremony ever. We want to invoke the sacred rituals that are so important to our histories, but we simply cannot regurgitate the patriarchal and heterosexist models so often recreated unthinkingly. There are no maps for how to “do it “This Year Was Lousy, but at Least It’s Familiar” Change represents chaos for most of us. We find change troublesome, even threatening. The cartoon characters Calvin and Hobbes are walking in the snow in a memorable New Year’s Eve comic strip. Hobbes asks Calvin, “Are you making any resolutions for the new year?” Calvin replies, “Nope! I want everything to stay the same as it was this year.” “Everything?” the stuffed tiger asks. “Right,” says Calvin, “This year was lousy, but at least it’s familiar.” The boy goes on to say, “I hate change! It’s too disruptive! When things are different, you have to think about the change and deal with it! I like things to stay the same, so I can take everything for granted! Besides, things keep changing for the worse! The longer I live the more complicated everything gets! I say let’s stop here before life gets any harder! From now on, no more change!” They both ponder that thought for a moment and then, running off into the snow, Calvin concludes, “I’m bored. Let’s do something different.” Hobbes replies, “Some things don’t change.”1 In spite of our resistance, or perhaps because of it, we are called to explore the sacred nature of change, and its constant companion chaos, for throughout the biblical narration there exist strands of sacred transformation woven into the fabric of the lives of people of faith whose existence is steeped in turmoil. As an example, consider the moving story of Hannah, mother of the prophet Samuel, which focuses on the chaotic disruption of one individual’s life and the possibility for 12 Open Hands of the cross. Most of us who are white and of Anglo-European descent must necessarily enter the cycle at this point. For those of us who span several different categories, each with their own unique degrees of power, we must be especially attuned to the fact that we may exist at various points along the cycle. For example, a woman who is white can challenge herself to nurture her power as a female, but may need to monitor her power as a white person of privilege. It is in this shifting of power that Hannah’s weakness becomes her strength. Hannah, a pariah in her family and her community of faith because of something beyond her control, is given a new chance to claim her own authority and power. She will give birth to a son, who will be a great leader of her nation. She sings, “The bows of the mighty are broken, but the feeble gird on strength… The Lord makes poor and makes rich; [the Lord] brings low [and] also exalts. [The Lord] raises up the poor from the dust” (Samuel 2: 4, 7-8). This song may very well have served as an inspiration to Mary’s Magnificat (Luke 1:46-55). For those of us born and raised on the principles of democracy, this usurping of the powerful may seem politic to us, but certainly not fair. God’s capriright,” so we march with fear and trembling into uncharted territories to make a new way for ourselves and those who follow us. What is it that allows chaos to have such command over our lives? Why does the simple thought of disorder make so many people weak in the knees and nauseous in the stomach? My life as a gay man, particularly as an openly gay pastor, has led me to a realization that chaos challenges people’s basic assumptions of power. Power involves our ability (or at least our perceived ability) to be in control of situations and people, to have influence over others, and to have access to certain prerogatives. Disruptions in life force us to reassess the dynamics of power. For someone with extensive access to power, this may mean giving up power. For someone with limited access to power, this may mean obtaining and accepting power. Both the giving up and the gaining of power are fear-filled processes. Even so, as Audre Lorde, black lesbian poet and activist, reminded us, “When I dare to be powerful— to use my strength in the service of my vision, then it becomes less and less important whether I am afraid.”3 Eric Law, a Chinese-American clergyperson within the Episcopalian tradition, has written an extraordinary little book entitled, The Wolf Shall Dwell With The Lamb: A Spirituality For Leadership In A Multicultural Community (St. Louis: Chalice Press, 1993). In it, Law proposes a useful premise which invites people of faith into the chaos of power and powerlessness so that our communities might be made more whole. Using images from the Passion of Christ, Law encourages us to understand more fully the cyclical nature of power. In what he terms the “Cycle Of Gospel Living,” the powerless are called to embrace the empty tomb and accept the power of the resurrection. In innumerable instances in our society, it is persons of color and other marginalized folk who enter at this point and who are invited to nurture qualities of empowerment, endurance, and faithfulness. Meanwhile, the powerful are called to give up power and choose the way ciousness in this instance is somewhat offensive and definitely confusing. Such chaotic actions on the part of the divine can only become meaningful when we allow ourselves to dive into the swirling creative waters of possibility which surround most of God’s actions. Here, in this Alice In Wonderland-like world, the lame can walk, the captives are set free, and the foreigner becomes hero. Here, a barren woman gives birth to a child and a wayfaring band of disciples survive to become the Church Universal. When we allow that redemptive cycle of cross and resurrection to course through our veins, we shall know in our hearts that God is acting on behalf of all of creation. Our times of disorientation become periods of giving new birth. We loosen our hold on the present so that we might take hold of a new future which may break in upon our lives at any given moment. As followers of the Christ we are urged to recognize that it is right and good that the powerless be made strong and those in power be made humble, and that the resulting chaos is, in fact, where God works God’s wonders most fully. There is no easy resolution for any of us. Our hearts and our minds (not to mention our entire social fabric) will resist it completely. As the comic strip character Calvin admitted, “I like things to stay the same, so I can take everything for granted!” But our God-stirred hearts know differently. This tumultuous cycle of death and life, cross and resurrection, will be the saving grace of our existence. May we find the courage to trust each other and God as we are, time and time again, plunged into the birthing waters of chaos. Allen V. Har ris is se nior pastor of Park Ave nue Christ ian Church (Disciples of Chr ist) in New York City. Notes 1The Times Leader, Wilkes Barre, PA, Sunday, December 26, 1993. 2Johnson, Bess B. et al, God’s Fierce Whimsy, The Mud Flower Collective, New York: The Pilgrim Press, 1985, p. 122. 3From a postcard, Syracuse Cultural Workers, Box 6367, Syracuse, NY 13217. Summer 1999 13 Gracious Chaos in the Early Church God’s Radical Grace In the Acts of the Apostles we witness the church’s dawning recognition of God’s radical grace, as well as the struggles of the early Christians to live into that reality. Much like today, early Christians had difficulties adapting to the realization that the Good News of God’s grace, manifested in Jesus the Christ, was being received and celebrated by persons from cultures different from their own. God’s grace served as a chaotic disruption. Their God and the God of their parents and grandparents and ancestors Abraham and Sarah and Hagar, of Isaac and Rebecca, of Jacob and Rachel and Leah (and Zilpah and Bilhah) was transforming the lives of non-Jews through Jesus the Christ! That meant that their spiritual community— those who gathered to break bread and pray and worship together in the name of Jesus the Christ— had to rethink their definitions of the family of faith. First-century Christians had to learn how to embrace as sister-andbrother- in-Christ the one who is different. As the stories unfold in Acts, many cultures thrive in the firstcentury Roman empire. Commerce and transportation facilitated communication and interaction with persons of different languages, different ways of thinking, different family configurations, different rituals, different ideals and goals. Different. In the midst of that multicultural world, small pockets of faithful persons tried desperately to maintain their cultural and religious values. Those who followed Jesus at first maintained their own cultural and religious Jewishness, which included faithfulness defined by ritual purity and avoidance of that which was different. In Acts, which is the second part of his gospel narrative, Luke carefully unfolds the transforming experiences and theological debates within the early churches. Time and time again the young churches faced the question, What do we do with the fact that God seems to keep changing the rules about who is in and who is out? Reading Acts from the perspective of the early churches’ experiences with God’s persistent inclusivity offers an opportunity for reflection and action in today’s churches. Within these chapters we discover multicultural stories— accounts of different languages, different traditions, different definitions of purity, different races, different sexualities, different classes, all brought together in the church by Holy Spirit who keeps blowing wherever she wills! Moving Out from Jerusalem Acts begins in Jerusalem. Jesus orders these Jewish disciples to stay home until they are baptized with the Holy Spirit. From the beginning of this story of church growth and development, however, the followers of Jesus hear that, as witnesses, they cannot remain insular. “Start in Jerusalem and move out from here, to Judea and Samaria and to the ends of the earth,” they are told. While they waited, they prayed. And they consolidated the home front, choosing one who had also walked with Jesus to replace the lost Judas, to reestablish the necessary quorum for a valid Jewish prayer meeting. Yet never again is Matthias mentioned, nor does the ministry remain dependent on an “officially” designated twelve. Holy Spirit is ready to move this safely homogenous group of Jewish followers of Jesus beyond the single-culture boundaries that have defined their lives until now. God’s Grace Judith Hoch Wray continued of page 15➤ 14 Open Hands We are clergy who believe in doing covenant services of blessing for samegender couples from our congregations. About 1150 rights and privileges are accorded to couples who marry. People who love someone of their own gender cannot access these rights because in our culture they are not permitted to marry. It’s time for Christians to articulate why they support these blessings— with the blessing of Christian tradition. When the apostle Peter began his career as a minister of Jesus Christ, his powerful preaching won converts from many nations. One day a stranger came to his door asking Peter to come explain to his master the power of God’s work in the world. Now Peter had just had a dream about how God measures morality differently than did Peter and the other Christians. God showed Peter all kinds of animals that Peter labeled either “clean” or “unclean.” God said, “Do not call unclean anything that I have made.” Peter had this dream, and then heard the knock at his door and the request that he be a minister to a man that he previously thought would defile him by association. Peter responded to the call and witnessed his ministry expand and his life become enriched. In the late 1800’s and early 1900’s, Methodist missionaries from the U.S. found that women in India lived in zehennas in total seclusion from the world. Confined to their homes, not allowed to attend meetings or social gatherings, and permitted to visit only with women or male relatives, they could not attend church. Missionaries developed woman-to-woman networks that shared the Bible, Christian faith, and literacy. But because Methodists from the U.S. ordained only men, and because men could not minister to women in India, converts could not be baptized or take the Lord’s Supper. Women missionaries appealed to the church for the right to be ministers, but their calling was denied. The church said that the Bible and tradition only allowed ordination of men. The rules didn’t fit the situation where God called the church to be in ministry. These two stories remind us that God calls us to see that we do not live in a comfortable neighborhood with people who are like us, who basically believe, live and act as we do. We live in relation to people who are different from us, whether or not we personally know them. They are part of God’s world and God’s creation; part of our world. All too often people who deplore the conduct of clergy who engage in ecclesiastical disobedience to bless same-gender relationships do not deplore the conditions that have brought clergy to the point of risking their careers. It is unfortunate that most denominations have left pastors with no other conscionable alternative than to bend or break an unjust law. Covenant services, charges, trials, and legal decisions all feed a new ecclesiastical chaos. Some say that direct action of performing banned blessings “poses serious harm” to the church. But is this logical? This assertion is like blaming the victim of domestic abuse for the violence in the home. It’s like arresting the boy who declares the truth about the emperor’s new clothes. It’s like condemning Jesus for following God’s will to the point of being crucified. Is there not serious harm in being a church that fails to follow the biblical call to do justice? Is there not a fundamental flaw in being a church that fails to do as Jesus did, living its way into a new social order where all are welcomed? Does not grace supersede law? Turning the Church Rightside Up —To Bless Same-Gender Love Alice G. Knotts and Joanne Carlson Brown Alice Knotts (pictured) is the pastor of Talent United Methodist Church in Talent, Oregon and the author of Fellowship in Love—Methodist Women Changing American Racial At titudes 1920-1968. Joanne Brown is the pastor of United Church in University Place, a UCC-UMC congregation in Tacoma, Washington. Summer 1999 15 In Acts 2, the great Jewish feast of Pentecost brought Jews from all over the world to worship in Jerusalem. Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappodocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt, Libya and Rome: all these had come to worship the Giver of Torah; among them both Jewish-born and converts, different cultures and skin colors and languages. Into this magnificent multicultural setting, the Holy Spirit comes. The group that followed Jesus the Christ would never be the same again. Luke tells us that three thousand persons were baptized that day! For the time being, all followers of Jesus were Jewish, whatever other cultural identifications they may have brought with them from the far reaches of the known world. Yet from the first day of the new Spirit-filled church, difference defined the community which is the body of Christ. An Equal Opportunity Gospel In Acts 8, we are told another amazing story about the way that Holy Spirit was working in the new church. On the surface it reads as “Deacon Philip meets an Ethiopian eunuch.” At a deeper level, we listen as Luke offers Theophilus (Acts 1:1) and all lovers of God a parable about the radical inclusivity of God’s grace in Jesus Christ. The Ethiopian eunuch, though not Jewish by birth, feared God and had come to Jerusalem to worship. In the Ethiopian eunuch, Luke incorporates about as much multi-cultural diversity as can be present in one human being. He belonged to a privileged class, a member of the court of Queen Candace of Ethiopia, in charge of the entire treasury of that country. By race he was African, noticeable darker than the dark-skinned Jews of Judea. Having chosen to be a eunuch, he was a sexual minority. (Note that, while being a eunuch was a socially approved option for a gay man in that ancient culture, it did not remove all social and religious prejudice.) As a eunuch, he was defined by law as impure and not allowed full access to the temple. In the text from Isaiah, the eunuch was probably hearing his own story, a story of rejection and grief, cut off from his own generation. “About whom was the prophet speaking?” he asks Philip. With that opening, Philip proclaims to this one who is different the good news about Jesus, the One rejected in order that others will be included! The Ethiopian eunuch is baptized and the church is challenged anew by the boundarychanging love of God. Who’s In and Who’s Out In Acts 10, Peter receives a revelation about God’s inclusivity and an opportunity to move beyond theory to action, preaching to and baptizing Gentiles. God has changed the definitions of what is clean, of who can be counted as holy in God’s “kindom.” Cornelius, an Italian centurion stationed in Caesarea and a God-fearer, has a vision in which he is instructed to send for Peter. While his servants and soldier were on the way to Joppa to request Peter’s visit, Peter, in a trance, sees “the heaven opened and something like a large sheet coming down.” In it were all kinds of “unclean” animals, things forbidden to faithful Jews, the kind of faithfulness still maintained by Peter and most of the early church. Three times he hears a voice instructing him to kill and eat. Three times he protests that he would never eat anything unclean. Three times he hears the retort, “What God has made clean, you must not call profane.” The messengers arrive, Peter travels with them, preaches to Cornelius and his household, and watches the Holy Spirit fall on these uncircumcised folk while he is still preaching. He baptizes the household and stays with them for several days. Peter will never be the same again. And neither will the church. Or will it? Old prejudices die slowly. Acts 15 recounts a Jerusalem council meeting, called to deal with the question of who can be saved. Certain individuals still believed that “unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” Paul and Barnabas, who had been preaching to Gentiles, go to Jerusalem to join in the debate. On the way, they stop in all the churches along the way to report, with great joy, the conversion of many Gentiles. (What a great political strategy! A forerunner perhaps of the welcoming congregations movement?) By the time they arrive in Jerusalem, the word is out that Gentiles are being saved. Already, those believers who belonged to the sect of the Pharisees had to change their strategy. Conceding that some Gentiles had been saved, they still insisted that it is necessary for them to be circumcised and to keep the law of Moses. Peter recounts his earlier experience, that “God, who knows the human heart, testified to them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as to us; and in cleansing their hearts by faith, God has made no distinction between them and us.” What a radical concept! No distinction between “them” and “us.” This story is told twice in the New Testament: by Luke (Acts 15:1-21) and by Paul (Galatians 2:10). The endings are different. According to Luke, the new Gentile believers were required to “abstain only from things polluted by idols and from fornication and from whatever has been strangled and from blood.” According to Paul, the Jerusalem leaders ask only that the poor be remembered. Obviously, the church did not easily move to being a non-judgmental, culturally inclusive community. One thing is clear: God keeps disturbing the church’s cultural exclusivity. Then and now. The challenge to live into the seemingly chaotic grace of God remains. Judith Hoch Wray holds a Ph.D. in New Testament Studies from New York’s Union Theological Seminary. She has taught homiletics at New Brunswick Theological Seminary and is a regular columnist for The Living Pulpit, for which she serves as assistant editor. Widely published, she serves on the advisory committee of Open Hands. This article originally appeared in The Disciple and is used by permission 16 Open Hands Turning the World Upside Down A Gay Jewish Perspective Although I’m Jewish, I got involved with Seattle’s University Baptist Church in 1996, when it offered counseling to conscientious objectors who were in the military during the Gulf War. Those days, I didn’t even know the differences between American Baptists and other Baptists. Now, I’m the office manager here, as well as a practicing Jew— and gay. Despite this mix, I don’t think of myself as “turning the world upside down.” From the Jewish perspective, it was the Romans who did that. And as a gay person, I tend to view Christians as the folks who “turned the world upside down” by elevating homosexual acts from improprieties to major sins; by forgetting agape in their obsession with lust. But perhaps this is a good working definition of chaos: a situation in which it is no longer clear which way is “upside down.” We Jews live “in the world.” We assume that our understanding of God’s law is not perfect, but evolving, and we depend upon our evolving understanding to navigate on our journey through that world. Not surprisingly, we keep finding ourselves in unknown waters. So, from adolescence to marriage, from birth to death, we keep having to try to apply God’s law to new problems. We Jews are not comfortable with chaos. When Albert Einstein declared that “God does not play dice with the universe,” he was articulating a Jewish conviction that there is, in fact, an Order to things, even if it’s not immediately apparent. Here’s an analogy: imagine yourself wandering through a fun house with distorting mirrors, dark passages, disorienting noise— chaos. Now, imagine yourself looking down on the fun house from above, with the roof conveniently pulled back. What seems chaotic from inside looks quite logical from a different perspective. When our world feels like a chaotic fun house, what we need is a different perspective. What we need is information from people who’ve seen things from a different angle. Progressive Christians and Jews have long benefited from each other’s perspectives; now heterosexuals have available to them the different perspectives of the gay/lesbian/bisexual/ transgender community. Sadly, it’s a view not everyone appreciates. The outlaws were exiled over the hill, to the unknown lands beyond. But we have come back to tell you what we have seen of those undiscovered countries. Several years ago, two same-sex couples in Hawaii filed a lawsuit, saying that the state’s refusal to grant them marriage licenses violated Hawaii’s constitutional ban on sex discrimination. The courts agreed, and triggered an intense, nationwide debate about what constituted a “marriage.” That debate is not yet resolved, either legally or, for many folks, religiously. But the voices—the perspectives— of sexual minority Christians have come out. It seems to me that heterosexual couples have been given the opportunity to benefit mightily from this debate. From the GLBT perspective, the concepts of “male and female,” Jeff Moses the reproductive process, and the cultural definitions of “gender- appropriate behavior” are distractions—fun house gimmickry. The important issues involve such questions as “what constitutes a healthy relationship?” “What are the ethics of dating and marriage?” “What is moral parenting?” Similarly, those of us who advocate for hate crimes legislation are frequently met with the argument that “all crimes are hate crimes.” Another national debate is in process, and out of it could come different, and more productive, understandings about hatred and crime, about bigotry and criminals. For example, is every crime a hate crime? Is inducing someone to hate itself a “hate crime,” or is it free speech? What are the limits of personal responsibility for one’s actions? Even the process of deciding whether or not to become a “Welcoming and Affirming” church offers immense benefits. Forced as I was by my circumstances to learn about human sexuality, I am surprised (and sometimes, frankly, embarrassed) by the lack of knowledge displayed by some heterosexuals. Forced as I was to learn to talk about sexuality, I am still surprised at how difficult even talking can be for some heterosexuals. They seem to have been deprived of even the necessary basic vocabulary. It is easy to be “morally superior” at a distance: to live in Minnesota and condemn racism in Georgia; to live in the 90’s and condemn the anti-Semitism of the 40’s. But the homosexual is neighbor, if not son or daughter, brother or sister, fellow worker or volunteer. Being welcoming and affirming puts me in the room with you, up close and personal. By its very nature, such proximity cannot always be comfortable. But we have seen wonders, over the hill. We are eager to share, and perhaps what we have seen will help you in your quest for order. If there is a fundamental order to our universe, if God’s laws are as much description as mandate— “operating instructions,” if you will— then chaos is a temporary state: order will reassert itself. Another analogy: chaos is like shuffling and dealing a new hand in a card game. Some players may be foolish enough to try to continue to play as if they still held their old hand; others may accept the new cards but stick to an old strategy. But the successful players will recognize new opportunities, confident that the rules of the game still apply. Jeff Moses is the office manager at University Baptist Church, a welcoming and affirming American Baptist Church in Seattle, Washington. He’s also a member of Congregation Tikvah Chadashah, Puget Sound’s gay and lesbian synagogue where all are welcome, and helped create an interfaith service for Seattle’s Pride Celebration in June. He and his life-partner of 13 years live in a house they’re renovating in central Seattle. A Gay Jewish Perspective Turning the World Upside Down Summer 1999 17 Homoerotic Mysticism If the concept of “mysticism” is often misunderstood by the average person, the idea of an erotic Christian mysticism— not to mention a homoerotic Christian mysticism— could be downright shocking to some. Even though mysticism has been a part of Christianity throughout its history, many people don’t understand the term very well and may not have imagined mysticism in connection with Jesus or the Christian tradition. In my forthcoming book I have attempted to expose mystical elements in Jesus’ own teachings. For the moment, however, there is only space to provide a basic definition of mysticism and to point out some examples of erotic—and even homoerotic— mysticism that have come down to us as part of our Christian spiritual heritage. What is Mysticism? The word, mysticism, is itself related to the word mystery. In I Corinthians, St. Paul said, “Listen, I will tell you a mystery.”1 What was he saying? He was saying, “Listen, I will reveal that which has heretofore been a mystery even though it should perhaps have been obvious all along.” Thus, mysticism is not about hocus-pocus or razzle-dazzle. Nor is it religious escapism or faddish, self-indulgent spirituality. Rather, it is about sensing God’s presence in the midst of the ordinary. It is about discovering the divine simplicity within the complexity of the everyday world. It is about appreciating the mystery of the divine without leaving terra firma. It is about seeing that God has been right in front of us all the time. This is also what Albert Einstein was talking about when he said, “The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science.”2 A story from the Hebrew Scriptures will provide a useful metaphor to help us begin to understand this. After receiving a host of instructions and teachings, including the Ten Commandments (which, in Hebrew, are really called the “Ten Sayings” not the “Ten Commandments”), Moses is conversing with God and says, “Show me your glory, I pray.” And [God] said, “I will make all my goodness pass before you, and will proclaim before you the name, ‘YHWH’ [often pronounced Yahweh or Jehovah]; and I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy. But,” [God] said, “you cannot see my face; for no one shall see me and live.” And the Lord Yahweh continued, “See, there is a place by me where you shall stand on the rock; and while my glory passes by I will put you in the cleft of the rock, and I will cover you with my hand until I have passed by; then I will take away my hand, and you shall see my back; but my face shall not be seen.”3 This narrative is somewhat jerky and a little difficult to follow, partly because it is a translation of the very ancient form of Hebrew in which this part of the Old Testament is Note: This article is excerpted and adapted by the author from his forthcoming book, The Mystical Side of Jesus: “The dominion of God is within you.” Because it does not fit our limited understanding and categories, an encounter with God is an encounter with chaos, with mystery. And yet, from that chaos, from the burning bush, from the cloud by day and pillar of fire at night, even from a cross, God creatively reaches out to call us, guide us, and offer us grace. Michael Pozar Finding God in Unexpected Places 18 Open Hands written. But, the main points are clear. Moses wants evidence of God’s abiding presence. God tells him that no one can see God per se [i.e., “see God’s face”] but that he will be allowed to encounter God in the only way possible for a human being. Moses had to squeeze into a cleft in the rock on Mt. Sinai and God would “cover” Moses so that Moses could not see God. Then God would pass by and uncover Moses just in time for him to see God’s “back.” Moses was allowed to see God’s back but not God’s face, or, it might make more sense to say that Moses was allowed to see the “afterglow” of God’s glory as an indication of the divine presence. Moses saw God’s glory, in a certain manner of speaking, but did not see God per se because God cannot be limited to any form or representation that can be humanly comprehended. This is the aim of the mystics, to “touch” or “see” God’s glory and thereby to come as close as possible to sensing and touching God right in the midst of our ordinary world. When these mystics touch God’s glory, they do so with the understanding that God is the ground of that glory (indeed, is the ground of all being whatsoever). God, as God, is completely remote from the human experience. We cannot really see God or comprehend God or even adequately imagine God. But, the mystics teach us that it is possible to see or touch God in a certain sense. In the story of Moses in Exodus, this is described as the possibility of seeing or experiencing God’s glory (seeing God’s afterglow, if you will) but not actually seeing God. However, we don’t have to be on Mt. Sinai to have a similar experience and it doesn’t need to be nearly so dramatic. In his ever-insightful lectures on The Varieties of Religious Experience, published in 1902, William James indicated four minimal qualities of mystical experience: “ineffability” (i.e., It is an experience that cannot be expressed in words.), “noetic quality” (i.e., It has a knowledge content, even if the insights of that knowledge cannot be reduced to logical propositions.), “transiency” (i.e., For most people, mystical experiences are fleeting, although some mystics have been said to live for long periods of time in the mystical state.), and “passivity” (i.e., “The mystic feels as if his own will were in abeyance, and indeed sometimes as if he were grasped and held by a superior power.”).4 James also offered a simple, almost rudimentary example of mystical experience from the writings of Martin Luther: When a fellow-monk one day repeated the words of the Creed: “I believe in the forgiveness of sins,” I saw the Scripture in an entirely new light; and straightway I felt as if I were born anew. It was as if I had found the door of paradise thrown wide open.5 Luther was not describing the “born again” experience that neo-evangelical fundamentalists sometimes try to impose on others, in which non-believers in the fundamentalistic God are induced to have an emotional experience of repentance that leads them to become believers in fundamentalistic doctrine. Such events may have some value, and may occasionally even yield genuine mystical experience in which genuine enlightenment occurs, but they are just as likely to be manufactured experiences designed to lure people into the legalism of fundamentalism. Luther had been a devoted Christian for most of his life. Nonetheless, the mystical experience of insight that he is describing here made him feel as though he had become a “new creature” with new insight into that which he had more-orless known all along. More than that, it seemed to him that he had broken down the barrier between himself and the transcendent realm of the divine, at least momentarily. That is, he seemed to be “touching God,” or, if you will, “seeing God’s glory,” in the sense we are here using those terms. Mystical teachings, therefore, are aimed at helping us to be ready to discover and appreciate an immediate awareness of the mystery (i.e., the glory) of God. God will always remain— to some degree— a mystery to us. Yet, we can be open to an experience of that divine mystery, and in touching the mystery we are, in a certain sense, touching God. Mystical teachings are meant to help make this possible. Indeed, this is exactly what Jesus’ mystical teachings do. This is not something that is easy to understand. That is perhaps why people have frequently overlooked the mystical teachings that have come from Jesus. We have no record of Jesus talking about touching God, seeing God’s afterglow, or intuiting God’s glory (at least not in the canonical texts).6 However, at least part of the time that Jesus was talking about the kingdom or dominion of God, he was pointing us in the direction of a similar mystical experience. Some of the teachings of Jesus, especially certain of the “kingdom teachings” were designed to point us towards the possibility of touching God’s glory and somehow coming to realize that God is the ground and basis for the glory that we are touching. Erotic and Homoerotic Mysticism One of the basic insights of all mysticism is that God is the ground of all being and yet is somehow mysteriously present in all things. When Jesus said, “The dominion of God is within you,” he was pointing to this insight. God is present in all persons, all beings, in a way that cannot really be explained. As Martin Luther once said, “God’s...own divine nature [is] wholly and entirely in all creatures and in every single individual being, more deeply, more inwardly, more present than the creature is to itself.” Mystics before and after Jesus have explored many ways of trying to make this insight explicit. They have also offered us advice and metaphors which were designed to draw us into a deeper understanding of the divine mysteries. A few have even used erotic metaphors in describing their mystical experiences. We don’t usually think of it this way, but that is exactly what the Song of Solomon is about: Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth! For your love is better than wine, your anointing oils are fragrant, your name is perfume poured out; therefore the maidens love you. Draw me after you, let us make haste. The king has brought me into his chambers. We will exult and rejoice in you; we will extol your love more than wine; rightly do they love you.7 This is erotic love poetry and religious metaphor all mixed together. Over the centuries, interpreters have tended to rob Summer 1999 19 the Song of Solomon either of its eroticism or else rob it of its profound mystical implications. But, it is filled with truly erotic, mystical metaphors that are meant to draw us potentially into an experience of the divine that we might not have otherwise. The erotic is lifted to the realm of the sacred, or, better put, the erotic is shown to participate in the sacred because God is in the erotic in the same way God is mystically in all things. Even more explicitly erotic language appears at times in the mysticism of St. Teresa of Avila: Often when the soul least expects it, our Lord calls her [the soul] suddenly. She hears very distinctly that her God calls her, and it gives her such a start, especially at the beginning, that she trembles and utters plaints [lamentations]. She feels that an ineffable wound has been dealt her and that the wound is so precious in her sight that she would like it never to heal. She knows that her divine Spouse is near her, although He does not let her enjoy His adorable presence, and she cannot help complaining to Him in words of love. The voice of the Well-Beloved causes in the soul such transports that she is consumed by desire, and yet does not know what to ask, because she sees clearly that her Lord is with her. What pains could she have? And for what greater happiness could she wish? To this I do not know what to answer; but that of which I am certain, is that the pain penetrates down to the very bottom of the bowels, and that it seems that they are being torn away when the heavenly Spouse withdraws the arrow with which he has transpierced them. As long as that pain lasts, it is always on the increase or on the decrease, it never remains at the same intensity. It is for that reason that the soul is never entirely on fire; the spark goes out and the soul feels a desire stronger than ever to endure again the love-pain she has just experienced.8 Unfortunately, many interpreters of Teresa have managed to ignore or even deny the rather blatant-sounding erotic elements in her writing. They have often observed the deep mystical insights of the writing while, at the same time, shielding their own awareness from the erotic elements contained therein. Even more did the interpreters have to shield their spiritual “eyes” from the homoerotic mysticism of Teresa’s pupil, St. John of the Cross. In an excerpt from Dark Night of the Soul, one of the greatest mystical texts of all time, John gives us a description of his encounter with God in a way that carries a clearly homoerotic tone: STANZAS OF THE SOUL 1. On a dark night, Kindled in love with yearnings—oh, happy chance!— I went forth without being observed, My house being now at rest. 2. In darkness and secure, By the secret ladder, disguised— oh happy chance!— In darkness and in concealment, My house being now at rest. 3. In the happy night, In secret, when none saw me, Nor I beheld aught, Without light or guide, save that which burned in my heart. 4. This light guided me More surely than the light of noonday To the place where he (well I knew who!) was awaiting me— A place where none appeared. 5. Oh, night that guided me, Oh, night more lovely than the dawn, Oh, night that joined Beloved with lover, Lover transformed in the Beloved! 6. Upon my flowery breast, Kept wholly for himself alone, There he stayed sleeping, and I caressed him, And the fanning of the cedars made a breeze. 7. The breeze blew from the turret As I parted his locks; With his gentle hand he wounded my neck And caused all my senses to be suspended. 8. I remained, lost in oblivion; My face I reclined on the Beloved. All ceased and I abandoned myself, Leaving my cares forgotten among the lilies.9 Orgasm, a poem written by the 20th-Century lesbian poet, Elsa Gidlow, is even more explicitly erotic and yet the following excerpt is clearly mystical in perspective: …Enter, O, enter The inmost Holy Place; At the altar, self-anointing And anointed, dance Your dance. Till flesh, transfused With burning breath becomes Veil of the Goddess; and Earth heaves. ...10 Enter, O, enter The inmost Holy Place 20 Open Hands Although there are mystical strains in all religions, and a few of them seem to touch on the erotic, it is the incarnational emphasis of Christianity that makes Christianity specially susceptible to the development of an erotic mysticism among some of its mystics. God is everywhere, yet we say that God was especially manifest as a human being, a human being who was truly human with a truly human physical, sexual, compassionate, and intellectual nature. The churches of the Reformation have been especially good in finding God amidst the intellectual pursuits of theology. However, especially now, as theology seems to be less and less compelling for many people, a more mystical approach to God seems more and more relevant. The method of mysticism is to confront us creatively with God’s presence in those places where we least expect to encounter it, and that includes our sexuality. Under the best of circumstances, it can be difficult to find God’s presence amidst the chaos of the world. Therefore, we are specially indebted to those sages and mystics who have challenged us to see God in those very places—right in front of us—where we most often forget to look. Michael Pozar is a Lutheran pastor, musician, and writer living in San Francisco. He is the founder of the Lutheran AIDS Network (LANET) and is cofounder of Acción Luterana, a network of Spanish-speaking Lutherans involved in the AIDS epidemic. Notes 11 Corinthians 15:51 2Albert Einstein, What I Believe 3Exodus 33:18-23 4William James, The Varieties of Religious Experience (first published in 1902), New York: The New American Library, Inc., 1958, p. 293-294. 5Luther’s Works 37:60 6Ed. Note: This to be distinguished from stories about Jesus, such as hearing God’s affirmation of his belovedness at baptism, being ministered to by angels in the wilderness, and talking with Moses and Elijah and being transfigured as witnessed by several of his disciples in a mountain top experience. 7Song of Solomon 1:2-4 8St. Teresa, The Interior Castle. This translation is from J. H. Leuba, The Psychology of Religious Mysticism, New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1925, pp. 150-151. 9St. John of the Cross, Dark Night of the Soul, trans. and ed., with an introduction, by E. Allison Peers, New York: Doubleday, 1990, pp. 33-34. 10Elsa Gidlow is quoted in: Andrew Harvey, The Essential Gay Mystics, New York: HarperCollins, 1997, pp. 272-273. The word “ordain” emerged from the Latin ordo, connoting order or an orderly succession. My experience with the issue of ordination, however, has been anything but orderly. I am not able to differentiate between my lesbian identity and my sense of call to ministry. I came out and was called out in the same breath. The Spirit was inspiring and conspiring with me and my community to make a new creation. I first found my calling in the Western Plains District of the Church of the Brethren, where I was licensed to the “set-apart ministry.” I was an out lesbian in my community and some on the District Ministry Commission were aware of that fact. Politely, we all approached my licensing with an implicit “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. I was frank in my disagreement with the Church of the Brethren statement on sexuality, but I did not share my sexual orientation or my growing love for the woman who would become my life partner. I accepted this omission because I felt, then, that my sexuality was not relevant to my gifts for ministry. It was only later that I came to understand how profoundly fractured I was by that division in my identity. The Spirit had given me a gift: an identity where the fullness of my being was intricately woven in wholeness—spirituality and sexuality; body, mind, and soul. In silencing one aspect of my identity, I consented to the disintegration of the Spirit’s gift. My license as a “set-apart minister” was no consolation for this deep loss. The local Brethren, after all, could no more separate my sexuality from my gifts for ministry than I could. An awkward silence arose around my sexuality, and that silence became a void of shame which no one could cross. How, then, could I carry out the charge of my license: to practice and develop my gifts for ministry? And how could the congregation carry out their charge to test and nurture these gifts? Less than two years after being licensed, I intentionally allowed my license to expire. No one asked me why. I exited from my hopes and dreams for ministry in that community in the same silence by which I entered. The frustration of my sense of vocation gave way to an enduring depression from which I am still healing. Nonetheless, my frustrated attempt to pursue licensed ministry did not keep me away from seminary. Soon I found myself the only Anabaptist— but not the only out lesbian— pursuing a Master of Divinity degree at United Theological Seminary of the Twin Disorderly Conduct: Doing a New Thing Lisa Ann Pierce Reflections on Ordination Reflections on Ordination Summer 1999 21 Cities. And though I had moved to the Twin Cities from Kansas in order to put some distance between myself and the church, I found myself warmly embraced by, and soon a member of, Saint Paul Mennonite Fellowship. Over the four years of my studies at United, the Fellowship gave me a wide berth to practice my gifts, test new learning, and express my sense of vocation. They accepted the role that my previous community had relinquished: they nurtured me with love and tenderness. And best of all, they chose not to take my gifts and treat them as “set-apart.” My gifts, rather, were viewed in close relation to the wide variety of gifts in the congregation. They honored the unique gifts that I brought and valued my seminary education, and also saw me as one member of a congregation with a vibrant lay ministry. Meanwhile, I was surrounded in my seminary education with questions of pastoral identity. My head was spinning with the question, “What will it mean to be a lesbian, feminist Anabaptist with a Master of Divinity?” After more than three years of struggle with that question, I came to the orderly conclusion that pastoral ministry was neither my calling nor my direction in life. Some three months later the Fellowship called me to serve for one year as interim pastor. I accepted. So much for orderly conclusions. This disorder has always been the Fellowship’s best gift to me. Over the years of my membership and my one year as interim pastor, the community has disassembled my sense of ministry even as it has reassembled my sense of wholeness. It is this sense of re-found wholeness which has allowed me to examine my understanding of ministry and to bring to bear my cultural and spiritual identity as a lesbian feminist. My beliefs about ordination have shifted profoundly in the process. I am coming to believe: • Ordination functions as a status when it is limited by factors other than readiness for ministry— factors such as sexuality and gender. • Our focus on licensing and ordination frequently detracts from the depth of our conviction to be a priesthood of all believers. • Ordination (in its current practice) does not function as an accountability structure. I have witnessed too many acts of injustice involving Anabaptist clergy (who were never held accountable) to believe that ordination is helping people in our churches move toward right relationship. • Ordination can be a weapon. I have seen ordination credentials withheld or threatened in an effort to control individuals. (Those who want to change the church often find that having nothing to lose can be a great freedom.) Sometimes, when we are working toward the inclusion of GLBT people in the institutions of the church, I think we have to ask ourselves, “What are we trying to join and why? How does this institution fit our values?” Increasingly, I want to work for the transformation of the church rather than my own inclusion in its current structures. How can GLBT perspectives challenge the structures of ordination in the church? What kind of church might we become if the language of vocation, calling, and commission became the language of all God’s people in all the places they work and give? We have been striving for this kind of possibility at the Saint Paul Mennonite Fellowship. After more than fifteen lifegiving years with our founding pastor, and one year with me serving as interim pastor, we have been called to a new creation. We have reorganized our congregation and no longer pay a pastor. Rather, we have become pastors to one another. It has not been easy—and it certainly has not been orderly— but it has been an honest and courageous struggle toward mutual ministry in a priesthood of all believers. We are trying to live into a church transformed. Lisa Ann Pierce lives with Karen, her partner of eight years, in Saint Paul, Minnesota. She has been a member of St. Paul Mennonite Fellowship since 1995 and served as interim pastor from 1997 to 1998. Currently, she serves as Co-Director of Women Against Military Madness in Minneapolis. Increasingly, I want to work for the transformation of the church rather than my own inclusion in its current structures. 22 Open Hands Tr oubling the Waters of Gender Expect ations Excerpts (a mere taste of a 21-page essay) from a thorough treatise that argues that, “since gendering is a key feature in our attempts to create epistemic order, destabilizing gender in turn destabilizes our epistemic attempts to create an ordered reality. Gender trouble leads to epistemic trouble.” Epistemology is the study of how we come to have knowledge, so, in others words: separating the genders gives order to our knowledge. Those who “trouble the waters” of gender give rise to disorder and chaos in how we know the world. In the following article, the author refers to the “vowed religious” by which he means those in the Roman Catholic Church who take a vow of chastity to serve in religious vocation. In respect of the author’s sense of reverence around the name of God (parallel to the Hebrew’s reference to YHWH), G*d has been left as in the original text. Though in these excerpts the author does not specifically mention transgendered or bisexual folk, “queer” encompasses them. This paper was delivered during the 20th anniversary conference of Harvard Divinity School’s GABLE, the Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual/Transgendered student organization, April 23-24, 1999. Resurrection of the Body I don’t aspire to make generalizations about “the essence of queerness” or the “essence of religious life.” Rather, I wish to invite you to see whether there are experiences in your lives that bear a certain “family resemblance” with the case presented. This case is a limited one, since I want to reflect on my life as a queer vowed religious man in the Catholic Church. I will do so by focusing on the body as the site of theological knowledge and, more specifically, by exploring what the queer body and the religious body share in common. I remember vividly a conversation I had while working in Frankfurt as a nursing assistant in a hospice for people living with and dying from AIDS. “Frank,” with whom I used to talk at nights, had lived for years on the streets. His body was fully covered with tattoos. Using these tattoos, the stumps of the two toes he had lost during freezing nights, his scars, and his dark yellow fingers, Frank told me the stories of his life. His body had become a living map of his experiences. This conversation was healing for me because it started a process in which I rediscovered my own body— its marks, its desires. Frank helped me to discover my body which had become a neglected depository of pain, lust, and memories that I had tried to avoid for so many years. It helped me to see how my body was a map of the counter-reality of my declared identity. I mention this healing encounter with Frank because it points to a simple but often overlooked reality: The body doesn’t go away, and the body is the receptacle for all these things in our lives that don’t go away even if we try so hard to make them disappear. In my case, it was, among other things, my love for men that I tried to avoid, the fuzzy feeling in my stomach when I was together with certain men. All this was stored in my body, rejected with it, but kept alive by it. In a sense Frank had helped me to experience a resurrection of the body. What stepped out of the tomb was my very individual and personal history. I should mention as well that this resurrection would not have been possible without years of bodily spiritual exercises: Praying while lying stretched out on the floor and meditating about the ways in which G*d’s love carries me; receiving the Eucharist; and walking on pilgrimages without money or shelter. Unknowingly these exercises had prepared me for the experience that what stepped into the light, embraced by G*d’s love, was not only my personal history but also my personal contradictions and ambiguities. Ludger H. Viefhues, S.J. Religious and Queer Vocations Summer 1999 23 Virginity Threatens Patriarchal Church Leadership The body is stylized by the ascetics to realize social and theological goals. Jo Ann Kay McNamara’s Sisters in Arms provides an interesting example.1 In her analysis of the early virginity movement, McNamara shows how vowed life enabled women to step outside of the social constraints of accepted gender roles and to defy the sexual labor of procreation imposed on them by the Antique Roman patriarchy. “Sexual renunciation was the key to the new time, with women acting as a metaphor for all the humble and meek destined to inherit the earth” (p 23). Virginity became not only a symbol for G*d’s power overcoming the evil of this world but further, a sign for female power and strength and a breakdown of social gender structures. McNamara writes “virginity broke the continuum of sexuality, denying the universal definition of women as imperfect men that rendered a balanced and complementary relationship with men ludicrous” (p 24). Thus, the movement of virgins, although highly praised by the male and married episcopate, nonetheless remained a threat to the patriarchal church leadership. Renouncing Penetration and Maleness The chaste vowed religious man is basically a man who refuses to penetrate. Penetration and the illusion of power and activity that often accompany it, is still an important feature for the creation of male identity in our culture. In history we can detect many variants of the “penetration code,” the idea that active penetration is a sacrament for maleness and power. In Roman Antiquity this code meant that “a wealthy and powerful adult male citizen…at the top of the status hierarchy could penetrate any other person without loss of social status.”2 The very act of publicly renouncing penetration stylizes the renunciant’s body into a culturally meaningful symbol. In a culture that defines maleness and power through the act of penetration, the symbol of the male body that is stylized by the absence of penetration, while also retaining other codes of maleness, questions and potentially destabilizes the order of gender and sexuality. Now, this seems to be too good to be true, since there are too many male religious who engage overtly or covertly in pure power trips, men who shift from living out their penetrative role in sexual relations to living it out in power relations. Nevertheless, this observation does not challenge the thesis that vowed religious life undermines the core understanding of what it means to be male.3 On a very fundamental symbolic level, my body is stylized as non-male (non-penetrating). It isn’t, however, stylized as fundamentally female either. My body can neither be clearly subsumed under “male” nor “female” in the current economy of gender. My “gender-troubled” body becomes homeless, a vagabond in a no-man’s-land of gender. This body can assume two functions: a symbolic function outwardly, and an experiential function inwardly. Outwardly this body as cultural symbol questions and destabilizes a fundamental religious and cultural ordering scheme. Gendering reality, separating, and demarcating maleness and femaleness are important tools that religious traditions use to create an ordered space, a reality that can be known, and acted upon. Mary Douglas Gendering reality, separating, and demarcating maleness and femaleness are important tools that religious traditions use to create an ordered space, a reality that can be known, and acted upon. 24 Open Hands in her classic Purity and Danger writes: “It is only by exaggerating the difference between within and without, above and below, male and female…that a semblance of order is created.”4 A body that cannot be subsumed under these oppositions symbolizes the fact that our ordering of reality, which relies on these symbolic oppositions, is only a semblance of order. Stanley Cavell observed that this lack of solid ontological grounding involves a realization of horror: Horror is the title I am giving to the perception of the precariousness of human identity, to the perception that it may be lost or invaded, that we may be, or may become, something other than we are, or take ourselves for; that our origins as human beings need accounting for, and are unaccountable.5 Queer Bodies So far I have used feminist and queer discourse to repoliticize the body of the vowed religious. The body of the vowed religious male is a queer body. As such it symbolizes the fragility of our acts of knowledge and ordering. Resurrecting the queer body in vowed religious life means to make visible and tangible for the church the shadow in which we search and find G*d. Thus, queer and feminist discourse is a gift for the church. It is a gift that can help us to free the religious body from the confinements of a discourse that focuses either on evanescent spirituality or on wholeness and individual psychology without seeing the cultural and therefore political dimensions of the chaste body. The queer body is religiously meaningful. It can be an instance of learning about G*d, about ordering and knowing reality, about the horror and joy of trust. The queer man, who is open for penetration, or the penetrating woman, stylize their bodies in a way that takes them outside of our current gender economy. They represent the fact that our categories, like the fundamental categories of male and female, are not expressions of an underlying objective reality that we passively receive. Proliferating gender identities— bringing categories to their breaking point and reminding us of the fundamental fluidity of all our structures— this is the grace of the queer body. This frees us from a conventional framework of understandings, making new interpretations and creativity possible. The queer body involves the overcoming of any social and intellectual framework that focuses primarily on clear-cut, binary oppositions, like male-female, or straight-gay. The insistence on the fragility of our epistemic frameworks implies a critique against any attempt to establish totalizing categories. In that sense, I think the queer body can help us uncover an appreciation for vagueness. Our queer body can draw us deeper into the troublesome awareness that identity, order, and knowledge are fluid. It points to and makes us experience the breakdown of our symbolic world and brings us into solidarity with others who experience such breakdowns. The realization that G*d is beyond our epistemic reach, that He is neither male nor female, that She is neither not-male nor notfemale, and the fundamental uncertainty on which all our knowledge rests is symbolized by and experienced through the queer body. This is the positive grace that we as queer men and women contribute to the church; we are pointing to the fundamental reality of uncertainty and the troubling necessity of trust. We can echo the lover of the Song of Songs: “On my bed at night I sought him whom my heart loves—I sought him but I did not find him. I will rise then and go about the city; in the streets and crossings I will seek him whom my heart loves” (3:1-2a NAB). Ludger H. Viefhues, S.J., from Germany, is a Ph.D. student in the School of Arts and Sciences at Harvard University in Boston. He has been involved in ministry with those in jails and prisons. Notes 1McNamara, Jo Ann. Sisters in Arms: Catholic Nuns Through Two Millennia. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1996. 2Boswell, John. “Concepts, Experiences, and Sexuality.” In Que(e)ring Religion—A Critical Anthology, ed. Gary David Comstock, 121. New York: Continuum, 1997. 3It is important to note that this line of thought depends on traditional understandings of maleness. I further believe that an emphasis on the heroic self-control involved in a chaste life is an echo of the “males are in power” idea. I take it that an awareness of the inherent gender instability is at the heart of this and other exaggerations. 4Douglas, Mary. Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. London; Boston: Ark Paperbacks, 1984, 4. 5Cavell, Stanley. The Claim of Reason: Wittgenstein, Skepticism, Morality, and Tragedy. Oxford: Clarendon Press; New York: Oxford University Press, 1979, 418. Emphasis mine. This is the positive grace that we as queer men and women contribute to the church; we are pointing to the fundamental reality of uncertainty and the troubling necessity of trust. Summer 1999 MINISTRIES 25 God is Up to Something, Even in Congregational Conflict Listening Leaders Bear Fruit Pat Taylor Ellison At some points along their journey all congregations, if they’re healthy, need to have tough conversations. Perhaps the members are concerned about how money is being spent, or how the building is being maintained— or perhaps the congregation has discovered that, over the years, they are faced with different ministry challenges and different persons to serve than they when they were founded. New people with new needs live at their doorstep. Does the congregation continue unchanged? Or do they change the way they live the life of faith for the sake of the neighbor? These are tough questions that all dynamic, life-filled congregations encounter. But what happens? People need to speak frankly with one another for the congregation to maintain or strengthen its healthy relationships among the members and especially with the community. Do they do so? Sadly, as often as not, the answer is no. Does your congregation speak frankly? Of course you know you should do it, but how do you do it? What if people disagree with one another? What if feelings are hurt? What if the congregation’s mission or vision is questioned? And how does our congregation have this tough conversation in such a way that it is grounded in our faith? Really fruitful conversations in healthy congregations are often led by surprising folks, folks who may not be paid staff members or even congregational officers. Such conversation is led by the great listeners of the congregation, “listening leaders” we call them, people who know that a safer place has to be established, a welcoming set of ground rules and habits have to be lived out, so that anyone who is alive in faith can participate. What follows is what we have learned over the past decade at the Church Innovations Institute (Minnesota) from experiences of congregations, large and small, throughout North America. Components of Capacity In any enterprise that people undertake, four Components of Capacity help them create the climate for that enterprise and enable them to become good at it. Aristotle said these were the four things that separated the novice from the accomplished person, whatever the field of endeavor. The four Components of Capacity are: attitudes and beliefs, a “just enough” knowledge base, a few skills, and a set of habits that can be passed along to others. A woodcarver, for example, has attitudes and beliefs about the wood, the tools, the article to be created, and its uses. The woodcarver has just enough knowledge of what sort of wood behaves in what way, what moisture and tools do to change the wood, and so on. The woodcarver has learned a set of skills particular to the trade and has developed a set of habits for his or her life that allow for the pursuit of craftsmanship, usefulness, and beauty. Hosting fruitful disputes doesn’t seem much like woodcarving, yet we know that listening leaders who discover and master these four components for their work, appropriate to their setting, can make a huge difference in the way congregations encounter and even embrace differences and disagreement as they grow in mission and service to their neighbors. In congregations which encounter tough issues and need open, honest, frank conversation that really bears fruit, the effective listening leaders we have met demonstrate these specific gifts under each component of capacity: EFFECTIVE LISTENING LEADERS Attitudes and Beliefs • Your hope is not in your persuasive skills but in God’s promises and God’s love. • When you disagree with others faithfully, you discover newness and surprise. • You have a preference for action: you’d rather forge ahead than hide. “Just Enough” Knowledge Base • You know the tradition of your faith community that is having the conversation. • You have a working knowledge of the Bible, especially Bible stories that form the Christian imagination of those taking part in the conversation and welcome rather than foreclose talk. • You have some method for interaction (understand how it works, where it goes awry, etc.). Skills • You are good at adapting and inventing ways of interacting with people. • You use your Christ-inspired imagination to encourage great conversation. • You can bring people back again and again to a common vision for their conversation. Habits • You embody hospitality. • You are a living listener whose whole body and mind encourages others to speak. • You encourage honest disagreement so that new thinking can be heard and tested. These are the gifts we see in the leaders of great faith-based, fruit-bearing moral conversation. Perhaps, reading them, you are saying to yourself, “Yes, of course. But what do they look like in the heat of a dispute?” As you read the following example, look for the gifts listed above. An Example of Listening Leadership A congregation was wrestling with whether to acknowledge a longstanding gay and lesbian fellowship group in its WELCOMING PROCESS 26 MINISTRIES Open Hands new congregational brochure. Most members were cordial to the group’s being part of the church’s ministry— it was this moment of going public that was at stake. The church’s leadership knew that a frank, public conversation with as many persons as possible was necessary before a fruitful decision could be made. The conversation would have to be one in which people could free one another up enough to speak their minds and hearts on the issue, so that, whatever the outcome, everyone could claim to have been part of a public comingto- terms with the future not only of the brochure but of their shared ministry. The listening leader knew the issue and knew the arguments. She knew that people would have to feel safe enough to speak. She knew that the congregation valued persons for their unique gifts and talents. She knew how to appeal to people’s imaginations of service and welcome in Christ’s name. She began with Bible study, encouraging people to dwell in a text (a particularly good one is the “Christ Hymn” in Philippians 2, which urges believers to have the same mind that is theirs in Christ, who became a slave in order to free others) to open people’s imaginations to God’s promises and to remind them of their shared faith. She walked participants through a userfriendly brainstorm structure that encouraged them to think of their tradition, especially Scripture, the needs and messages of society and culture, and their own experience as faithful people, both individually and corporately. She honored everyone’s contributions equally. She returned to the text for new insight when talk halted for one reason or another. The listening leader paid attention to body language. She encouraged people to picture their ministry with and without publicly listing the group in question, and listened as they spoke the old and the new arguments. After a little while the gathered folks were talking to one another directly, no longer through her as mediator. She tested this lowered reliance on her presence once the conversation was floating by leaving the room. The talk continued on into the evening, and in the end, the decision was reached: the group was listed publicly. Of course there was still some fallout. And it must be said that not everyone who could and maybe should have attended the conversation actually came. Yet those gathered that evening experienced a sort of coming to terms without coming to blows, a hospitality that they were not expecting. The dwelling in a scriptural text that invites listening and even slavehood in service of freeing the neighbor, the brainstorming model, the space and time for an ensuing “floating” conversation, the encouragement of civil if passionate debate that honors all comers— these activities demonstrate the list of gifts under each component of capacity. The listening leader had a grasp of something crucial within each category: particular attitudes and beliefs, a minimum knowledge base to work from, a set of skills, and basic habits that, when placed in service of that congregation during that time, permitted them to put their disagreement to work to bear fruit. The model that was used is called Growing Healthier Congregations, or How to Talk Together When Nobody is Listening developed by Church Innovations, based on experiences exactly like this one. We created it because of our deep belief that God is up to something, even in conflict. A trusted listening leader from your congregation, with tools like this and the Holy Spirit’s guidance, can help create safer spaces to tackle tough issues, to have fair and fruitful fights, and to discover more energy for mission. Pat Taylor Ellison, Ph.D., a Lutheran, is associate director of research of the Church Innovations Institute in Saint Louis Park, Minnesota. How Can We Reach More Parents? Paul Beeman, National President, PFLAG Hurray! So you and your congregation have taken a year to study homosexuality in light of your faith. With fear and trembling, you took The Vote. To your relief, your congregation voted to become a welcoming congregation. Congratulations! But what now? Quite a few people have said with a trace of sorrow, “Since we took the vote in our congregation, not much has changed. The flood of new gay members that some predicted/feared/ hoped would blossom, hasn’t happened. Except for a couple of activists, most member families we know, or suspect may have a gay child still have not stepped forward. We don’t wish to “out” people or families, but we expected and hoped for more results. What more can we do? How is a Welcoming congregation supposed to…well, to Welcome people who don’t come? How can we reach out to more parents?” Having been pastor of several congregations where LGBT persons and their families could be totally open, here are a few suggestions. First, be careful of the “We”-“They” pronouns. In a welcoming congregation, “We” are not inviting “Them.” It is different now. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered, questioning, straight, parent, child, male, female, lay, clergy— all of us are “We.” One faith, one baptism, One Body. No more “Theys.” Jamie Henderson, son of former PFLAG President Mitzi and Tom Henderson, is from a long PARENTS For an in-depth yet user-friendly approach to dealing with tough congregational conversations, you can train yourself using: Growing Healthier Congregations, or How to Talk Together When Nobody’s Listening, a video workshop. Pat Keifert, Pat Taylor Ellison, Ron Duty. Church Innovations Publishing, Inc., 1997. A 124-page, 2-video training kit for congregational groups of all ages and sizes, meant to grow a set of healthy habits for taking our faith seriously as we tackle tough issues. To order this resource or to be trained by an associate of Church Innovations Institute, contact the Institute at 1-888-223-7631. Summer 1999 MINISTRIES 27 line of Presbyterians. But he warned, “Healthy people don’t stay in abusive relationships, and the church has been abusive to its gay and lesbian members. I was tired of always justifying my presence in my church, of always being The Gay member, not just myself.” In a Welcoming congregation, no person or group is singled out. We are all One. Second, take time for prayer and celebration as One. You have taken a gigantic and historic step of faithfulness in becoming a welcoming congregation. Don’t stop now. But don’t feel discouraged if the world, or even your small part of it, doesn’t change instantly. Take time to catch your collective breath and offer thanks for gains made. There are lots of ways to celebrate: some devout, some communal, some raucous. What fits your congregation’s style? Some celebrations need to be renewed every year. One congregation uses St. Valentine’s Day annually to combine all three, with a prayer vigil for thanks and guidance, a Valentine’s Day dance, and a press conference outlining their plans for action in a related LGBT issue. Your local PFLAG chapter would be delighted to share with you in planning and to participate in such events. Third, do visioning together. What do you and your gay and straight colleagues want your welcoming congregation to look like in the years ahead? In studying prehistoric petroglyphs (rock carving) and pictographs (rock paintings) near where we winter in Arizona, I learned of the ancient peoples’ “sympathetic magic.” They believed if, in your sacred place, you draw what you want to happen, that will make it happen. Draw an elk on the cave wall before you go hunting and you will find one. Good advice in hunting for more church participants. What brought in those of you already active? What is or could become special about your congregation to make LGBT’s and their families feel safe and welcome? Fourth, speak up on gay and other minority issues. Without becoming one-sided, let these topics become an easy part of your casual personal conversations, with friends and in social gatherings. Draft statements and occasional position papers for use in committee meetings, administrative bodies, announcements, sermons and news releases. I have often spoken about sexual minority or gender identity issues in a sermon or a large group. Almost invariably someone comes to me afterward, feeling I have given them permission to speak openly about a long-hidden topic in their lives or their families. Fifth, declare your congregation to be a discriminationfree zone. After a period of study and soul-searching, a congregation in Tacoma, Washington, declared itself to be a Bigotry-Free Zone. That notation appears on its signboards, worship bulletins, newsletters and letterheads. Progress has been deliberate, but some members admitted they have gay daughters and sons. A few new LGBT persons began to attend and some have joined. Soon the church opened its facilities for a newly-organizing PFLAG chapter. Sixth, be sure LGBT persons are in responsible and visible positions. At Advent and Christmas Eve services I always asked families to light the Advent Candles, along with their reading of scripture and prayer. As far as I know there was hardly a blink when a long- term member-family consisting of two gay men did the lighting one Christmas Eve. That the highly qualified chair of our education committee happened to be lesbian was equally irrelevant. Seventh, participate in your denomination’s pro-gay caucus. In my denomination, representatives of our Reconciling Congregations— lay and clergy, gay and straight—meet regularly in clusters, to support one another and to help sympathizers in other congregations take the first steps toward becoming welcoming. Our representatives meet occasionally as a statewide coalition to strategize for getting pro-acceptance lay and clergy elected to our regional and national law and policy-making bodies. We all need these relationships, for support, for sharing information, for conceiving together our congregation’s future, and to influence our denominations. So get together and start drawing pictures on your cave walls, depicting what you hope for in your congregation. And happy hunting! Paul Beeman has served as pastor of United Methodist churches large and small, as a district superintendent, and as a Director of Public Relations for Methodist conferences in Washington State and in the Dakotas. He and his wife, Betty, have four children: two straight, one lesbian and one gay. The Beemans helped organize the PFLAG chapter in Olympia, where they have retired. He has been a PFLAG national board member since 1993, and became its president in 1998. SPIRITUALITY Profound Holiness at the Heart of Gay Love Meeting AIDS Honestly and Lovingly Daniel A. Helminiak Richard Hardy has written a powerful book about the spiritual experience of gay men whose partners have AIDS. Loving Men: Gay Partners, Spirituality, and AIDS (Continuum, 1998) is authoritative. He knows AIDS and he knows spirituality. He did in-depth interviews with thirteen gay partners of PWAs, and he understood their experience: his own partner died of AIDS. Besides, he was professor of spirituality at St. Paul University, Ottawa, and is currently adjunct professor of spirituality at the Church Divinity School of the Pacific in Berkeley. He truly presents the spiritual depths of gay couples living with AIDS. He chronicles what many find inconceivable: profound holiness at the heart of gay love. The book begins with a fine chapter on spirituality: what it is, how it necessarily includes the body, why it need not be religious. The remaining six chapters treat in turn various facets of the experience of loving a man with AIDS, and Hardy highlights the spiritual dimension of each facet. This is not a book of stories about men with AIDS, though it does tell parts 28 MINISTRIES Open Hands of their stories. It is rather an analytic portrayal of how their stories are deeply spiritual. The topics include their meeting (some in bars, some in churches), the risks they took, the personal development they pursued, the communities that supported and rejected them, their images of God and their prayer experiences or lack thereof, and the hope they found in the midst of the plague. Hardy shows how God and spiritual pursuit were at stake all along the way. If ever there is an argument for gay marriage, this book must be it. Talk about heroic love “in sickness and in health, until death do us part”! Here are gay men who made wellweighed commitments to one another, “vows,” and lived out their commitments in the face of overwhelming odds. These gay relationships are as profound and real as any heterosexual marriage. And they are as holy. “The great mystics…,” Hardy writes, “constantly remind us of the mystery of the sacred in all that is human…. To enter into the fullness of love—which sexual lovemaking is at its best—is to find at its very core the God who made it so” (p. 137). This gay love is real love; it must be. As one man, Frank, phrased it, “You have to be able to love to get through it” (p. 159). End of discussion. The power of this book is that it does not talk around the subject. It presents it up front, the actual words from the lips of these men. Those who have lived this experience will surely recognize themselves in this book. Those who have not will come to understand, perhaps to actually feel, what AIDS means. Reading this book, all will recognize occasions for holiness at every turn in the course of AIDS. Indeed, this book shows us some contemporary saints. They are not saints, of course, “if one envisions saints as characters living out of this world. But they are saints if one sees saints as people who live and love passionately, each in their own way, place and time” (p. 183). These men became saints by dealing honestly and lovingly with AIDS. Their minds were opened and their love expanded. Very challenging circumstances forced them to dig down deep and to reach for life’s core. They simplified their perspective. They learned to cherish each moment. They came to know themselves and their love as part of a marvelous universe. The usual word to name this achievement is mysticism. By living with AIDS and loving as gays, these men became mystics. Loving Men documents that fact, so Hardy has made an important contribution. Too long has body-denying and gay-bashing religion dominated the spiritual scene. In contrast, Hardy presents a picture of “authentic spirituality” (p. 163). He spells out what spiritual growth is about—healthy and wholesome human development, in the body yet open to transcendence. And he highlights this very thing in the lives of the gay men he studied. Rich in detail, profound in understanding, instructive about the meaning of spirituality, this book deserves a thoughtful reading. Daniel Helminiak, formerly a Roman Catholic priest and presently a psychotherapist and educator, is the author of several books, most recently, Religion and the Human Sciences: An Approach via Spirituality (State University of New York Press, 1998). A Litany for Worship Ron Coughlin This litany was written for a Pride Day Service of Worship in the Canadian context. You are encouraged to adapt it to your own situation and context. Litany of Confession (Readers will come up to the Table one by one, read their parts and then extinguish one candle. As each reader returns to her/his pew, the next reader will come forward.) Reader 1 We remember the sorrows of the thousands and thousands of gay men, lesbian women and bisexual persons who were murdered as heretics, condemned as witches, gassed in Nazi concentration camps, shocked in mental asylums, labeled sinful or sick, and robbed of self esteem and dignity. Confessing our society’s oppression we extinguish this candle. Reader 2 We recognize that our world has not responded with compassion and urgency to the crisis of people living with HIV and AIDS. Many people who suffer from this illness are still being treated as lepers in our society. Confessing our society’s oppression we extinguish this candle. Reader 3 We express sorrow and outrage for the many men and women who have been beaten up or murdered on the suspicion of being gay, lesbian or bisexual. We acknowledge that in some countries of our world a lesbian or gay relationship is against the law and is considered a crime punishable by a jail sentence. Confessing our society’s oppression we extinguish this candle. Reader 4 We pray for the many ministers who have lost their positions because they have been open about their sexual orientation or because they were suspected of being gay or lesbian, or because they presided at a covenanting service of holy union. We remember the congregations which have been disfellowshipped because they were an open and welcoming congregation to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered persons. Confessing our society’s oppression we extinguish this candle. Sustaining the Spirit Summer 1999 MINISTRIES 29 Reader 5 We recognize that in this country gay and lesbian couples do not enjoy the same privileges and rights as other couples. These couples are denied health benefits, pension payments, and the right for access to our loved ones in hospitals. Confessing our society’s oppression we extinguish this candle. Reader 6 We are appalled by the statistics which show that the largest number of young men who commit suicide are those who are gay. People who struggle with self-acceptance and society’s lack of acceptance of gay people often see no hope and give up. Confessing our society’s oppression we extinguish this candle. Reader 7 We recall the times when we have heard a racist, sexist or homophobic joke or story and did not speak up. Confessing our society’s oppression we extinguish this candle. Silence We say together: All: Amen. Prayers of Thanksgiving (Readers will come up to the Table one by one, read their parts and then light one candle. As each reader returns to her/his pew, the next reader will come forward.) Reader 1 In thanksgiving, we remember the many signs of hope that boundaries will be broken and that real acceptance and justice will be offered to all people regardless of sexual orientation. We remember the Stonewall protests in New York in 1969, a significant milestone in the struggle for gay and lesbian rights. 1969 also was the year when then Justice Minister Pierre Trudeau removed homosexual activity between consenting adults from the Criminal Code of Canada. In thanksgiving for these signs of hope we light this candle. Reader 2 In 1977 sexual orientation was added to the Charter of Human Rights by the Province of Quebec. This forbids discrimination in employment, housing, and community services for individual gay men and lesbians. Since that time, similar laws have been passed by Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, British Columbia, the Yukon and the Northwest Territories. Our courts have written these human rights into the laws of Alberta. In thanksgiving for these signs of hope we light this candle. Reader 3 The United Church of Canada, since 1980, has advocated for the acceptance of and justice for all people, regardless of their sexual orientation. In 1988 and 1990, the right of all people to be considered for ordination and commissioning was affirmed. We celebrate the tenth anniversary of this decision and acknowledge that currently there are 30 openly gay or lesbian ministers in parish ministry across our church. The United Church has settled 7 openly gay or lesbian ministers in their first pastoral charge and has created a safer place for candidates to acknowledge honestly their sexual orientation. In thanksgiving for these signs of hope we light this candle. Reader 4 We give thanks that recent court decisions have supported the rights of gay and lesbian persons. We recall that in Nova Scotia recently, the courts have upheld the rights for same-gender couples to have the same spousal benefits as other couples. In thanksgiving for these signs of hope we light this candle. Reader5 In 1982, a group of men and women meeting in Montreal founded Affirm: Gays and Lesbians in The United Church of Canada, now known as Affirm United. This group of dedicated justice- seekers have assisted our church over many years through dialogue, study and calls for justice. In thanksgiving for these people and the many others who work in their own milieu for justice and hope, we light this candle. Reader 6 For the new acceptance of positive images of lesbians, gay men and bisexual persons in the press, on our stages, on television and in modern films, we give thanks. We think of Ellen Degeneres, KD Lang, Melissa Etheridge, Rupert Everett, George Michael and many others. We welcome the new understanding that sexual orientation is a fact of God’s creation, like being left-handed. In thanksgiving for these signs of hope we light this candle. Reader 7 We give thanks for the many quiet signs of support— the encouraging word, the remembrance of anniversaries, the joining in the Pride Day parade, the firm comment that homophobia is not accepted here. These and numerous other ways of showing support are signs of God’s love and acceptance. In thanksgiving for these signs of hope we light this candle. Silence We say together: All: Amen. Ron Coughlin is the program leader for the Affirming Congregation Programme of the United Church of Canada, the newest ecumenical partner of Open Hands. 30 Open Hands Movement News POSITION AVAILABLE Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR) Job Opening FOR, a national interfaith peace and justice organization seeks a Nonviolence Education and Training Coordinator to organize and lead nonviolence education and training programs. Application deadline: Oct 1, 1999. Starting date: Jan 3, 2000. Send resumes and contact Yvonne Royster for application form: The Fellowship of Reconciliation, Box 271, Nyack, NY 10960. (914) 358-4601. Fax: (914) 358-4924. Mark Bowman Leaves RCP and Open Hands; Jim Sauder Leaves BMC Council The cofounder and publisher of Open Hands and the executive director of the Reconciling Congregation Program within the United Methodist Church left both posts as of the sixth national RCP convocation at the end of July. Mark Bowman oversaw the shaping of the RCP ministry and Open Hands magazine, published by the RCP in cooperation with ecumenical partners in six other denominations. Few, if any, national GLBT leaders within the welcoming congregations movement have served as creatively, passionately, and lovingly with such stamina and longevity as Bowman. Open Hands editor Chris Glaser praised Bowman “as a friend, a prophet, a pioneer, and a wonderful person to work with— always supportive, encouraging, trusting.” [Look for Mark Bowman’s reflections on his twenty-year effort to bring reform to the church in the Fall issue of Open Hands.] Earlier this year, Jim Sauder resigned his decade-long leadership role as coordinator and then executive director of the Brethren/Mennonite Council for Lesbian and Gay Concerns. He represented the Council’s Supportive Congregations Network on the Open Hands Advisory Committee, and his participation will be greatly missed. Allen Harris Honored by UCC Coalition Nearly 300 people gathered at the Westin Hotel for the UCC Coalition for LGBT Concerns luncheon during the General Synod held in Providence, Rhode Island, in July. The Coalition honored a colleague, the Rev. Allen Harris, for his nine years of leadership as developer of the Open and Affirming (O&A) Ministries of the Gay, Lesbian, and Affirming Disciples Alliance (in the Christian Church, Disciples of Christ), a leadership position Harris left this past year. Certificates were also presented to the 76 UCC congregations which had been listed as Open and Affirming since the General Synod in 1997. MARK YOUR CALENDARS NOW! Witness our Welcome 2000: God’s Promise is for You Mass Ecumenical Gathering of Welcoming Congregations Northern Illinois University in DeKalb, Illinois August 3-6, 2000 DON’T MISS THIS HISTORIC EVENT! Sponsored by: • Affirming Congregations (United Church of Canada) • Association of Welcoming & Affirming Baptists • More Light Presbyterians • Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ) • Open and Affirming Program (UCC) • Reconciling Congregations (United Methodist) • Reconciling in Christ Churches (Lutheran) • Supportive Congregations (Brethren/Mennonite) ML Presbyterians Name Field Organizer More Light Presbyterians has hired its first national field organizer, Michael J. Adee. The addition of a full-time staff person marks the commitment of the new organization—a merger of the former Presbyterians for Lesbian & Gay Concerns and the More Light Church Network—to training and working with congregations, chapters, and presbyteries. A lifelong Presbyterian, Adee’s background includes parish and campus ministry, chaplaincy, hospice work, overseas missionary service, political organizing, diversity training, social change programs and university teaching. He holds an M.Div. from Southwestern Seminary and a Ph.D. in Communication from Louisiana State University. He has served as an elder in two Presbyterian churches. Formerly he was the executive director of the Stonewall Cincinnati Human Rights Organization, and more recently, the executive director of The Experience, a national non-profit educational organization serving the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community. Adee can be reached at 505/992-1919 or mjadeemlp@aol.com. Founders of Catholic Ministry Silenced Jeannine Gramick, a nun who organized weekly masses for gay Catholics as early as 1971, and Robert Nugent, a priest who joined her, forming New Ways Ministry in 1977 to connect the gay community and the Catholic Church, have been ordered by the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to stop their ministry of 25 years. They had been told in 1984 to include in their ministry “the church’s teaching regarding the intrinsic evil of homosexual acts.” But both Gramick and Nugent continued to serve the broader church as prophets urging changes in attitudes toward gay people, while serving gays and lesbians and their families as pastors. They also produced two books on the subject. A written statement from Nugent indicated compliance with the mandate not to speak but perhaps to write on the subject (apparently not specifically forbidden), and to continue counseling and the sacrament of reconciliation on a private, personal basis. Francis DeBernardo, executive director of New Ways Ministry (based in Mount Rainier, Maryland), told The Washington Blade, “The silencing of them is an impotent act on the part of the Catholic Church because I think the discussion about gays that they have sparked has already blossomed.” Summer 1999 31 Welcoming Communities More Churches Declare Welcoming Stance Annual listing of welcoming congregations (Winter 1999) erratum: Christ Church United Methodist instead of Christ UMC in Santa Rosa, California. OPEN AND AFFIRMING PROGRAM Parkway United Church of Christ Minneapolis, Minnesota This urban congregation of 500 members has a strong commitment to local mission (food pantry, clothing drive, etc.) and, with the capable leadership of two lay members, a growing ministry with youth. Following a year of study, the church became ONA with 98% of those voting favorably. The church now announces events like LGBT Pride and the area AIDS Walk and is designing a banner that church members might use when participating in such events. Last summer the congregation held a series of summer potluck discussions on “Equal Rights in Covenant Life” and then developed a statement supporting same-sex marriage. This summer they plan another series on violence in America. RECONCILING CONGREGATIONS Alum Rock United Methodist Church San Jose, California Alum Rock UMC was chartered in 1951 as a suburban neighborhood church serving the east side of San Jose. The presence of several different ethnic groups in this 250- member congregation has made it known as a diverse congregation. Alum Rock has a strong history in refugee ministry and is preparing to welcome a family from Kosovo. Alum Rock is engaged in ecumenical ministry with other churches through People Acting in Community Together (PACT), a faith-based community organizing project which is working on education and traffic safety issues. Central United Methodist Church Stockton, California Central UMC was founded in 1849 during the earliest period of the California Gold Rush. In 1964 the congregation dedicated a new building known for its dramatic architectural style across the street from the University of the Pacific. The 860-member congregation is comprised largely of educators and is quite cosmopolitan with persons from Africa, Europe, and Asia. Central took three years to study what it would mean to become a Reconciling Congregation with many forums and study groups. The affirmative vote by the congregation was about 80%. Clifton United Methodist Church Cincinnati, Ohio This 107-year-old congregation has a rich history of ministry in a university neighborhood. Clifton helped start a Korean congregation and a ministry with Cambodian refugees. Increased participation by students in recent years has led the congregation to become more involved in campus ministry. Clifton has long been known as a community which appreciates diversity of thought and theological perspective. The congregation of 170 members includes many folks from other faith and denominational backgrounds who have found a home there as well as a place to explore their faith and ask questions. Gay and lesbian persons have worshiped at Clifton for several decades and new persons are now coming because of the decision to be a Reconciling Congregation. Harvard-Epworth United Methodist Church Cambridge, Massachusetts Harvard-Epworth UMC is located in Harvard Square and is surrounded by Harvard Law School. The 300-member congregation draws persons from throughout the metropolitan Boston area. Harvard-Epworth is known for its excellent preaching and music program and as a community with as many singles as couples. The congregation has a long tradition of involvement in social justice issues and has had a significant number of gay and lesbian members for many years. After a long pastorate of 33 years, the congregation is in the midst of redefining its identity. Peace United Methodist Church Shoreview, Minnesota Peace UMC is about thirty years old and is located in an affluent suburb of St. Paul. This high-energy congregation has been growing fairly rapidly in recent years and now includes about 750 members, mostly younger families. Peace United Methodist Church’s strong emphasis on inclusivity has been spearheaded by its Committee on the Status and Role of Women. Peace has a dynamic music ministry and has recently developed partnership ministries with a couple of inner-city churches. St. Stephen’s United Methodist Church Marblehead, Massachusetts This historic congregation was founded in 1791 after Jesse Lee visited with a group of men and women in an upper room in Marblehead. St. Stephen’s is located on the seacoast in an affluent suburb north of Boston. The 300-member congregation is largely professional and is experiencing a renaissance of younger couples with children. The congregation is known for its friendliness, its excellent music program, and its pastor’s unconventional style. St. Stephen’s is engaged in a number of local and international missions. The Reconciling Congregation decision was made unanimously. 32 Open Hands A gay Roman Catholic priest speaks out for what he believes— “John McNeill is one of my heroes. He will be remembered as the gay saint in the twentieth century who initiated a Catholic Stonewall while the Church in fear tried to closet him and finally expelled him because he believed that Christianity is fundamentally about kindness and inclusion.” —Rev. Dr. Robert Goss, author of Jesus Acted Up and co-chairman of the Gay Men Studies in Religion Group of the American Academy of Religion At your bookstore, your Cokesbury bookstore or call (800) 227-2872 • www.wjk.org Both Feet Firmly Planted in Midair My Spiritual Journey John J. McNeill Paper $18.00 RECONCILING IN CHRIST Holy Trinity Lutheran Church Charlotte, North Carolina Holy Trinity Lutheran Church has hosted a pediatric day care for children with HIV/AIDS for the past three years. The program has evolved into a ministry for parents, siblings, friends and supporters of PWA’s in general. The RIC decision came out of the mission statement to be a welcoming community to people whom the world has marginalized. GLBT people have been assuming more and more positions of leadership in the congregation, and the church has an interest in advocacy for physically handicapped people as well. Lutheran Church of the Redeemer Aurora, Illinois Lutheran Church of the Redeemer, located in an urban setting, has about 100 members. The church hosts one of the most successful Hispanic-Anglo partnerships in the ELCA. The decision to become RIC was laity-led, and grew naturally out of a sense of the importance of diversity in the congregation’s members. There will be ongoing discussion of how to address issues of justice around race and sexual orientation. QTY BACK ISSUES AVAILABLE ___ Welcoming the World (Spring 1999) ___ Why Be Specific in Our Welcome? (Winter 1999) ___ A House Divided: Irreconcilable Differences? (Fall1998) ___ Bisexuality: Both/And Rather Than Either/Or (Summer 1998) ___ Treasure in Earthen Vessels—Sexual Ethics (Spring 1998) ___ We’re Welcoming, Now What? (Winter 1998) ___ From One Womb at One Table (Fall 1997) ___ Creating Sanctuary: All Youth Welcome Here! (Summer 1997) ___ Same-Sex Unions (Spring 1997) ___ Untangling Prejudice and Privilege (Fall 1995) ___ Remembering…10th Anniversary (Summer 1995) ___ The God to Whom We Pray (Spring 1995) ___ Reclaiming Pride (Summer 1994) ___ Aging and Integrity (Fall 1992) ___ Our Spirituality: How Sexual Expression and Oppression Shape It (Summer 1992) ___ The Lesbian Spirit (Summer 1991) ___ Lesbian/Gay Reflections on Theology (Spring 1991) ___ Youth and Sexual Identity (Winter 1991) ___ The “Holy Union” Controversy (Fall 1990) ___ Journeys toward Recovery and Wholeness (Spring 1990) ___ Images of Family (Fall 1989) ___ The Closet Dilemma (Summer 1989) ___ Lesbian & Gay Men in the Religious Arts (Spring 1989) ___ Living and Loving with AIDS (Summer 1988) ___ Building Reconciling Ministries (Spring 1988) ___ Sexual Violence (Fall 1987) ___ Minorities within a Minority (Spring 1987) ❑ Please send me the back issues indicated ($6 each; 10+ @ $4). ❑ Send me Open Hands each quarter ($20/year; outside U.S.A. @ $25). ❑ Send the current issue to name(s) attached. ($6 each). ❑ Send Open Hands gift subscription(s) to name(s) attached. Enclosed is my payment of $ _______ OR Charge $ _____________ to my VISA MASTERCARD (Circle one) # __________________________________________ Expiration _____/_____. Name on Card ____________________________________________________ Signature ________________________________________________________ My Name ________________________________________________________ Address _________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip _____________________________________________________ Daytime Phone (______) _____________________ Local Church _____________________________________________________ Denomination _____________________________________________________ Send to: Open Hands, 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 Published by the Reconciling Congregation Program in conjunction with Affirming Congregation Programme, More Light Presbyterians, Open and Affirming Ministries, Open and Affirming Program, Reconciling in Christ, and Welcoming & Affirming Baptist programs. A Unique Resource on Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual Concerns in the Church for Christian Education • Personal Reading Research Projects • Worship Resources Ministry & Outreach 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 Open Hands Vol 15 No 1 - Creating Chaos https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/197b2de65ec9d6940469857ad1f77b13.pdf f38b7e18677c70127ea543f374778bed Issue An issue of a recurring publication. Volume Number The volume number of the issue 15 Issue Number The number of the issue (within a volume) 2 Publication Year The year the issue was published 1999 Publication Date The date the issue was published Fall Text Any textual data included in the document Being Whole as God is Whole Henri Nouwen's Hidden Legacy Erotic Ecotheology First Gay Activist to March on Washington Evil Twins Vol. 15 No. 2 Fall 1999 2 Open Hands Vol. 15 No. 2 Fall 1999 Resources for Ministries Affirming the Diversity of Human Sexuality Open Hands is a resource for congregations and individuals seeking to be in ministry with lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons. Each issue focuses on a specific area of concern within the church. Open Hands is published quarterly by the Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (United Methodist) in cooperation with the Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada), the Association of Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (American), More Light Presbyterians, Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ), Open and Affirming Program (United Church of Christ), and the Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran). Each of these programs is a national network of local churches that publicly affirm their ministry with the whole family of God and welcome lesbian and gay persons and their families into their community of faith. These seven programs—along with Supportive Congregations (Brethren/ Mennonite), and Welcoming Congregations (Unitarian Universalist)—offer hope that the church can be a reconciled community. Open Hands is published quarterly. Subscription is $20 for four issues ($25 outside the U.S.). Single copies and back issues are $6. Quantities of 10 or more, $4 each. Subscriptions, requests for advertising rates, and other business correspondence should be sent to: Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773 / 736-5526 Fax: 773 / 736-5475 Member, The Associated Church Press © 1999 Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. Open Hands is a registered trademark. ISSN 0888-8833 Printed on recycled paper. Publisher Mark Bowman Editor Chris Glaser Designer In Print—Jan Graves WHOLLY HOLY Finding Home 4 Toward an Erotic Ecotheology J. MICHAEL CLARK Holiness begins at home—in right relation. Wholly Himself, Holy His Calling 10 An Interview with Bayard Rustin, An Architect of the SCLC and the 1963 March on Washington MARK BOWMAN INTRODUCTION BY IRENE MONROE Not everybody knows the contributions he made. Whispers and Stares 15 Being Black and Lesbian at Church TOLONDA HENDERSON “That They May Be One” 16 Rejecting Binary Categories to be Whole and Holy RACHEL METHENY What if becoming “welcoming” buys into a system of oppression? Our “Evil Twins” 18 The Pitfall of Defining Ourselves over Against Others RON COUGHLIN “By defining everyone else, I thought I knew who I was.” Remembering Rita Hester 19 The “T” in LGBT IRENE MONROE Media coverage ignored her truest self. Be Whole as Your God in Heaven is Whole 20 ERIC H. F. LAW The idolatry of believing God can’t welcome us all. When We All Get Together 22 Aftermath of a Firebombed Synagogue ALAN N. CANTON United Methodists come through for Reform Jews. Henri Nouwen’s Hidden Legacy 24 MIKE FORD One life experience Henri Nouwen didn’t get to write about. Fall 1999 3 Program Coordinators Marilyn Alexander (Interim) Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (UMC) 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 773/736-5526 www.rcp.org Ron Coughlin Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada) P.O. Box 333, Station Q Toronto, Ontario CANADA M4T 2M5 416/466-1489 acpucc@aol.com Ann B. Day Open and Affirming Program (UCC) P.O. Box 403 Holden, MA 01520 508/856-9316 www.coalition.simplenet.com Bob Gibeling Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran) 2466 Sharondale Drive Atlanta, GA 30305 404/266-9615 www.lcna.org Michael J. Adee More Light Presbyterians (PCUSA) 369 Montezuma Ave. PMB #447 Santa Fe, NM 87501-2626 505/820-7082 www.mlp.org Brenda J. Moulton Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (ABC/USA) P.O. Box 2596 Attleboro Falls, MA 02763 508/226-1945 http://users.aol.com/ wabaptists Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ) P.O. Box 44400 Indianapolis, IN 46244 http://pilot.msu.edu/user/ laceyj/ Editorial Advisory Committee Vaughn Beckman, O&A Howard Bess, W&A Ann Marie Coleman, ONA Bobbi Hargleroad, MLP Tom Harshman, O&A Dick Hasbany, MLP Alyson Huntly, ACP Bonnie Kelly, ACP Susan Laurie, RCP Samuel E. Loliger, ONA Ruth Moerdyk, SCN Tim Phillips, W&A Caroline Presnell, RCP Paul Santillán, RCP Julie Sevig, RIC Kelly Sprinkle, W&A Margarita Suaréz, ONA Judith Hoch Wray, O&A Stuart Wright, RIC Next Issue: LIBERATING WORD—Interpreting the Bible Welcoming Communities ............................... 32 Movement News ............................................ 32 Call for articles for Open Hands Summer 2000 The god of Violence Theme Section: Suffering, sacrifice, wrath, and violence have been associated with God. Those who have endured spiritual abuse or who have been scapegoated by the church are particularly sensitive to this association. Surely this is not the God we worship? How do we address all forms of violence—sexual, physical, verbal, emotional, and spiritual— as Christians? How do we avoid playing the victim and yet practice non-violence? 1000-2500 words per article. Ministries Section: We continue to expand the themes of these columns, which now may include: Welcoming Process, Connections (with other justice issues), Worship, Spirituality, Outreach, Leadership, Health, Youth, Campus, Children, and Parents. These brief articles may or may not have to do with the theme of the issue. 750-1000 words per article. Contact with idea by April 1, 2000 Manuscript deadline: May 15, 2000 Chris Glaser, Phone/Fax 404/622-4222 or e-mail at ChrsGlaser@aol.com 991 Berne St. SE, Atlanta, GA 30316-1859 USA MINISTRIES Connections Walking for Love and Justice 26 Farmworkers and Lavender People DEETTE WALD BEHGTOL Welcoming Process Consider An Inter faith Resource Fair 27 JEFFREY A. MATTHEWS Leadership Justice Groups Building Bridges 28 DEBBIE ROBERTS AND ZANDRA WAGONER Spirituality My Soulforce Journey to Lynchburg 28 DOTTI BERRY Outreach International Gay Group Addresses Religion 29 TOM HANKS SUSTAINING THE SPIRIT My Song of Love is Unknown 31 A love poem to Jesus from the closet. 4 Open Hands Tending Our Garden The winter rainy season has set in, as if weeks of cold rain on a garden now laid to rest, or on trees barren of their leaves, could somehow provide the balance to long summer weeks of withering heat when tomato plants could not set fruit, when green beans turned into leather breeches and grapes into raisins on the vine (before we could rescue either one), when even leaves on the trees browned, folding up in despair and falling prematurely in midsummer, all our watering notwithstanding. Fortunately, late summer did bring enough respite for the garden and even for some of the trees to catch a second wind and to produce fruit and seed; summer lengthened well into the fall, with shirt-sleeve weather lasting past Thanksgiving, until mid-December’s sudden about-face brought our belated first killing frost and, just as dramatically, an ice storm to the mountain forests only a few counties north of us. The meteorological pendulum has been swinging wide to maintain some sort of balance— El Niño, La Niña, killer tornadoes in north Georgia, devastating hurricanes through the poorest nations in our hemisphere, Haiti and Georges, Honduras and Mitch—and we cannot help but wonder whether collective human ecological imbalancing has in some way precipitated such seemingly apocalyptic extremes. As the seasons of our garden bring us full circle, I realize my own thinking has come full circle as well, toward what I increasingly think of as an erotic ecotheology, a firm conviction that the erotic and ecological are intertwined. If the erotic is essentially that urge into relationship, that urge which ultimately requires us to develop right-relation (both sexual and social justice), surely the very relationality of our embeddedness in ecosystemic life requires that we extend our erotically-informed ethics of right-relation to all nonhuman life as well. Likewise, I am also convinced that we know the divine only in and through our embodied, sensory, and sensuous (and thus erotic) relationships with other embodied lives both human and nonhuman. An utterly sensuous and relational theology and ethical practice actually reflects God’s own immanent eco-energies, the thorough dispersion of the Finding Home Toward an Erotic Ecotheology J. Michael Clark Excerpted from “Harvest Home,” Ch. 7 of Erotic Ecology: Toward an Ethic of Right Relation, a book in progress. ©1999, J. Michael Clark, Ph.D. Fall 1999 5 imago dei, the pluriformity of incarnations, yearning for justice as right-relation at all levels of life. I have finally come to realize, as well, that doing erotic ecotheology is an embodied call to integrate our sexual bodiliness and our spirituality; it is a thoroughly bodily demand, a sensuous project, requiring our attention to all our senses, including the erotic urges that draw us to another human being, to a tree or a flower, to our cats and dogs, to the scent-laden night breezes that caress our bodyselves, to a summer sunset or a midwinter snowscape. Deep in mid-winter we certainly find ourselves rejoicing at the earth’s tenacity, giving thanks for its bounty in spite of extremes. As our ecosystem lies dormant, we too rest, awaiting the arrival of seed catalogues that begin the cycle anew. It need not surprise my gentle readers that I would bring my various and multilayered, circling reflections back around again to Bob’s and my shared home, to our biodiverse and ecosystemic home; I have done so before. 1 My starting point and resting place remain our biodiverse, interconnected, and interdependent home and the ever expanding concentric circles which dynamically constitute home writ large: our yard and garden, our neighborhood, our city, our region—up to and including the whole godbodied earth itself. Tending Our Home—Earth We are interwoven and interdependent members of biotic systems that are themselves members of larger ecosystems. Because we are all in fact embodiments or incarnations of sacred diversity and pluriformity inrelation, and because we humans especially are called to be accountable within these relationships—as we move through the end of the twentieth century and into the beginning of the twenty-first, we surely need to recover and to nurture not only a deepened sense of rootedness, a more profound and even spiritual sense of place, but also a stronger, enacted commitment to the land and to the diverse and interconnected lives which dwell here with us—to biosphere and geosphere, to otherkind, even to the ancestral spirits who may yet grace and protect our places, our ground and grounding in the world. Perhaps we may come to understand our careful gardening, as well as our tending of nonfood plants and our caring for both the wild and adopted critters in our midst, as sacred actions inrelation that affirm the intrinsic value of every life, as holy and propitiatory actions in humble exchange for those deeply respected and valued lives who are our necessary prey or whose fruits we necessarily require if we are to live and to thrive. The root word of our ecologos, our ecology, oikos means our home, our habitat earth, Larry Rasmussen reminds us; indeed, it encompasses the earth as “a single vast household.”2 Multiply layered in meaning, however, oikos also entails our sense of place or rootedness; it is “the experience of belonging somewhere intimate to one’s bones” which, unfortunately, Rasmussen adds, “eludes most moderns.”3 At this millennial turning point in time, our erotic ecology must call us back to just such intimacy, to such athomeness in place. Judith Plant has observed that home is the “theatre of our human ecology”4 and I, of course, want to stretch that: Home is the theater or starting point for all our ecology, for deepening our relations with other humans and with otherkind alike. It is in our homes where we first learn as children and relearn as adults to relate to other human lives— to love and care for parents, siblings, and grandparents, for friends and spouses, for children, grandchildren, and godchildren. Extending this accountability in-relation beyond that home engages us in social justice. It is also in our homes where we first come to marvel at and to care for some special plant or a garden full of plants, for some special tree in its spring flowering and autumnal coloring, or for some special pet—a parakeet or a goldfish, a cat or a dog. Extending this accountability in-relation beyond that home engages us in ecological justice. Because all our relational lives begin at home, in our neighborhoods and our communities, our ecosocial justice actions also begin in and from our particularity: “One cannot do something except locally, in a small place,” writes Rasmussen.5 Sallie McFague concurs, insisting not only that we must “weave together the fabric of social justice and ecological integrity in particular places,” but also that love itself actually “begins with the nearby, the particular, the known, and grows gradually outward as the interlocking connections between different forms of need, discrimination, and oppression become evident.” 6 “We are more likely…to love nature,” McFague continues, “if we love one small bit of it, …by loving particular places [and experiencing] particular, local, available bits and pieces of nature.” 7 Homelessness The very concept of “home” is already such a powerful one for us in the West that we wrestle, both intellectually and socially, with its apparent opposite—homelessness. A senior student’s recent independent study—a project undertaken in response to a philosophical forum the previous term that, however unintentionally, ended up treating the urban homeless primarily as merely inconvenient objects in the cityscape—recently demonstrated the extent to which our Western constructions of “home” have also led us to construct the category of “homelessness” as yet one more Other. We have too narrowly conceptualized homes as human structures—as I am…convinced that we know the divine only in and through our embodied, sensory, and sensuous (and thus erotic) relationships with other embodied lives both human and nonhuman. 6 Open Hands rooms, apartments, lofts, and houses. Even in our highly mobile society, we do not consider one’s personal shopping cart full of all one’s personal belongings a “mobile home.” We do not understand how a specific park bench or interstate bridge pylon under which one sleeps every night can give one a “sense of place.” We have not appreciated the possibility that, even without a structure per se, one can still have a neighborhood for one’s home: For nearly fifteen years I have watched the same woman daily walk back and forth through the same neighborhood with her styrofoamed morning coffee. Is this neighborhood not her home? Because we have not understood these kinds of connections or relations, we have also not imagined that regular attendance at a particular cold weather shelter or a specific community soup kitchen could constitute a kind of home, a place of human kinship. Ultimately, my student argued, because we have too narrowly defined both having and not having a home, and because we have constructed the “homeless” as a faceless, primarily male, and homogenous Other, we have failed in our efforts to provide even basic human services, whether public restrooms or accessible and continuous public education for homeless children.8 Rasmussen has also perceived the ecological and economic justice connections in his own, even broader interpretation of homelessness. Whether caused by Western style economic imperialism over the poor or simply by the technological mobility and job-related rootlessness of the rich, the turn of the century is for many Americans a period of “homelessness of both spirit and place,” a period also characterized by “deprivation and alienation through the destruction of home as habitat and the economic, cultural, and spiritual uprooting of people from their [ecosystemic and relational] homes.”9 Toward an Erotic Ecotheology The ecological homelessness of marginalization constitutes the very conditions of life for any excluded and/or devalued people, such as gay people who are ghettoized for our biological failures to produce another generation of future consumers, for our resistance to the heterosexist economics of (re)production. Conversely, I’ve also realized that engaging in any stereotypically excessive gay consumerism, whether of material goods and objects or of (objectified) sex itself, is to accede to the very economics of injustice that keeps us excluded from a felt sense of belonging, of being at home within the biodiverse earthgarden of God’s body. We human beings, especially we human beings of the privileged first world, must enact and create and take responsibility for that for which we hope. Because no one else will do it for us, we must create the ecological, social, and sexual justice of an erotic ecotheology. We alone must restore our earthly home(s). To embody and to live out the hope and justice of an erotic ecology also means that where we make our home(s) must also be a location or site of ongoing metanoia (about face, conversion) in the relational and transformative dunamis (power, miracle) of the very web of life. By focusing on the human scale of our specific homes and neighborhoods, we may resist the oppressive forces of globalization that otherwise appear too large for us to affect. “A sustainable world can be put together only from the bottom up,” Rasmussen insists, with “communities and communities of communities”; moreover, “easier and simpler,” or smaller and more localized, “is better [and], with room for error, favors sustainability.”10 His hopefulness here is interwoven with his confidence that people can be astute enough at the local level of our homes and communities to discern and to make ecologically informed and earth-wise choices. We can discern when—without megacorporate direction or interference— local approaches to problems are most appropriate and/or when more global solutions are necessary: Oceans, genetic diversity, climate, the ozone level, and even forests and other global commons…must be treated as such. Fall 1999 7 But…food, shelter, livelihood, and other needs that can be met on a community and regional basis, with indigenous resources, talents, and wisdom, should be met there.11 Crucifixions Without Supernatural Rescue As I have read and studied, written and reflected, across one specific cycle of seasons in our particular home and garden, a place which so dearly belongs within the larger garden of this sacred earth—from the arrival of one year’s seed catalogues to the bitterly cold, midwinter arrival of a new year’s worth of similar springful promise—I have also been engaged in preparing and teaching various materials whose synchronicity in my life now appears to punctuate my erotic ecology. My previous ruminations on the problem of suffering, on the absence of supernatural rescue from tragedy and on human responsibility for creating justice,12 are being further qualified by my ongoing interactions with students in several courses. As we explore contemporary Judaism, for example, I am reminded that Elie Wiesel finds God hanging limp and childlike on a Nazi gallows,13 even while students focusing in another course on the historical Jesus and the Christologies in our Western history and culture wrestle with the injustice and the meanings of Jesus’ own crucifixion as another site of the suffering God. The conflation of Jewish theodicy and Christianity’s crucifixion motif take a peculiar turn in this second course, as well, when Chaim Potok shows us an ultra-orthodox Hasidic Jewish artist who paints a crucifixion scene, arguing that “there was no aesthetic mold in his own religious tradition into which he could pour a painting of ultimate anguish and torment.”14 These recurring epiphanies of divine presence embodied at sites of godforsakenness seem painfully trivialized, however, by the phenomenon permeating American Christianity— as seen in yet another concurrent course— of preaching “Christ crucified”: The suffering God is canceled in popular religion by the rescuing God of Easter morning; the tragic suffering of real, this-worldly lives to a Holocaust, to pogroms, to ancient Roman occupation or modern colonialization is obliterated by the otherworldly salvation of individual believers in that same rescuing moment. I am stupefied, for surely the impetus for achieving justice as rightrelation goes a-begging when we too quickly dismiss the Nazi gallows, the lynching tree, the cross, or any other crucifixion. In short, I believe we can radicalize McFague’s contention that nature as ecosystemically interwoven life is “the also poor.”15 From the standpoint of an erotic ecology, I believe we must also argue that nature is also crucified. ✞ The Jewish child hanging on the Nazi gallows is clearly crucified. ✞ The young black man swinging from a mid-1950s southern oak is crucified. ✞ The lesbian couple slain on the Appalachian Trail is crucified. ✞ The gay college student beaten and tied to the cross-ties of a cold Wyoming fence is crucified. ✞ The gay Alabamian beaten and burned on a pyre of tires is crucified. But, crucifixions do not end with these too obvious examples. ✞ The indigenous nation forced to march a trail of tears to resettlement on lands devoid of ancestral spirits and barren of agricultural possibilities is also crucified. ✞ The two-thirds world family whose qualitatively rich subsistence lifestyle has been forcibly replaced by the real material poverty of the globalizing monetary economy is also crucified. Yet, I want to go further still, to insist that crucifixions are not limited to humans alone: ✞ Any species facing a humanly-induced extinction is also crucified. ✞ The old-growth forest destined for decimation and the urban trees cleared for a parking deck are also crucified. ✞ The imprisoned calf doomed for vealdom is also crucified. ✞ The dog or rabbit whose body is routinely subjected to cosmetics testing and the chimpanzee whose body is routinely subjected to AIDS vaccine testing are also crucified. ✞ The mink whose objectified dead body will adorn a more privileged human body and the cow whose commodified skin will dress the automobile interior of that same privileged person are both also crucified. ✞ Our ground level ozone-laden air, our shrinking wetlands, and our virtually undrinkable polluted waterways are also crucified. And, only we human beings can stop these crucifixions. If there is to be a spring renewal for this planet, we must stop these crucifixions. If the Holocaust, the lynching tree, a Wyoming fence, or the cross itself point us to the “ultimate anguish and torment” of the divine in godself, then we must also find in that point of simultaneous absence and presence, of godforsakenness and divine empowerment, the motivating faith to put a stop to ecological, social, and sexual injustice. An erotic ecology demands such faith-in-action, such accountability inrelation, unless we are willing to forfeit God’s body as our biodiverse and relational home. Such faith is possible; such hope can be made true. Because “God [is] the great relation of all relations of the universe,”16 God not only composts everything,17 but that composting yields new life— if we take responsibility. God is not a supernatural rescuer, but the natural energy and fecundity of right-relation, dependent upon our embodied accountability in-relation, our willingness to strive for eco-social justice. God will not intervene to save the world from the disasters of human frivolity and greed. Granted, doing erotic ecology may not “save the world,” either. It may, however, redirect our energies to divine presence in certain important starting points in our homes and our communities and wherever we enact our respect and gratitude for human diversity and biotic diversity, for interconnectedness and interdependence. Because we are all in this together and the whole of life is sacred. 8 Open Hands We are all in this together and the whole of life is sacred. J. Michael Clark, Ph.D., (pictured here with Little Bit) is the author of Defying the Darkness: Gay Theology in the Shadows (Pilgrim Press, 1997) and Doing the Work of Love: Men and Commitment in Same-Sex Couples (Men’s Studies Press, 1999). He teaches at Georgia State University in Atlanta and Agnes Scott College in adjacent Decatur. He lives near downtown with his spouse Bob McNeir and their ecosystemic family of dogs, birds, fishpond, and flower and vegetable gardens. Notes 1J. Michael Clark, Beyond our Ghettos: Gay Theology in Ecological Perspective (Cleveland: Pilgrim Press, 1993), pp. 87-93, and, An Unbroken Circle: Ecotheology, Theodicy, & Ethics (Dallas: Monument Press, 1996), pp. 161- 177. 2Larry L. Rasmussen, Earth Community, Earth Ethics (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1996), pp. 9, 24, cf., p. 91. 3Ibid., p. 96 4Judith Plant, “Searching for Common Ground: Ecofeminism and Bioregionalism,” Reweaving the World: The Emergence of Ecofeminism (I. Diamond & G.F. Orenstein, eds.; San Francisco: Sierra Club Books, 1990), p. 160. 5Rasmussen, p. 94. 6Sallie McFague, Super, Natural Christians: How We Should Love Nature (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress Press, 1997), pp. 154, 163. 7Ibid., pp. 22-23, cf., pp. 43, 154, 155. 8Danielle Munoz, “Homelessness is in the Eyes of the Beholder” (15 October 1998), and, “The Effects of Homelessness on the Education of Children: An Annotated Bibliography” (7 December 1998), unpublished papers for RelS 4950 (“Directed Reading: Homelessness and Ecotheology”), Georgia State University, Atlanta, fall semester 1998. 9Rasmussen, pp. 96, 95. 10Ibid., pp. 343, 340. 11Ibid., p. 337. 12Cf., J. Michael Clark, Defying the Darkness: Gay Theology in the Shadows (Cleveland: Pilgrim Press, 1997), pp. 87-96. 13Elie Wiesel, Night, trans. S. Rodway (NY: Avon Books/Discus, 1969), pp. 9-10. 14Chaim Potok, My Name is Asher Lev (NY: Fawcett Crest, 1972), p. 313. 15McFague, p.6. 16Rasmussen, p. 354 17Catherine Keller, Apocalypse Now and Then: A Feminist Guide to the End of the World (Boston: Beacon Press, 1996), p. 310. 18Rasmussen, p. 352. 19Kathleen M. Sands, Escape From Paradise: Evil & Tragedy in Feminist Theology (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress Press, 1994), p. 169. That is the faith I share with my many sources and my wise teachers and students, a counter-apocalyptic faith perfectly captured by Rasmussen as well: Faith…acts with confidence that the stronger powers in the universe arch in the direction of sustaining life, as they also insist upon justice. Worldweariness is combated by a surprising force found amidst earth and its distresses. …The religious consciousness… that generates hope and a zest and energy for life is tapped in life itself. 18 Celebrate Good Friday, commemorate the Shoah, but do not wait for God to do it for us. Do not wait for miracles or messiahs, Moses or Christ. Make Pesach by making liberation and social justice happen. Make Easter by nurturing spring life and making eco-justice happen. “Make life go on”19 in the sacred Circle of Life, the Sacred Hoop. Le Chaim. AD Fall 1999 9 AD 10 Open Hands Few of our present readers were subscribers when this interview with Bayard Rustin first appeared in the Spring, 1987, issue of Open Hands (Vol. 2, No. 4), the year of his death. It fits so well our theme of connecting the “isms” (racism, heterosexism, sexism, classism, ableism, and other “isms”) that we reprint it here. This time it is introduced by Irene Monroe, whose column “The Religion Thang” highlighted this gay African American civil rights activist in the May 5, 1999 issue of In Newsweekly, a LGBT New England newspaper. Introduction For decades now, Black History Month has rarely acknowledged or celebrated the contributions and achievements of its lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people. Just like white American history, black history would lead you to believe that the only shakers and movers were heterosexuals. However, for proudly a decade now the African American lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community of New England has celebrated one of its shakers and movers of history: Bayard Rustin (1912-1987). Every year a community breakfast is held in his honor and sponsored by the AIDS Action Committee of Massachusetts. This year’s event took place April 24 at the JFK Library in Boston. For most African Americans, heterosexuals as well as queers, they do not know who Bayard Rustin is. For example, Dr. Nancy Norman, director of women’s health at the Fenway Community Health Center, said she “…didn’t know who he was until the breakfast, which gives importance to his place in the civil rights movement.” Born in 1912, the Quaker-settled area of West Chester, Pennsylvania, one of the stops on the Underground Railroad, is the place of Bayard Rustin’s beginnings. A handsome six-footer who possessed both athletic and academic prowess, Rustin is most noted as the strategist and chief organizer of the 1963 March on Washington that catapulted the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. onto a world stage. Rustin played a key role in helping King develop the strategy of non-violence in the Montgomery Bus Boycott (1955-1956) which successfully dismantled the long-standing Jim Crow ordinance of segregated seating on public conveyances in Alabama. In the civil rights movement, Bayard Rustin was always the man behind the scenes and a large part of that had to do with the fact that he was gay. As Albert Shanker, president of the American Federation of Teachers and friend of Rustin, stated in a review on Jervis Anderson’s biography, Bayard Rustin: The Troubles I’ve Seen, Rustin “…was a quintessential outsider—a black man, a Quaker, a one-time pacifist, a political, social dissident, and a homosexual. Because of their own homophobia, many African American ministers involved in the civil rights movement would have nothing to do with Rustin, and they intentionally rumored throughout the movement that King was gay because of his close friendship with Rustin.” Where most queers query about their sexual orientation by engaging in acts of compulsory heterosexuality, Rustin queried his queerness by engaging in acts of public gay sex which led to his arrest and conviction for violating California state lewd-vagrancy laws. Wholly Himself, Holy His Calling An Interview with Bayard Rustin, An Architect of the SCLC and the 1963 March on Washington by Mark Bowman Introduction by Irene Monroe “It is not prejudice to any one group that is the problem, it is prejudice itself that is the problem.” —Bayard Rustin Fall 1999 11 In a letter to a friend explaining his predilection toward gay sex, Rustin wrote, “I must pray, trust, experience, dream, hope, and all else possible until I know clearly in my own mind and spirit that I have failed to become heterosexual, if I must fail, not because of a faint heart, or for lack of confidence in my true self, or for pride, or for emotional instability, or for moral lethargy, or any other character fault, but rather, because I come to see after the most complete searching that the best for me lies elsewhere.” Prior to the Stonewall riots in 1969, very few lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender African Americans were open about their sexual orientation. For the most part, many of us resided under a cloud of intentional ambiguity or blatant denial. The reprisal of being queer and African American often led to community scorn by our residents, public humiliation by our fire and brimstone preachers, and the denunciation of true blackness by our black militants. The price of being black and queer in a racist society is unquestionably difficult. However, to be black and queer within your communities very seldom leads to total excommunication, but it does quite frequently lead to social and emotional alienation. As resident aliens, black queers too often live a bifurcated existence within their communities. Their black skin ostensibly gives them residence in their communities, but their sexual orientation most times gives them eviction from it. To be tangentially aligned to our communities dangled our lives precariously on a thin thread with the nagging feeling of impending expulsion. Bayard Rustin is an exemplar for all lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people of African descent, and by extension to all queers, because he was a man of formidable courage. Courage is a mental and spiritual orientation to counter danger and opposition with confidence and fearlessness. When imbued with the spirit of God, it is a requisite for justice and transformation in the world, because it blesses not only the possessor of it, but also the lives of others. We are all abundantly blessed for the life of Bayard Rustin. His courage reminds me of the verse in Hebrews 13:6, which states, “…[W]e can take courage and say, ‘The Lord is my helper, I will not fear anything. What can human beings do to me?’” Irene Monroe is a lesbian African American theologian who has written extensively on African American gay and lesbian history, African American sexuality, and anti- Semitism in both the black Christian and black Muslim communities. A sought-after speaker on campuses and in religious forums, she studied at Wellesley, Union Theological Seminary (NY), and is a Ph.D. candidate at Harvard Divinity School. She lives in Cambridge, Massachusetts with her partner, Dr. Thea James, an emergency room physician. The Interview In West Chester, Pennsylvania, what did you absorb, spoken or unspoken, about homosexuality in your upbringing? My early life was that of being a member of a very, very close-knit family. I was born illegitimate. My mother was about 17 when I was born, and, consequently, my grandparents reared me. The family members were largely Democrats, long before most other black families. My grandmother was one of the leaders of the NAACP; she had helped found the Black Nurses’ Society and the black community center. There were two homosexual boys in high school that were rather flamboyant, and the community, I think, looked down on their flamboyance much more than on their homosexuality. …As far as my early life is concerned, there was one other incident. There was one young man who was very highly respected in the community that I can remember as a child hearing whispering about. But I never could put my finger on what it was that made him, in the eyes of people, different. One of the reasons that this was confusing to me was that he was highly respected— he was a member of the church, sang in the choir, played the organ, and seemed to be such a responsible, talented, and charming person that I could never get quite what it was that was being whispered about him. 12 Open Hands I asked my grandmother once and she said, “Oh, well, he’s just a little different from other people and I wouldn’t pay any attention to it.” On one occasion this fellow was visiting our home, and when he was leaving he put his arms around me and kissed me (which had never happened to me with a man before). Later when I was discussing him with my grandmother, I said, “You know it’s very interesting, but this is the second time that he has hugged me and tried to kiss me.” My grandmother simply said, “Well, did you enjoy it?” And I said, “No, I felt very peculiar.” And she said, “Well, if you don’t enjoy it, don’t let him do it.” That’s all she said. And that was the extent of it. Now it was in college I came to understand that I had a real physical attraction to a young man. …We never had any physical relationship but a very intense, friendly relationship. I did not feel then that I could handle such a physical relationship. But I never went through any trauma about coming out because I realized what was going on. I was also strong and secure enough to be able to handle it. But I have always sympathized with people who, for one reason or another, go through the great trauma that I never experienced. … I think that a family in which the members know and accept one’s lifestyle is the most helpful factor for emotional stability. [My family] was aware that I was having an affair with [a] friend from college, and they obviously approved it. Not that anybody said, “Oh, I think it’s a good thing.” But they would say, “Friends have invited us over for dinner tonight, and we told them that your friend is here, and they said it’s quite all right for you to bring him along.” There was never any conflict. And yet there was never any real discussion. A few years later you moved to New York City. The clubs in Harlem in the 1930’s and 1940’s were known as Meccas for gay men and lesbians. Did you interact in that world? Well, Harlem was a totally different world than I had known. When I came to New York, I lived with a sister (really my aunt) who lived on St. Nicholas Avenue, which was at that time the main thoroughfare of black New York aristocracy— it was called Sugar Hill. That’s where the black doctors, lawyers, professionals, and ministers lived. In the black upper class there were a great number of gay people. So long as they did not publicize their gayness, there was little or no discussion of it. A number of the poets, artists, musicians were gay or lesbian. And the clubs paid little attention. In that early period there were few gay clubs because there didn’t need to be. The gay clubs came later, with WW II and after. I think that the black community has been largely willing to accept its gay elements so long as there not openly gay. It was later when the gay clubs came, and gay men and lesbians wanted the right to come out of the closet, that I think the black community became quite as intolerant as the white community. Why is that, in your estimation? What caused the resistance to acceptance? I think the community felt that we have, as blacks, so many problems to put up with, and we have to defend ourselves so vigorously against being labeled as ignorant, irresponsible, shufflers, etc.—there’s so much prejudice against us, why do we need the gay thing, too? I remember on one occasion somebody said t me, “Goodness gracious! You’re a socialist, you’re a conscientious objector, you’re gay, you’re black, how many jeopardies can you afford?” I found that people in the civil rights movement were perfectly willing to accept me so long as I didn’t declare that I was gay. It was amongst the Fellowship [of Reconciliation] people that there was hypocrisy— more so-called love and affection and nonviolence toward the human family, but it was there that I found some of the worst attitudes to gays. I experienced this personally after I’d been released from working with the Fellowship when I was arrested in California on what they called a “morals charge.” Many of the people in the Fellowship of Reconciliation were absolutely intolerant in their attitudes. When I lost my job there, some of these nonviolent Christians, despite their love and affection for humanity, were not really able to express very much affection to me, whereas members of my family (a couple of them had actually fought in the war) were loving, considerate, and accepting. So there are times when people of goodwill may find it difficult to maintain consistency between belief and action. This can be very difficult for some people when faced with a homosexual relationship. Later, in the early 60’s, Adam Clayton Powell threatened to expose you, and J. Strom Thurmond did make accusations against you. Did you experience many other incidents like these? Yes, for example, Martin Luther King, with whom I worked very closely, became very distressed when a number of the ministers working for him wanted him to dismiss me from his staff because of my homosexuality. Martin set up a committee to discover what he should do. They said that, despite the fact that I had contributed tremendously to the organization (I drew up the plans for the creation of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and did most of the planning and fundraising in the early days), they thought that I should separate myself from Dr. King. [A. Phillip] Randolph [an organizer of the 1963 March on Washington] said, “Well, well, if Bayard, a homosexual, is that talented—and I know the work he does for me—maybe I should be looking for somebody else homosexual who could be so useful.” Fall 1999 13 This was the time when Powell threatened to expose my so-called homosexual relationship with Dr. King. There, of course, was no homosexual relationship with Dr. King. But Martin was so uneasy about it that I decided I did not want Dr. King to have to dismiss me. I had come to the SCLC to help. If I was going to be a burden I would leave— and I did. However, Dr. King was never happy about my leaving. He was deeply torn— although I had left the SCLC, he frequently called me in and asked me to help. While in 1960 he felt real pressure to fire me, in 1963 he agreed that I should organize the March on Washington, of which he was one of the leaders. In June of 1963, Senator Strom Thurmond stood in the Congress and denounced the March on Washington because I was organizing it. He called me a communist, a sexual pervert, a draft dodger [Rustin spent two years in Lewisburg Penitentiary as a conscientious objector during WW II, later 30 days on North Carolina chain gang for his participation in the first Freedom Ride in the South.], etc. The next day, Mr. A. Phillip Randolph [president of the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters] called all the black leaders and said, “I want to answer Strom Thurmond’s attack. But I think we ought not to get involved in a big discussion of homosexuality or communism or draft-dodging. What I want to do, with the approval of all the black leaders, is to issue a statement which says: ‘We, the black leaders of the civil rights movements and the leaders of the trade union movement and the leaders of the Jewish, Protestant, and Catholic church which are organizing this march have absolute confidence in Bayard Rustin’s ability, his integrity, and his commitment to nonviolence as the best way to bring about social change. He will continue to organize the March with our full and undivided support.” He said, “If any of you are called, I do not want any discussion beyond that—Is he a homosexual? Has he been arrested? We simply say we have complete confidence in him and his integrity.” And that’s exactly what happened. Someone came to Mr. Randolph once and said, “Do you know that Bayard Rustin is a homosexual? Do you know he has been arrested in California? I don’t know how you could have anyone who is a homosexual working for you.” Mr. Randolph said, “Well, well, if Bayard, a homosexual, is that talented— and I know the work he does for me— maybe I should be looking for somebody else homosexual who could be so useful.” Mr. Randolph was such a completely honest person who wanted everyone else also to be honest. Had anyone said to him, “Mr. Randolph, do you think I should openly admit that I am homosexual?” his attitude, I am sure, would have been, “Although such an admission may cause you problems, you will be happier in the long run.” Because his idea was that you have to be what you are. You were involved in many civil rights groups in the 40’s, 50’s, 60’s, 70’s. Did any of them at least begin to internally think about lesbian/gay rights? After my arrest [in California in 1953], I tried to get the black community to face up to the fact that one of the reasons that some homosexuals went to places where they might well be arrested was that they were not welcome elsewhere. I wanted to get people to change their attitudes, but they always made it personal. They would say, “Well, now, Bayard, we understand—we know who you are and we know what you are, but you’re really different.” And I’d say, “I don’t want to hear that. I want to change your attitudes.” But there was little action. Even now [in 1987] it’s very difficult to get the black community doing anything constructive about AIDS because it is thought of as a “gay” problem. What ways did your being a gay man affect the person that you are, the person you have been? Oh, I think it has made a great difference. When one is attacked for being gay, it sensitizes you to a greater understanding and sympathy for others who face bigotry, and one realizes the damage that being misunderstood can do to to people. It’s quite all right when people blast my politics. That’s their obligation. But to attack anyone because he’s Jewish, black, a homosexual, a woman, or any other reason over which that person has no control is quite terrible. But making my peace and adjusting to being attacked has helped me to grow. It’s given me a certain sense of obligation to other people, and it’s given me a maturity as well as a sense of humor. If you had to do it all over, if you had to live life knowing what you know now, would you want to be gay? I think, if I had a choice, I would probably elect not to be gay. Because I think that I might be able to do more to fight against the prejudice to gays if I weren’t gay, because some people say I’m simply trying to defend myself. But that’s the only reason. I want to get rid of all kinds of prejudices. And, quite frankly, one of the prejudices which I find most difficult is the prejudice that some black homosexuals have to white homosexuals, the prejudice that Oriental homosexuals have to everybody but Oriental homosexuals, and certainly the tremendous amount of prejudice that some white gay men and lesbians have to blacks. And the reason this is sad to me is not that I expect homosexuals to be any different basically than any other human being, but it is sad because I do not believe that they know that it is not “When one is attacked for being gay, it sensitizes you to a greater understanding and sympathy for others who face bigotry, and one realizes the damage that being misunderstood can do to people.” 14 Open Hands prejudice to any one group that is the problem, it is prejudice itself that is the problem. That brings me to a very important point— people who do not fight against all kinds of prejudice are doing three terrible things. They are, first of all, perpetuating harm to others. Secondly, they are denying their own selves because every heterosexual is a part of homosexuality and every homosexual is a part of this so-called straight world. If I harm any human being by my bigotry, I am, at the same time harming myself because I’m a part of that person. And, finally, every indifference to prejudice is suicide because, if I don’t fight all bigotry, bigotry itself will be strengthened and, sooner or later, it will turn on me. I think that one of the things we have to be very careful of in the gay and lesbian community is that we do not under any circumstances permit ourselves to hold on to any indifference to the suffering of any other human being. The homosexuals who did not fight Hitler’s prejudice to the Jews finally got it. Now they may have gotten it anyhow. But when the Gestapo came up the stairs after them, they would have died knowing that they were better human beings if only they had fought fascism and resisted when the Jews were being murdered. Are you hopeful for the human race? I have learned a very significant lesson from the Jewish prophets. If one really follows the commandments of these prophets, the question of hopeful or nonhopeful may become secondary or unimportant. Because these prophets taught that God does not require us to achieve any of the good tasks that humanity must pursue. What God requires of us is that we not stop trying. Mark Bowman, long-time leader of the Reconciling Congregation Program and publisher of Open Hands, helped found the RCP in 1984 and served as its executive director through July 1999. He lives in Chicago and now consults with local and national nonprofit organization. You can e-mail Mark at Markleby@aol.com QTY BACK ISSUES AVAILABLE ___ Creative Chaos (Summer 1999) ___ Welcoming the World (Spring 1999) ___ Why Be Specific in Our Welcome? (Winter 1999) ___ A House Divided: Irreconcilable Differences? (Fall1998) ___ Bisexuality: Both/And Rather Than Either/Or (Summer 1998) ___ Treasure in Earthen Vessels—Sexual Ethics (Spring 1998) ___ We’re Welcoming, Now What? (Winter 1998) ___ From One Womb at One Table (Fall 1997) ___ Creating Sanctuary: All Youth Welcome Here! (Summer 1997) ___ Same-Sex Unions (Spring 1997) ___ Untangling Prejudice and Privilege (Fall 1995) ___ Remembering…10th Anniversary (Summer 1995) ___ The God to Whom We Pray (Spring 1995) ___ Reclaiming Pride (Summer 1994) ___ Aging and Integrity (Fall 1992) ___ Our Spirituality: How Sexual Expression and Oppression Shape It (Summer 1992) ___ The Lesbian Spirit (Summer 1991) ___ Lesbian/Gay Reflections on Theology (Spring 1991) ___ Youth and Sexual Identity (Winter 1991) ___ The “Holy Union” Controversy (Fall 1990) ___ Journeys toward Recovery and Wholeness (Spring 1990) ___ Images of Family (Fall 1989) ___ The Closet Dilemma (Summer 1989) ___ Lesbian & Gay Men in the Religious Arts (Spring 1989) ___ Living and Loving with AIDS (Summer 1988) ___ Building Reconciling Ministries (Spring 1988) ___ Sexual Violence (Fall 1987) ___ Minorities within a Minority (Spring 1987) ❑ Please send me the back issues indicated ($6 each; 10+ @ $4). ❑ Send me Open Hands each quarter ($20/year; outside U.S.A. @ $25). ❑ Send the current issue to name(s) attached. ($6 each). ❑ Send Open Hands gift subscription(s) to name(s) attached. Enclosed is my payment of $ _______ OR Charge $ _____________ to my VISA MASTERCARD (Circle one) # __________________________________________ Expiration _____/_____. Name on Card ____________________________________________________ Signature ________________________________________________________ My Name ________________________________________________________ Address _________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip _____________________________________________________ Daytime Phone (______) _____________________ Local Church _____________________________________________________ Denomination _____________________________________________________ Send to: Open Hands, 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 Published by the Reconciling Congregation Program in conjunction with Affirming Congregation Programme, More Light Presbyterians, Open and Affirming Ministries, Open and Affirming Program, Reconciling in Christ, and Welcoming & Affirming Baptist programs. A Unique Resource on Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual Concerns in the Church for Christian Education • Personal Reading Research Projects • Worship Resources Ministry & Outreach Fall 1999 15 Last year I wrote a paper entitled “Some of Us Are Still Brave: An Exploration into the Self-Concepts of Black Lesbians.” Drawing from the literature on identity development and information gathered from openended interviews with ten women, I explored how the process of racial identity and sexual identity influence each other as these women came to understand who they were. Since this was an exploratory study, I asked each woman at the conclusion of the interview if there were times or places in their lives in which race and sexual orientation intersected that we hadn’t yet discussed. One woman, whom I called Rose, answered immediately: religion. She had grown up going to black churches, but no longer felt comfortable there because she had come out in the community as a lesbian. It was more stressful than spiritually calming for her to be subjected to the whispers and stares she encountered while worshiping there. Attending services in a “gay friendly” church, however, did not give her that calm, either. The whispers and stares were more discreet, but she still felt them, for Rose found few other people of color in these churches. No matter where she went, she was always justifying her existence, either as a gay person in a black church, or as a black person in a gay church. There were no black gay churches in the area, so she simply stopped going to church altogether. Two years ago, four women of color attending the National Gathering of the United Church of Christ Coalition for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgendered Concerns, myself included, discussed the difficulties of finding time and space to discuss our concerns within a predominately white organization. We decided to organize a People Whispers and Stares Being Black and Lesbian at Church Tolonda Henderson of Color Institute preceding the next National Gathering. Building on the connections we made during that day-long event and the discussions we had during the week, the POC Institute presented a statement outlining our concerns and the need for a separate group. This caused much pain within the gathered body, but for the most part it was recognized that the document was born of much pain. A line item was added to the budget to create a parallel organization with a separate leadership and power structure to nurture the needs of gay and lesbian people of color within the UCC. We are in the process of planning a meeting in Cleveland next year. What the Coalition recognized at its meeting last June in Providence, Rhode Island is that it is not enough to know someone is gay to know how they need to be nurtured within a Christian community. Groups and organizations who claim to represent the interests of gay and lesbian people within the church need to be aware that, to be blunt, not all gay people are white. When people do not or cannot recognize the different concerns and needs of gay and lesbian people of color, or gloss over the differences in the experience of white gays and lesbians and those who are people of color, they are in effect denying my very existence and quite possibly the existence of those sitting next to them each Sunday morning. I would challenge any congregation which is or is thinking about making a commitment to gay and lesbian people within their communities to look hard at whether or not they are really serving all gay and lesbian people. This may be a long journey for some communities, involving reflection on issues of race in general. But these reflections are necessary. Some may say they do not need to be concerned about race because there are not any people of color in their congregations. To that I would ask two questions. First, why not? Particularly for those churches in neighborhoods or communities where there are people of color, it is important to ask why none of these people choose to fellowship with you. The second question is, do you know the race of the partners of all the gay and lesbian people in your church? Those who are white and dating people of color need to know that they can bring their partners to church functions, that their concerns about children and family will be addressed within the church. Without being mindful of these two things, a covenant of a congregation to be supportive of gay and lesbian people will not be as all embracing and true as it could be. What I propose here is certainly not easy. This does not mean, however, that it can be ignored. Tolonda Henderson is the assistant director of admission at Connecticut College, New London, CT. She attends the First Congregational Church in Groton and is a member of the UCC Coalition for LGBT Concerns. If you are interested in receiving a copy of “Some of Us are Still Brave: An Exploration into the Self Concepts of Black Lesbians,” contact Tolonda Henderson at tjhen@hotmail.com for more information. 16 Open Hands I recently moved back to Indiana after spending two years in the San Francisco Bay area, where I served in a United Methodist church. I soon discovered that one of the main differences between United Methodist churches in the Midwest and those on the west coast is the number of Reconciling Congregations in the San Francisco area. Even the church where I was working—a church where the presence of gay and lesbian persons was minimal— was considering becoming Reconciling. However, upon my return to Broadway United Methodist Church in Indianapolis, I learned that the congregation, with a substantial ministry to persons who claim the identity gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender, did not want to become a Reconciling congregation. Even some of the gay and lesbian members did not support such an initiative. I began to ask why Broadway, which proudly affirms the ministry and relationships of gay and lesbian persons, would not choose to become Reconciling. I believe the answer might lie in a new movement promoted by some in the academic world. This movement seeks to destroy rigid binary categories (e.g., man/woman straight/gay), which serve the interest of the dominant group by excluding some from the claim of normalcy. In the binary, the first member (man and straight) is recognized as primary and dominant and the second member (woman and gay) is accorded an inferior status, becoming derivative of the first member. In addition, the first member can only be understood and can only gain its power in relation to the second member. Within this system of thought, homosexuality becomes a tool used by those in power to establish the heterosexual norm; heterosexuality needs homosexuality to survive. Likewise, patriarchy needs the two-gendered system, for it survives on the notion that women are imperfect reflections of men. One way to end oppression is to end the binary divisions. If there is no longer an “other” (gay), there is no longer a “subject” (straight). If there is no longer “woman” or “man,” there is no longer patriarchy. By acknowledging the existence of more than two genders or sexualities (transgenders being one example) or by blurring or destroying categories, we would no longer have an established norm by which to define or judge people who are different from the norm. This movement has emerged in response to the tradition of essentialism, whose advocates posit the naturalness or biological determinism of homosexuality (i.e., people are born gay/ straight, female/male). Instead of understanding homosexuality as a natural category, separate from heterosexuality, we need to uncover how and why a particular sexuality is expressed, produced, and eventually defined in a particular time period. For example, in biblical times, sexuality was expressed according to active (male role) and passive distinctions (female role), which influenced how one viewed homoerotic relations. In our time period, sexuality is based on binary oppositions with one group claiming normalcy in its relation to the other— now the deviant. Many involved in the reconciling and welcoming movements have advocated essentialism and neglected the critical work of analyzing systems of oppression. The church must do more than simply claim a welcoming stance to all sexualities; it must unmask the inner workings of repressive regimes, which means moving beyond categories and identities. Some people believe that we must raise our children as neither male nor female (according to their genetic disposition) but allow the child to decide his/her own gender or sexuality. This notion is grounded on the belief that gender and sexuality are based on social conditioning and not on genetics. But, as a friend of mine once said, “It is easier to potty train the world than to change it.” By continuing to present evidence of difference, we not only fail to analyze the inner logic of repressive mechanisms (the binary category), but we run the risk of re-stigmatizing the repressed group. The resurrection of the homosexual, though serving to unmask prejudice and the need for equal rights and worth, becomes the “other,” differentiated and classified against the heterosexual norm. Indeed, by naturalizing difference, the system of domination is reproduced instead of debunked. The difference system will always be used by those in power to make the claim that one will always be gay, different, and therefore not the norm. It is just their intention to create a climate of fear and hatred toward anyone different from themselves. Thus when identity claims are made—“I am a lesbian” or “we are a welcoming congregation”— they may be recreating the binary category that has been used to oppress gays and lesbians. “That They May Be One” Rejecting Binary Categories to be Whole and Holy Rachel Metheny Fall 1999 17 Whereas the reconciling and welcoming movement made the gay and lesbian person visible and inserted them into the moral domain, it nonetheless allowed the gay or lesbian to be used as a tool by the repressive regime to render gays and lesbians different and therefore deviant. Thus, instead of being invisible, the homosexual is now a deviant. As a deviant, the gay and lesbian is shut out of the moral domain and the church and becomes fearful of losing one’s family, job, and life. This fear has been expressed by members of Broadway, especially if Broadway was to become a Reconciling congregation. Instead of clinging to rigid sexual identities, we need to move to the idea of “shapeshifters” (those who can change identities) or “tricksters” (those whose sexuality is fluid and changing). The “shapeshifter” has the intention of confusing those in power. By confusing the dominant group, one can no longer define oneself or another as normative or deviant. For example, if the actress and comedian Ellen Degeneres continued to “play the game” of “who am I?,” skirting around her claimed sexual identity, she might never have been ostracized by Hollywood. When Ellen said, “I am gay,” her sexuality became the totality of her personhood. Ellen and other lesbians are more than women desiring erotic relations with other women; they are Christians, Buddhists, politicians, pastors, mothers, African-Americans, and Asians. In addition, lesbianism, in the heterosexual world, is defined solely by the sexual act, an act that is different and against the norm. Lesbian relations are more than a sex act; they involve parenting, sharing dreams, and making life commitments to another. Overall, a sexual identity that is fluid and multifaceted can stymie the workings of groups wanting to outlaw homoeroticism by taking away the power to define normal and deviant. From the first grade up to middle school, I, along with a few others, had to leave class to receive special attention for speech impediments. I will always remember the ostracism I felt each time I had to leave class. Because I was different, I was made to feel ashamed and abnormal, as if I were an imperfection of creation. These feelings are not unlike the feelings experienced by those who claim a sexual identity contrary to the heterosexual norm. I do not want to lessen the power and pride that comes as a result of defining oneself as a gay and lesbian person or of a church defining itself as a welcoming congregation. However, I would hope that some day we can move beyond the difference system and the binary categorization that renders people somehow imperfect or deviant and reach a day when claiming to be a welcoming congregation would sound as absurd as a church needing to make a public statement welcoming heterosexuals. Broadway United Methodist Church is more than a community of sexual identities; it is more than a welcoming and affirming place for all persons. It is a moral and religious community that foremost welcomes and celebrates the diversity of persons and gifts God has created and finds that each person is indispensable to God’s ministry in the world and church. Can it not be more liberating, then, for a church to be recognized as a diverse and welcoming place without identifying itself as a reconciling or welcoming congregation? References: Herrman, Anne and Stewart, Abigail. Theorizing Feminism. Westview Press, 1994. Nicholson, Linda, ed. Feminism/Postmodernism. New York: Routledge, 1990. Rudy, Kathy. Sex and the Church. Boston: Beacon Press, 1997. Seidman, Steven, ed. Queer Theory/Sociology. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishers, 1996. Rachel Metheny is an ordained United Methodist pastor in the South Indiana Conference, presently ser ving Broadway UMC in Indianapolis. She is also working on a Ph.D. in ethics at Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, California. 18 Open Hands All my life I thought I knew who I was. But I didn’t really. I just knew who other people were, and by knowing I was not one of “them,” I thought I knew who “I” was. But that doesn’t work for me anymore. This is the way I used to think: First, I knew that I was not a Jew. That is how I was supposed to know that I was a Christian. So we told stories and jokes about Jews to make it clear who they were so that we would know we were not like them. Next, I knew that I was not Catholic. That is how I was supposed to know that I was Protestant. So we told stories and jokes about Catholics to make it clear who they were so that we would know we were not like that. Then, I knew that I was not Anglican or Baptist or Pentecostal. That is how I was supposed to know I was United Church. So we told stories and jokes about them to make it clear we were not like that. I knew I was a boy because I was not a girl, and we told stories and jokes about girls. I knew I was English (living in Quebec) because I was not French, and we told stories and jokes about the French. I knew I was Canadian because I was not a foreigner and we told stories and jokes about immigrants. From my early teen years, I struggled with my sexual orientation. However, I had no role models and felt I was the only one in the world with these feelings. I had never heard the word “gay” up until this time. So I joined in telling jokes about those people— to make it clear I was not like that. We told stories about everybody. But we didn’t tell stories about ourselves. Why should we? We were just people. By defining everybody else, I thought I knew who I was. This worked fine as long as all those other people acted like they were supposed to act, according to my stories. That is, my identity was secure as long as they played their role according to my script and acted out my stereotypes and my prejudices. But of course, they would not always act like they were supposed to act. I met Jews who didn’t act like Jews were supposed to act, and all of a sudden I was not sure of being Jewish or Christian. And the first time I met a Baptist who drank alcohol and an Anglican who didn’t, it blew the whole thing. As I began to accept myself, I discovered I had a lot more questions than answers. All my stereotypes and prejudices did not fit my experience. Suddenly, I realized that I had never given much attention to who I was. So, lately, I am taking to heart the old Socratic idea of “know thyself.” This is a new discipline that is not taught in school, so I am engaged in a whole new education process. I expect to be struggling with this question right up to and beyond the grave, and never really have it all wrapped up. It’s exciting, it’s scary, it’s full of growth potential and it’s part of discovering who I am. Factions of the early church of Corinth were also defining themselves over against others— specifically, other Christians. The Corinthians were fighting over who were the real Christians. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it? To the church at Corinth, Paul wrote: Though I have enthusiasm and speak in tongues, though I understand everything, though I pray and move mountains, though I work hard, if I have not love, I am nothing. It seems that when the people gathered as a church, they began fighting, because each was wrapped up in their own understanding of their gifts, defining themselves over against other Christians with different gifts. The very gifts they were given became the basis of conflict in the church. Now what are we to do? Paul says: Don’t fight. I will show you a more excellent way. Bring your gift. Celebrate your gift, but go beyond it. Each individual gift makes us different. All the various people and various gifts are needed to make the church whole. We all have different gifts to share, but we all have the common gift: the gift of love and acceptance. Ron Coughlin is a minister in the United Church of Canada, working in its General Council office in the area of lay ministry, candidates for ministry, and internships. He is the volunteer Aff irming Programme coordinator and member of Affirm United, an organization of individuals and local groups across Canada made up of gay men, lesbians, bisexuals and their friends and family. Affirm United began with a few people meeting in Montreal in 1982 and has since provided a safe place for people to worship, study, and celebrate their God given gifts. Affirm United is a resource to the United Church for education and dialogue. Our “Evil Twins” The Pitfall of Defining Ourselves Over Against Others Ron Coughlin The previous article by Rachel Metheny discusses the problem of “binary categories.” Here is an example of how problematic “either/or” definitions can be, excerpted from a sermon delivered in conjunction with a gathering of Affirm United in the United Church of Canada. Fall 1999 19 Misinformation about transgender people in our country is rampant and egregiously offensive. This ignorance is perpetuated by both the heterosexual as well as queer communities, as seen by the media coverage of Rita Hester, a 34-year-old African American transexual, murdered last fall. Ms. Hester was a male-to-female preop transexual woman who was mysteriously found dead inside her first floor apartment in the Allston section of Boston with multiple stab wounds to her chest. The motive of her murder is still in question. Needless to say, many of us in the LGBT community are not ruling out the possibility of it being a hate crime. However, the immediate crime at hand in Rita Hester’s case was the media coverage. Depictions of Ms. Hester as “he,” or a “transvestite,” or as “William” (her legal name), or as an enigma that even her neighbors didn’t know until the time of her death were damaging, disrespectful, and demeaning to the entire transgender community, and keep transgender people constantly subject to ridicule, confusion, ignorance, and possible hate crimes. A petition in remembrance of Rita Hester states, “Transgendered people need to be described with language that is accurate according to lived social reality. In Rita’s case, her acceptance in the Allston/Brighton neighborhood as a female is more important than whether or not she had ‘legally’ changed her sex. The media’s failure to use pronouns and descriptions consistent with her social identity is inaccurate, rude, and inexcusable.” Very little is understood about transgender people because they are relegated to the fringes of society. Crimes against transgender people often go unnoticed or are seen as lesser crimes. Many transgenders, because of anti-trans hatred in this society, feel most comfortable moving about their lives in the night and out of the view of the general public. In fact, a flyer announcing a vigil for Rita Hester stated, “For those who are not comfortable with taking public transportation (which unfortunately includes most trans people I know) some of the Jacques regulars have volunteered to drive people.” The Human Rights Ordinance in the city of Cambridge is the first in this country to include “gender expression” in its list of rights of those to be protected from discrimination. Also, it legally defines gender beyond the limited and inaccurate boundaries of physical anatomy. Gender is defined in the amendment as “the actual or perceived appearance, expression, or identity of a person with respect to masculinity and femininity.” The International Foundation for Gender Education is the largest nonprofit organization serving the transgendered population nationwide. According to IFGE the transgendered “community is comprised of crossdressers, transexuals, gender-benders, anyone who does not identify with traditional gender roles, and all who support freedom of gender expression.” Because transgender people are seen and treated as outcasts, too often the heterosexual population forgets or cannot conceive of the idea that many transgender people have loving families, friends, and community. Nowhere in any of the mainstream media coverage of Rita Hester was her family mentioned. Rita Hester is survived by her mother, brother, and sister, all from Connecticut, and the entire LGBT community here in Boston. I am still haunted by the words of Hester’s mother, who spoke during the vigil. When she came up to the microphone during the speak-out portion of the vigil at the Model Cafe, where Rita was known, she repeatedly said in a heartbroken voice that brought most of us to tears, including me, “I would have gladly died for you, Rita. I would have taken the stabs and told you to run. I loved you.” As the vigil proceeded from the Model Cafe to 21 Parkvale Avenue where Rita lived and died, Hester’s mother again brought me to tears as she and her surviving children knelt in front of the doorway of Rita’s apartment building and recited—as many of us joined in—The Lord’s Prayer. The vigil for Rita Hester was a visible form of protest against anti-trans phobia as well as a memorial to one of our fallen warriors in the LGBT community not only here in Boston but nationwide. Whether or not we find who killed Rita Hester, let us not let her death be in vain, especially for those who have fallen before her like Chanelle Pickett, another African American transexual murdered in 1995 whose white killer was convicted of a lesser crime—assault and battery— and not murder. Let us keep vigil— its Latin root vigilia means night spent watching—against hatred and violence, and let us always, as is stated in Luke 12:35, “Be dressed and read for action and our lamps alight.” Irene Monroe, M.Div., named one of Boston’s “50 Most Intriguing Women” by Boston Magazine, is a doctoral candidate in the Religion, Gender, and Culture program at Harvard Divinity School and a Ford Foundation fellow. Remembering Rita Hester The “T” in LGBT Irene Monroe 20 Open Hands Be Whole As Your God in Heaven Is Whole Eric H. F. Law Child 1: God loves me. Child 2: God loves me too. Child 1: How can that be? Child 2: Why not? Child 1: Because god loves me. Child 2: That doesn’t mean god can’t love me. Child 1: Yes, it does. Child 2: Why? Child 1: Because I’m older and god loved me first. Child 2: That’s not fair. Child 1: You don’t expect god to love me all these years and then suddenly change his mind and love you just because you show up, do you? Child 2: Why can’t god love more than one person?. Child 1: Of course god can do that. It’s just that god can’t love you. Child 2: Why? Child 1: Because I don’t like you. Child 2: What does that have to do with anything? Child 1: If god loves me and I don’t like you, how can god possibly love you? Child 2: You’re mean. Child 1: Say all you want but you won’t get god to love you. Child 2: Why? Child 1: Because I told him not to. Child 2: You can’t tell god what to do! Child 1: Of course I can. God and I are real buddies. Child 2: I don’t think god likes being told what to do. Child 1: You can if he loves you. Child 2: I think you’re going to hell. Child 1: What! Child 2: God says, “Don’t judge lest you be judged.” Child 1: Where did you hear that? Child 2: It’s in the Bible. Since you judged me, I will tell god to judge you and you are definitely going to hell. Child 1: You can’t do that. Child 2: If you can tell god what to do, so can I. Child 1: But you don’t even know god. Child 2: I don’t know your god, but I know mine. Child 1: Are you saying there are two different gods? Child 2: Yeah, one loves you and one loves me. And I don’t think they get along in heaven. Child 1: That’s because my god is better. Child 2: No, my god is nicer. Child 1: My god is stronger Child 2: My god is smarter. Child 1: My god is bigger. Child 2: My god is prettier. Child 1: Wait a minute! This doesn’t sound right. Child 2: What doesn’t sound right? Child 1: I thought there is only one god. Child 2: Where did you hear that? Child 1: It says so in the Bible. Child 2: Then your god must be a fake. Child 1: No, my god is the real one and your god must be Satan. Child 2: How dare you insult my god? Child 1: You are going to burn in the eternal fire of hell, Satan-worshiper. Child 2: You are going to be chopped up into a million pieces for insulting my god! Child 1: I hate you. Child 2: I hate you too. Child 1: I’ll kill you. Child 2: I’ll kill you first because the real god is on my side. Child 1: No, you have Satan on your side— you will definitely die first. (They fight. One kills the other and goes on to argue with another child of god.) A Dialogue Between Two Children of God (A play) Fall 1999 21 Different Faces of the Same God Constructive dialogue with others who are different helps people appreciate different concepts of God. In the process of dialogue, we invite people to take the time to consider another’s reality, and more importantly, another’s relationship with God. In doing so, we discover different faces of the same God. Instead of confining God, making God look and act like us, we attempt to gain a greater vision of who God is. We acknowledge that God is greater than me and you and everything we know combined. We accept that God’s creation, action, and purpose are beyond our comprehension. We learn to see and know God for who God is—not what we want God to be for us. When we have enabled people to be faithful to God in his or her many dimensions, images, and faces, we have made a giant step toward enabling people to act more inclusively toward those who are different. When we can image God in God’s many faces, we can see God in the different faces that we see. When we can embrace the wholeness of God in all different kinds of people— our friends and our enemies, our family and the strangers, our hometown neighbors and the foreigners in our midst— then we are better able to embrace those we consider unlikeable, strange, and different. And when we can perceive God in all of God’s different dimensions, we also can embrace all the different parts of ourselves as holy—the masculine and the feminine, the strong and the weak, the thinking and the feeling, the sensual and the chaste, the playful and the serious, the practical and the dreaming. As God’s rain and sunshine and grace include everyone, as Jesus proclaimed, so we are called to be inclusive as our heavenly God is inclusive, to be whole as our heavenly God is whole. Eric H. F. Law is a consultant/trainer in inclusive organization development, dividing his time between Canada and the United States. He is an Episcopal priest, a playwright, a composer of church music and the author of two books: The Wolf Shall Dwell with the Lamb and The Bush Was Blazing But Not Consumed. The play and portions of this article are excerpts from his forthcoming book: INCLUSION—Making Room for Grace. Exclusion and Idolatry For Christian communities, many acts of exclusion can be traced to the sin of idolatry. Knowing only our limited, incomplete concept of God, we assume that we know all there is to know about God. We create an idol based on these limited ideas and we worship it. We hold our idol up as the only god and we measure another’s worth by it. We want to make God think the way we do. We want God to have the same categories of what is good and bad, right and wrong. If we love someone, God has to love that person. If we hate someone, God has to hate that person too. We confine God to our limited way of seeing and perceiving the world. Historically, we have sinned greatly in the name of our limited, incomplete images of God. For example, with the image of God being exclusively that of a white male figure, we jumped to the conclusion, most often unconsciously, that people who were not white and male were inferior or less of the divine race or gender. With the image of God as a sexless being, we restrained God from relating to humankind in any sexual or sensual ways. With these images, we waged war against those who did not fit our image of God, we implemented genocidal pogroms against them, we kept them in slavery, we demanded those who dared to identify themselves as sexual beings to be silent— all because they did not fit our image of God. For religious people, inclusion is not simply an interpersonal issue, but a theological one. Therefore, one of the principal strategies enabling people to act more inclusively is to help people accept and appreciate a wider variety of images and concepts of God. A good place to start is our Holy Scripture. Scriptures are records of God’s diverse relationships with humanity, first through the patriarchs and matriarchs, Moses and the Exodus events, the prophets; then through Christ in his earthly relationship with humanity, his suffering, death and resurrection; and then through the acts of the community of early believers. In these records are a wealth of images and concepts of God and of Jesus Christ that constantly challenge our limited perception of God. God is not a static entity, but a being with many ways of connecting with us depending on where we are. The rich are challenged by a different image of God than the poor. A woman relates to another set of images of God different from those of men. A scientist’s relationship with God may be very different from that of a poet’s. A gay person connects with God differently than a straight person. The minute we think we’ve got God figured out, there it is: another image that does not quite fit— and so we have to work on relating to others and to God in new ways again. To the degree that we are faithful in studying and experiencing these diverse images and concepts of God and of Christ, we move away from the danger of idolatry. When we have enabled people to be faithful to God with his or her many dimensions, images, and faces, we have made a giant step toward enabling people to act more inclusively toward those who are different. 22 Open Hands Ed. Note: This article was requested before it was revealed that those allegedly responsible for the firebombing of three Sacramento synagogues have also become suspects in the murder of two gay men, revealing yet more connections than originally known. I’m sure that most of you have heard about how three synagogues in my home of Sacramento, California, were firebombed in June, and perhaps you have heard about the pains of despair that so many Jews around the country are feeling. And, of course, these feelings run even stronger among those of us who are members of one of the temples, and that includes me. I have been a member of Congregation B’nai Israel for the past 17 years. This is our 150th anniversary. We are the oldest congregation West of the Mississippi. How could this happen in America? What have we done? Why do they (still) hate us so much? Aren’t we good members of the community? We volunteer for local services and donate funds to good civic causes. All we ask is to be allowed to worship the way we wish and to be allowed to keep our culture alive in our own homes and temples. We don’t seek converts. It is not a “we’re better than you are,” or “God loves us more than you.” All we ask is that we be allowed to live in peace, brotherhood, and safety within the dominant Christian community. We don’t want to bother or threaten the dominant community. Just allow us to “to be.” Is that so hard? We heard via our phone tree as well as the local media, that our weekly Friday Sabbath service would be held in the 2,000 seat Community Theater. Even though it was announced that everyone (Jew/non-Jew) was invited (this is normal for Reform congregations), I figured that there would only be 150 or 250 people there, enough to fill up a few rows in the huge theater, which has two balconies. When I arrived I was totally surprised. Eighteen hundred people from all over our community— Jews, Catholics, Buddhists, Hare Krishnas, and members from every Protestant denomination were there. There were members from black churches, gay churches, Asian churches, as well as atheists, agnostics, and some of the followers of New Age spiritual leaders. There were ministers, bishops, city council members, the police chief, the FBI, ATF, and representatives from the state legislature and governor’s office. Never have I seen such an outpouring of grief and concern from the community—for Jews. One of the most touching groups was the Methodists. It seems they were having a large convention here in Sacramento. And when they heard about the bombings, many decided they wanted to pray with us. And so there were hundreds of them all wearing their convention badges. A Reform Jewish Friday night service is not what you might expect. It is not solemn and “dignified.” It is the “celebration of the Sabbath” where we sing, clap hands, say prayers, listen to the rabbi and cantor (who leads the music), banter with each other, and of course hear a sermon, often filled with humor. It is a happy service. But who could be happy? Our house of worship had been torched. Our entire library of 5,000 books was gone. [See box below for how you can help the library.] Yet our Rabbi told us that we must persevere and that to not celebrate the Sabbath would be exactly what the terrorists would hope to achieve. We were putting on a brave front. We laughed, we sang, we applauded, we said the ancient prayers. Then something happened that I will never forget. Seated on the stage (known as a bema [bee-mah] in Hebrew: altar) were a number of our Temple’s officers, as well as some of the “dignitaries” from the city. There was one very attractive blonde woman whom no one seemed to recognize. I heard the “buzz” of “who is that woman and why is she there.” Toward the middle of the service our Rabbi said he wanted to introduce us When We All Get Together Aftermath of a Firebombed Synagogue Alan N. Canton Eighteen hundred people from all over our community—Jews, Catholics, Buddhists, Hare Krishnas, and members from every Protestant denomination were there. There were members from black churches, gay churches, Asian churches, as well as atheists, agnostics, and some of the followers of New Age spiritual leaders. Never have I seen such an outpouring of grief and concern from the community—for Jews. Fall 1999 23 Speakers/leaders to include: Steve Charleston Jimmy Creech Chris Glaser Carter Heyward Grace Imathiu Mary E. Hunt Michael Kinnamon Eric H. F. Law Virginia Ramey Mollenkott Melanie May Melanie Morrison Jeanne Audrey Powers Janie Spahr Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite Mel White Walter Wink an historic ecumenical gathering of Welcoming Churches and their allies in the U.S. and Canada August 3-6, 2000 Northern Illinois University (outside Chicago) Worship * Workshops * Bible Study * Performances Celebrations * Denominational Gatherings * Youth Program Sponsored by: Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada), Association of Welcoming and Affirming Baptists (American Baptist), More Light Presbyterians, Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ), Open and Affirming Program (United Church of Christ), Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran), Reconciling Congregation Program (United Methodist), and Supportive Congregations Network (Brethren/Mennonite). Major funding provided by: Broadway United Church of Christ (New York), E. Rhodes and Leona B. Carpenter Foundation, and First United Church of Oak Park (Illinois). For more information on this gala event or to find out how you can support WOW2000, contact: WOW2000 •5250 N. Broadway • PMB#111 • Chicago, IL 60640 800-318-5581 • www.wow2k.org to a Rev. Faith Whitmore and she got up and went to the podium. She was either the local or regional head of the United Methodist Church, who was having their convention. And she spoke briefly about how appalled she was and her brethren were about these incidents. We’ve heard it before. From the Pope on down, all through the years its been “Gee, sorry for the Holocaust but there’s nothing I could have done about it.” She reached into her suit coat and took out a piece of paper. “I want you to know that this afternoon we took a special offering of our members to help you rebuild your temple and we want you to have this check for six thousand dollars.” For two seconds there was absolute dead quiet. We were astounded. Did we hear this correctly? Christians are going to do this? On the third second the hall shook with a thunderous applause. I’ve never heard applause like that before. And it went on for two minutes. And then people broke into tears. Me too. It was like all of the emotion of the day and evening poured out in those few minutes. As Rev. Whitmore gave the check to the Rabbi and hugged him, it was one of the most emotional moments I’ve ever been witness to. Christians— who for centuries sent the Cossacks to pillage our towns, who put us through their Inquisitions, who burned us at the stake as heretics, who expelled us from their countries, who locked us away in tiny shtetls (shtet-ell—a poor Jewish town like in Fiddler on the Roof), who eagerly turned us into the Nazi SS, and who ran the trains, who produced the poison gas, or just “knew” about the greatest human tragedy of this century— were doing something good for a Jew. Nothing in my life prepared me for that. The evening closed with a final hymn and we all went home feeling a bit better. Why here? Why us? Why me? I’m sure there are answers, but I don’t have them at the moment. The only answer I do have is that we must pick ourselves up as a congregation and community (there were two other temples also heavily damaged) and move on. They can’t beat us. We are the Jewish people. We were here 5,000 years ago, and we will be here 5,000 years from today. Alan Canton is the author of the popular business book, ComputerMoney, and one of the principals of Adams-Blake Publishing. In addition to his consulting projects, he is a syndicated writer, speaker, and much published commentator on national small business issues. His new book, The Silver Pen: Starting a Profitable Writing Business From a Lifetime of Experience— A Guide for Older People has just been published. Donations of books or money for the library can be sent to: Ms. Poshi Mikalson, Librarian, Congregation B’nai Israel, 3600 Riverside Blvd., Sacramento, CA 95628 USA. Make checks payable to the congregation. Books and videos with Jewish content are needed: children’s books, cookbooks, food, history, biography, life, commentary, and fiction with a Jewish theme. 24 Open Hands A few days after the nail bomb attack on a gay pub in the Soho district of London, I found myself working in the capital and made a deliberate detour to visit the scene of the devastation. This was not a form of journalistic or personal voyeurism, but a deep sense of wanting to pay silent respect to those who had been killed and injured, and to be alongside members of a grieving community. I hovered beside a policeman outside the boarded-up bar, watching people placing carnations in silver foil along the pavement. Down the street, I spotted leather-clad bouncers standing outside pubs and cafe waiters searching the bags of every customer. In nearby St. Anne’s Church, a lighted candle became the focus of people’s prayers. Outside, a woman invited passers-by to write messages of condolence and pin them to a makeshift noticeboard propped up against some chairs. Moved by the comments, I instinctively pulled a black notebook from my pocket and started scribbling down the powerful sentiments. Then I Henri Nouwen’s Hidden Legacy Mike Ford realized they were sacred meditations. The first I read was distressing: “Raj’s friend is unrecognizable.” Then I noticed a prayer, “Dear Lord, please ease the suffering and pave the way for good to be done.” Another message was repentant: “Ashamed that I ignored the threat of bigotry and prejudice. Ashamed that I allowed ignorance and evil a chance to harm. I will never forget. Sorry.” Beside it, a short statement: “To the Victims of Man: Maintain the love of the heart.” Underneath, a political plea: “Let all the churches speak out now against homophobia. Where is the courage in the church hierarchies? Where is their love? Silence supports hatred and bigotry.” On another corner of the noticeboard, simple but profound words, “It’s time to learn how to love.” From there I made my way to Soho Square where, in the evening floodlight, I caught sight of several rows of flowers, each bouquet with its own poignant message: “I know we only spent a very brief time together but it still brightened up my life. I’m sorry we couldn’t have known each other better.” … “We risk all for each other beyond reason and we shall never lose hope even in suffering.” … “Rest in peace in a place without prejudice.” I thought of my spiritual hero, Henri Nouwen. Had he been there in person, he would surely have wept, for he was someone who showed a remarkable sensitivity towards any form of suffering and was always on the side of the marginalized. An authentically compassionate man, he suffered with people— literally. And he always sent flowers. I thought of him particularly as I read, on one floral tribute, a quotation from the 13th century Sufi mystic, Rumi, “Beyond ideas of right and wrong there is a field. I will meet you there.” During the last year of his life, Henri had become interested in the writings of Rumi. Both knew that true spirituality went far beyond and much deeper than any moral imperative. Whenever he wrote or talked about sexuality, for instance, Henri Nouwen would shift the discussion away from morality, outside the confines of right and wrong. Sexuality, he once told me, had to be talked about from the place of mysticism and not just the place of morality. More than 30 years ago, writing in the National Catholic Reporter, Nouwen urged people to befriend homosexual people without trying to change them: “If we are committed to the word of God as revealed in the person of Jesus Christ, we are invited to understand the homo- I came to realize just how central Nouwen’s long-repressed homosexuality had been to his struggles and how it had probably been the underlying stimulus for his powerful writings on loneliness, intimacy, marginality, love, and belonging. Fall 1999 25 sexual existence as an expression of our basic human condition, which is one of fear, anxiety, loneliness and, especially, homelessness, and is in essence a cry for the liberating power of faith, hope, and love.” Nouwen, who was gay himself, first recognized his sexual orientation at the same time as he started responding to his call to the priesthood— at the age of six. For much of his life he agonized over what for him was clearly a conflict: he was passionate about people and even suffered a complete emotional breakdown after one platonic friendship collapsed because of the expectations he had of it. During the last decade of his life at L’Arche (a community of people living with disabilities and abilities), he slowly came to accept his sexual identity and showed particular kindness to fellow homosexual Christians, especially those in relationships which he described as “holy.” But he was never exclusive in his affections: his huge hands and long arms embraced many others who felt distance from society, the institutional church, or both. He cared especially for the physically and mentally disabled, the psychologically wounded and the recently bereaved. Although rooted in the priesthood of the Roman Catholic Church, he knew what it was like to be an outsider, to feel displaced and abandoned. Even at the height of his fame as an internationally respected professor and writer, Nouwen experienced the depths of his own loneliness as a celibate who longed for intimate friendships but was also frightened of them. He once said that the essence of his struggle revolved around his longing to be close and his needing to keep his distance. During my travels around the world to research my recent book on him, Wounded Prophet, I learned much about Nouwen and the contradictions which shaped him into a unique individual: a multi-gifted man of boundless generosity, charm, and pastoral vision, but also a deeply insecure person of anguish, pain, and craving. Nouwen, journalist of his own inner life, was a complicated man, tormented by a fear of rejection, of not being loved. Remembering this raw vulnerability, a few friends tried to overprotect him in death as they had in life, but many more felt it important to be less inhibited and more truthful about who he was and what he wrestled with. I was surprised by the candid way in which people spoke honestly about him to a stranger. I didn’t always need to ask questions: people simply talked about him and told me afterwards that the interview had become part of their own grieving process for a man they had deeply loved. After more than a hundred encounters, I came to realize just how central Nouwen’s long-repressed homosexuality had been to his struggles and how it had probably been the underlying stimulus for his powerful writings on loneliness, intimacy, marginality, love, and belonging. The author of more than 40 books, Henri Nouwen was often much more explicit about his needs and longings in his first draft than some of his friends and editors desired him to be in the final versions. So they edited the manuscripts before publication. In some cases, this gained wider appeal for his books but, at the same time, also had the effect of de-contexualizing some parts of his writing. There may have been some virtue in this utilitarian approach, but was it really honest in the long term? Latterly, Nouwen spoke publicly about AIDS, preached at the funeral of a gay man who had died of the virus, told students that gay men and women had a “unique vocation in the Christian community,” affirmed gay people in their relationships and included many references to homosexuality in his last journal, Sabbatical Journey. Yet, the man who drew so abundantly from his own experience about almost everything else, never wrote explicitly about his own personal struggles as a priest who was gay, thereby depriving his readers of his deep wisdom and mystical perceptions into this most contemporary and controversial of issues. He thought a great deal about it and told his publishers that he wanted to write about homosexuality thoroughly—but only when he felt emotionally free enough. That day never came. Nouwen died suddenly in 1996 at the age of 64. Letters I have received from around the world since Wounded Prophet was published suggest that a great many readers, especially priests, would have more than welcomed his insights. Henri Nouwen has, however, left us a rich legacy of words to offer hope and reassurance to people who suffer in any situation—and not least to those penning messages of hope in the London rain, crouched beside the burgeoning flowers in the shadow and on the edge of Soho: “We are not alone; beyond the differences that separate us, we share one common humanity and thus, belong to each other. The mystery of life is that we discover this human togetherness not when we are powerful and strong, but when we are vulnerable and weak” (Henri J.M. Nouwen, Our Greatest Gift, HarperCollins, 1994, p. 27). Michael Ford is a religious affairs journalist with the British Broadcasting Corporation. His biography of Henri Nouwen, Wounded Prophet (Doubleday, 1999), is based on interviews with 100 of Nouwen’s friends and associates. “We are not alone; beyond the differences that separate us, we share one common humanity and thus, belong to each other. The mystery of life is that we discover this human togetherness not when we are powerful and strong, but when we are vulnerable and weak.” —Henri Nouwen 26 MINISTRIES Open Hands CONNECTIONS Walking for Love and Justice Farmworkers and Lavender People DeEtte Wald Beghtol I suppose there are Latino/Latina farmworkers who say, “Support gay and lesbian causes? You must be crazy!”— just as there are probably some gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender folks who say “Support farmworkers? You must be crazy!” But in Oregon, farmworkers and “lavender people” have alliances that have been working for both communities for close to ten years. In 1992 an ultra right-wing organization named the Oregon Citizens Alliance used the initiative process to put a measure on the ballot for public vote which condemned people of sexual minorities as “abnormal, wrong, unnatural and perverse” and made it legal to deny us basic legal rights. It was for Oregonians the notorious Measure 9. In response gay men and lesbians organized in very creative ways. One of the most ambitious of these was the “Walk for Love and Justice,” organized by the Lesbian Community Project. Lesbians, gays, and our allies walked more than 110 miles from Eugene, Oregon to Portland on a route which ran through many conservative, isolated, rural towns and communities. The purpose was to give people in small towns a chance to meet and talk to openly gay and lesbian people— to experience for themselves that we are normal, real people who shouldn’t have basic rights taken away from us. The task of finding groups to feed and house the walkers was daunting. LCP and their allies in other gay-friendly organizations contacted churches all along the route— not because churches were necessarily the most gay-friendly, but because churches have kitchens and large spaces which could be used for sleeping. The risks were great, not only for the people who walked, literally risking potshots in the communities they walked through, but also for the leaders of congregations who hosted the walkers. The session of the Presbyterian congregation to which I then belonged in suburban Portland, long considered one of the more liberal churches in the presbytery, had some intense discussions before finally agreeing to welcome the walkers. “What would they be like?” “How would we protect our young people from these ‘foreign’ influences?” But brave congregations all along the route opened their fellowship halls and sometimes the homes of parishioners so that the walkers could have places to sleep before the next day’s walk. The only stop on this journey that was not a church was the headquarters of Piñeros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste (PCUN), the Northwest Farmworkers and Treeplanters Union. Those of us working on preparations for the walk were delighted and astounded that PCUN had agreed to be a part of this pilgrimage. Latino/Latina people in Oregon were not well known for their inclusivity of GLBT people. I imagine the discussions inside PCUN before making the decision to welcome the walkers were even more heated that those in my church. It was really a stretch for PCUN, after a long history of abuse by Anglos, to welcome into their headquarters not only unknown Anglos but gay and lesbian Anglos. But PCUN leaders could see that the farmworker struggle is linked to other struggles for justice. They could see that if the OCA attack on GLBT people succeeded, then Latino/Latina people, as another vulnerable minority, might be next. They could see the truth in the quote from Pastor Martin Niemoller, which many of us wore on buttons and t-shirts: “In Germany [the Nazis] first came for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me— and by that time no one was left to speak up.” In the years since that eventful walk, PCUN has broadened its alliances with GLBT people. Causa, a Latino/Latina organization focusing on immigrant issues, works closely with Rural Organizing Project, an organization which has developed a network of Human Rights Councils in small towns in every corner of Oregon. These groups have worked together to defeat anti-immigrant measures as well as other anti-human rights measures. So when the More Light Church Conference came to Portland in 1997, it was appropriate that leaders of the GLBT struggle return the favor to PCUN. We included as one of the “field trips” of the conference a trip to PCUN headquarters, and shared profits from the gathering with them. Conference organizers wanted attendees from all over the nation to learn about farmworker issues and to see Latinas/Latinos as our sisters and brothers in the struggle. I don’t remember the name of one of the women I met on the Walk for Love and Justice; but I will remember forever her words: “I went on the walk to change others, and I have been changed.” She had seen what the Quakers call “that of God” in people she had previously seen as “other.” This is exactly what the link between PCUN and LCP and “lavender” people in Oregon is about. We are all changed as we join in each other’s struggles. DeEtte Wald Behgtol is an activist and a peacemaker. She is an active member of Bridgeport Community Church, UCC, an Open and Affirming Congregation, and of Metanoia Peace Community, UMC, a Reconciling Congregation in Portland, Oregon. Fall 1999 MINISTRIES 27 WELCOMING PROCESS Consider An Interfaith Resource Fair Jeffrey A. Matthews “Licensed to Kill,” a documentary on PBS, tells the story of a gay man, reared in a Christian fundamentalist home, whose father (an administrator in a Christian college), was vocal and vicious in his condemnation of homosexuals. With this poison in his heart, the son decided it would be a service to society and to God to kill some gay men. At the time of his interview for the short film, the young man had murdered two men and injured a third, and was serving a prison sentence. He had begun to re-think the severity of his religion. “Maybe,” he now ventured about his upbringing, “there should have been more emphasis on the positive aspects of God.” This story stands as one more example of the guilty role religion has too often played in society, and the desperate need for healing and reconciliation that exists between institutions of faith and GLBT people. It’s time to emphasize “the positive aspects of God.” “Linkages” is a vital, creative and growing program in New York’s Capital Region (Albany) which displays such an emphasis. For the past two years, folks from welcoming congregations and the GLBT community have come together on a Sunday in the spring to connect, talk, listen, laugh, learn, pray, and we hope, form “linkages” of understanding and appreciation for now and the future. The idea arose as members of two Reconciling United Methodist congregations (Community UMC of Slingerlands, NY, and First UMC of Schenectady, NY) came together to explore ways of putting flesh on the bones of our welcoming statement. Members of each congregation felt that there ought to be something— more than just saying it—that we could do to reach out to and welcome the GLBT community. We discovered, as we talked, that our mistake had been thinking we had to do it by ourselves. It occurred to us, like a rush of revelation, that we didn’t need to struggle in isolation, but that we could do more, and do it better, together. We were, in essence, “coming out” of our respective closets to discover that we were not alone. The lesson of community was being learned again. Our initial idea was to organize a resource fair. There were religious and human needs and resources that we should know about, support, and share. An organizing committee grew out of our first meeting and quickly reached out to the Capital District Gay and Lesbian Community Council and interested area clergy and congregations. By the time our enlarged Linkages committee met, it included laity and clergy, gay and straight, women and men, young and old, Jews and Christians; people of goodwill and genuine enthusiasm. Clearly this was an issue ready for attention. Since then both the planning process and actual program days have provided sources of deeper understanding, healing, friendship, and community. The Linkages days have included the original resource fair element, but also a variety of workshops, discussions, hospitality, and interfaith worship. Our spring gatherings have been held in a More Light Presbyterian Church and a Welcoming Unitarian/Universalist Society. A January “Winter Warmer” social event, which nurtured our new relationships, was hosted by the Capital District Gay and Lesbian Community Center. Nearly 30 religious and GLBT organizations have participated in Linkages, with attendance ranging from 150 to 200. Religious exhibitors have included United Methodist, Presbyterian, Baptist, MCC, Quaker, Unitarian/Universalist, and National Catholic Churches, along with Conservative and Reform Jewish congregations. GLBT and related exhibitors have included PFLAG, Empire State Pride Agenda, Gay/Lesbian/ Straight Educators Network, The Inclusion Project of Jewish Family Services, the National Coalition Building Institute, Safety Zone Youth Program, and the Capital District Gay and Lesbian Community Council. Workshops have dealt with topics like: scripture, needs of GLBT youth, coalition building, holy unions, sexual ethics, sharing stories/changing hearts, and the process and implications of becoming a welcoming congregation. Interfaith worship has given us the opportunity to embrace God and each other and the blessing of diversity. The local news coverage has been generous, positive, and helpful. Now, in its third year, the vision and movement continues to grow. Though the original idea was for Linkages to be a one-time event, it has taken on a life that will not be denied. Saratoga Springs (a community north of Albany) has adopted the model and last year held its first “Creating Connections” conference. Representatives from a variety of faith communities outside of the Capital District have come to participate and see how Linkages works. Who knows what God has in mind for this work of reconciliation? If only one person were to hear and believe the old story that “God is love,” and reject the false and violent lessons of hatred, anger, and fear, Linkages will have been a great and blessed success—but I believe it won’t end there. It just may be that the time has come to share the positive story of the God who loves and saves and frees us all. Jeff rey A. Matthews is the pastor of Community United Methodist Church in Slingerlands, New York. 28 MINISTRIES Open Hands LEADERSHIP Justice Groups Building Bridges Debbie Roberts and Zandra Wagoner In 1996, a formal liaison relationship was developed between the Brethren/Mennonite Council for Lesbian and Gay Concerns (BMC) and the Church of the Brethren Womæn’s Caucus. Womæn’s Caucus is a network of feminist women and men who identify with the Church of the Brethren. We began 25 years ago as an organization to advocate for women’s concerns and issues. Given our awareness of the violence and pain related to the denial of gender equality, we are engaged in the broad task of creating a church which is free from attitudes and practices of injustice. Over the years, we have had an inherent connection with BMC, given the interlocking systems of heterosexism and sexism and our mutual commitments to justice. Recently, we have formalized our relationship. Through this connection, we have supported one another’s programs, responded to denominational concerns, exchanged ideas, and co-sponsored four conferences: Dancing at the Wall, Dancing at the Table, Wade on in: Dancing at the Water’s Edge, and Dancing in the Southwind. Together we have been creating a vision of church that is both welcoming and life-affirming. Womæn’s Caucus has been delighted by this new relationship. It has strengthened our work and offered us new life and spirit. The history leading up to our present relationship is significant. Initially, Womæn’s Caucus was funded, in part, by the Church of the Brethren. This support was terminated in the 1980’s. Although the denomination no longer financially supported the caucus, and never financially supported BMC, we each maintained a formal liaison relationship with our denomination. Three years ago, the denomination officially severed its relationships with both the Caucus and BMC. The increased rejection by the official structure of the Church of the Brethren paradoxically awakened new life in the Womæn’s Caucus. We were eager to connect with other groups who shared a prophetic vision of church. After years of attempting to work within the denominational structure, the Caucus was moving toward an awareness that the institutional church was unable to feed our passions for community and justice. While not abandoning the church, we realized that it was time to nurture our spirits and create authentic places where prophetic vision was encouraged and embraced. Around this same time, BMC was coming to a similar conclusion. No longer wishing to pound on walls of exclusion, BMC was choosing to dance at the walls instead. Our parallel hopes and vision, along with the denominational severing, moved us to strengthen and formalize our relationship. We have found our relationship of cooperation and communication with BMC to be a significant act of bridge-building. Womæn’s Caucus benefits from BMC’s particular vision, increasing our awareness of the dynamics of power and injustice which compromise the dignity of persons and whole groups. We believe that such bridge-building breaks down fears of the unknown, dismantling the negative assumptions that one group may have about another group in which they are not an active part. It may be true that our relationship has increased our alienation from our denomination, but it is a minor cost in comparison to the benefits we have experienced together. Our liaison strengthens the support and possibilities of community. Together we provide safe space, affirmation, supportive community, and a stronger voice. Ultimately it is more detrimental to remain separated than to risk standing together. So Womæn’s Caucus has continued to build bridges to other organizations, since developing a liaison relationship with the Church of the Brethren Global Women’s Project and, most recently, the Church of the Brethren “On Earth, Peace” Assembly. We hope to continue our bridge-building efforts. Debbie Roberts is convener of the Womæn’s Caucus Steering Committee and campus minister at the University of La Verne, California. Zandra Wagoner serves as the Womæn’s Caucus administrator and is a full-time graduate student focusing on women and religion at Claremont Graduate University in California. This updated article was first published in Dialogue, a publication of the Brethren/Mennonite Council for Lesbian and Gay Concerns (BMC). SPIRITUALITY My Soulforce Journey to Lynchburg By Dotti Berry In October, Rev. Mel White and Rev. Jerry Falwell, each with 200 followers, met in Lynchburg, Virginia for a weekend of dialogue, meals, and worship, and to speak together against violence against LGBT people. This is a personal account of its spiritual effect on a lesbian in active dialogue with her own as-yet nonaffirming congregation. Our strength lies in our diversity! And what a wonderful mosaic God has woven! The “Soulforce 200” delegates to Lynchburg were gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered, and heterosexual people of faith: Catholic, Protestant (from Episcopal to Mennonite), Jewish, Mormon, and Buddhist as well as others. We were all there with the recognition that none of us in our society are free until we are all free. Justice for self means nothing if my brothers and sisters are imprisoned in any way. I was humbled by the personal journeys of truth and suffering which many in the group recounted. Dr. Rodney Powell, who personally taught the non-violent approach for Dr. Martin Luther King during desegregation was again on the front lines to lead us to a new understanding of how to approach our adversaries. Heterosexual people such as Mary Lou and Bob Wallner, whose lesbian daughter Anna’s suicide has brought a new awareness, were there to continue learning about who we are. Jimmy Creech was there, the heterosexual United Methodist minister who continues to suffer for our Fall 1999 MINISTRIES 29 cause as he faces trial once again in November for celebrating same gender holy union ceremonies. If I had to describe my family motto growing up, it would be “You will tell the truth at all costs.” My family is big on “telling the truth” until “the truth” is something they do not want to hear. So, the first Soulforce Vow to seek the truth, to live by the truth and to confront untruth wherever I find it, has been an accepted philosophy for most of my 46 years. In the last 20 years since I came out of the closet, however, it has become a working philosophy— a philosophy in action. As an openly gay Christian, my faith in God sustains me; my daily walk with God empowers me in ways I never dreamed possible. I truly don’t feel I have ever “lost” anything because of being openly gay. Yes, by the world’s standards, I may have lost plenty. But, in reality, I have gained more than I could ever imagine by allowing God to work through me and touch my soul in ways that enable me to accomplish things I could never do with my own strength. If I gain something of value through deception (of who I am), then to me, that is simply a form of idolatry. The world is more than willing to give me anything of value I want—if, and I say if, I am willing to be deceptive. This, however, is how the world enslaves us. Personal spiritual renewal was at the heart of this Soulforce journey to Lynchburg. I recognize that suffering for others is the path to my own liberation and that transformation of society becomes a natural byproduct of transforming my own soul. Since the Soulforce methods for changing minds and hearts are negotiation and direct action, I was challenged by the teachings of Gandhi and King to see my adversary in an entirely new light in order to do justice nonviolently. That meant no violence of the fist, no violence of the tongue, and no violence of the heart. This second of five Soulforce Vows, the Vow to Love, was a challenge. The first two parts of the second Soulforce Vow are pretty obvious— it is the last one that is so subtle. We can outwardly control the first two: violence of the fist and tongue, but violence of the heart is hidden from the view of others even while it is being engaged. But it eats away at us like a cancer. So “no violence of the heart” is where I was most challenged, because my heart was suspicious of Jerry Falwell’s motives. I realized I was committing “violence of the heart” and felt compelled to alter that through prayer and meditation. I had to continually go back to one of the seven Soulforce beliefs about my adversary which says “My adversary’s motives are as pure as mine and of no relevance to our discussion.” I choose to believe that Falwell is just as committed to finding the “truth” as I am, as I recall another of the beliefs about my adversary: “My adversary may have an insight into truth that I do not have.” I also recall that Jesus himself taught that we are not to judge— either motives or hearts— simply to love. Only God can know a person’s heart. That is why I did not try to focus on ex-gay Michael Johnston and spend negative energy on him in any way. Again, I have to accept that his motives are as pure as mine. Who am I to judge him? Perhaps God is working through him and has brought him to his true sexual orientation just like God has worked to bring Mel White and others of us to our true sexual orientation. My point is, only Michael and God know what is true! If his path is not one of pureness and truth, that will one day become apparent. I believe that our adversaries are simply victims of misinformation, so bringing the truth in love relentlessly can do nothing less than transform their understanding with the realization that they have operated under false premises for far too long. Our real enemy is untruth, not people. When I make a conscious decision to choose freedom over being a victim, my life dramatically changes. I remind myself that freedom is never given to the oppressed; it is always claimed by the oppressed. During the Lynchburg weekend, in spite of our differences, we simply tried to love one another as did Jesus, encouraging others to do the same. I came to realize that there is no victory in “defeating” an enemy. There is only victory when relationships are restored. The non-violent movement seeks justice and reconciliation, not victory. Mel White and Soulforce were determined to bring this truth to Jerry Falwell and his followers so eloquently spoken by Rabbi Abraham Heschel “Speech has power. Words do not fade. What starts out as a sound ends in a deed.” The future of Soulforce is in eradicating spiritual violence against all people. Please pray for us. Better yet, join our Soulforce network of friends seeking justice for all God’s children— heterosexual, gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender by logging onto http://www.soulforce.org Dotti Berry is owner of Phoenix Communications, a marketing, promotions, and internet development company which also offers workshops on diversity. You can go to www.2000the millennium and click onto Phoenix Communications. For more details on an upcoming workshop in February with Brian McNaught, go to www.empoweringdiversity.com OUTREACH International Gay Group Addresses Religion Tom Hanks For the first time in its 21-year history, ILGA (International Lesbian and Gay Association) held its international conference in Africa, Sept.19-25. Johannesburg, South Africa was the site chosen to commemorate that nation’s amazing transformation and its historic role as the first nation to include protection for sexual minorities from discrimination in its constitution (now followed by Ecuador in Latin America, which eliminated its anti-sodomy law in 1998). Given the solid accomplishments and advances for lesbigay rights in virtually every country in Latin America, Africa now commonly is considered as the next continent ripe for major advance. Even in Zimbabwe, where Robert Mugabe has the reputation of being the world’s most homophobic leader (and 30 MINISTRIES Open Hands by fundamentalist missionaries cite the same “clobber texts” against gays and increasingly offer to “cure” homosexuality” by “ex-gay” type “therapy” (torture). One urgent need, however, is to circulate literature in French, the dominant common language in many countries. In Latin America virtually every nation now has lesbigay groups with email and access to Internet (www sites), which makes our traditional recourse to mailing documents less urgent (and keeping our websites updated more urgent). However, few nations in Africa even have a gay group, much less one with access to computers. So traditional mailings to activists and universities will remain important for a few years. In Latin America, the major problem in continental infrastructure for gay rights remains the lack of bookstores. However, NX, the gay magazine in Argentina, is now offering books via email and their website, and at the Latin America caucus a representative from IGLHRC agreed to work on development of this approach for other countries, which avoids threats of violence to stores on the street and greatly reduces costs. In a stirring and controversial conclusion, the ILGA plenary voted to move up its next international meeting to coincide with Rome 2000, July 1-9 (where IGLHRC already has programmed a day on the subject of homosexuality and religion). Also, in a kind of African coup d’état, for the post of Co- Secretary General, the plenary replaced Australia’s respected and popular Jennifer Wilson with an eloquent and visionary black South African lesbian, Phumi Mtetwa, who promised to fulfill the organization’s process of regionalization by making it “an ILGA for the poor.” The election of London trade union leader Kursad Kahramanoglu (Islamic, of Turkish origin) as the male Co-Secretary General guaranteed that ILGA’s future will be dramatically different from its European roots and past— and certainly not dull! However, Jennifer and Australia are not to be counted out, since the decision to make Rome 2000 the next meeting also opens up the way to have the following ILGA coincide with the Gay Games in Sydney in 2002. Will ILGA be ready to tackle Asia in earnest by that time? In preparation, our Working Party has restructured and expanded its representation to include contact persons in Africa, Brazil, France, Germany, and North America, as well as Latin America. If you want to join the Party, you can probably skip Italian, but it’s not too early to start working on Chinese! Our “gay nineties” may only have been the launching pad for the new millennium. Most ILGA delegates stayed over after the conference to participate in Johannesburg’s 10th Pride March, an unforgettable six-mile trek (including one very long, steep hill) that took us to the apartment of Simon Tseko Nkoli. There we paused to commemorate this beloved national leader in the struggle against apartheid and homophobia, who died of AIDS, Nov. 30, 1998. Simon was imprisoned for four years and while in prison came out as gay, a decision that had major impact on Nelson Mandela and other black leaders and proved crucial in the move to include gay rights in the national constitution. Tom Hanks is the executive director of Other Sheep, highlighted in our international issue this past spring, and lives in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Other Sheep’s English language website is www.othersheep.org which has the worst statistics for HIV/AIDS, with some 25% of the population infected), GALZ (Gays and Lesbians of Zimbabwe) provides courageous and dynamic leadership in an appalling situation. As the contact person for the ILGA Working Party on Homophobia, Ideology and Religion, I was especially concerned with our preconference Sept.19, which was well-organized by a local committee and attracted 50 persons, about a third of those attending the conference. A women’s preconference, held the same day, attracted 80, and many women expressed regret that they had to choose between two such significant areas of concern. However, the women’s preconference decided to focus on women and spirituality at their next meeting, so agendas appear to be converging (patriarchy always has been a major concern in our Working Party documents). For the first time the Working Party’s preconference was able to involve Islamic participation. Many expressed interest in the development of a South African Islamic liberation theology (especially the works of Farid Esack) that has demonstrated solidarity with the human rights struggle for women and sexual minorities, including support for the controversial new constitution. Although Islamic northern African nations had few representatives at the conference (and no known groups exist yet), a few weeks before ILGA met, King Mohammed VI of Morocco was outed as having frequented gay bars in the Netherlands during his years as a university student there. Thus the Islamic world, unquestionably the major remaining hurdle in ILGA’s struggle for gay rights, has begun to give encouraging evidence of significant change and opposition to traditional homophobic prejudices. South Africa already has a number of strong lesbigay organizations, a large archive department in the major university, and a new book including chapters by numerous Christian leaders (with a foreword by Anglican Bishop Desmond Tutu) supporting lesbigay concerns, plus a growing number of gay churches (including several MCC’s)— one with 600 members! Given the economic and cultural leadership of the nation and its recent dramatic transformation from an apartheid pariah, the nation’s potential for influencing other nations is enormous. Humorous evidence of this was recently supplied when the legislature of neighboring Namibia voted to adopt South Africa’s labor code— apparently without bothering to give it a careful reading— and found they had enacted legal protection for sexual minorities against discrimination! Not only in the preconference but throughout the conference religion was a major focus. One popular South African lesbian leader began her presentation declaring “I’m black, gay and Christian!”— a far cry from the more secular, “post- Christian” atmosphere of the conference in Cologne, Germany (1997). Other Sheep literature was in great demand and the number of our Other Sheep resource centers in Africa at this writing has increased from 5 to 17. Islam (especially in the North) and the staggering HIV/AIDS statistics (especially in Central Africa), plus the continuing popularity of tribal religions and ancestral worship, make the continent unique. However, certain challenges common in other areas made clear why much of our literature, prepared for North and Latin America, is so in demand in Africa, where churches oriented Fall 1999 31 Sustaining the Spirit He comes and wraps himself around me, An almost tangible presence. My body reacts to love beyond knowing— Ardor quickens, heat rises within me, life itself… I know that I am naked, and I am not ashamed. How can I feel shame in the presence of the One who creates both flesh and spirit? His spirit hand joins my human one in ecstatic rhythm Touching me in secret places, places of my body— Places of my heart— Places of desire— Heart’s Desire, desiring me, even me! Time leaves me—or I leave it— floating for an eternity in his enveloping presence, Longing for the ending, yet longing that no ending will come— He possesses me My breath grows short and quick. Breath from him, ruach blown from my nostrils, Reaching for pleasure, reaching for fulfillment, reaching for union, I gasp for God’s spirit. He holds me close, The Savior of all the world clutches my quaking body to his breast, Sharing in my joy and wonder, Showing me pleasure I have never known, Loving too deeply to allow for shame, The perfect Lover, loving perfectly. He does not look at his watch and flee; he does not run to wash as if soiled by my fluid, dirtied by my passion; nor even does he roll over and sleep, But lingers there, arms around me, breath inside me, And I bask in the embrace of Love himself. My Song of Love is Unknown f.b. f.b., a gay but closeted minister in the Presbyterian Church, writes of Jesus in the tradition of ancient mystics, who paralleled spiritual and sexual intimacy. If this poem is disturbing, it may be because it shatters the boundaries of categories we prefer to keep distinct. Others will be disturbed by the exclusively male imagery; but this is one example in a tradition in which nuns wrote also of a female Jesus. 32 Open Hands Welcoming Communities More Churches Declare Welcoming Stance Annual listing of welcoming congregations (Winter 1999) erratum: Christ Church United Methodist instead of Christ UMC in Santa Rosa, California. RECONCILING IN CHRIST Our Savior’s Lutheran Church Muskegon, Michigan Our Savior’s Lutheran Church is an urban congregation of 300 members in a socio-economically diverse urban setting. The church houses a food pantry, a Headstart program, and a Neighborhood Association, with outreach programs to the community. For the last six years, the issues of welcoming and hospitality have been discussed, and the Reconciling in Christ decision was a “no-brainer” when it came up in the last six months. The church carries out its welcome by hosting an “Out Muskegon” support group for GLBT people on Friday evenings as well. Hollywood Lutheran Church Los Angeles, California Hollywood Lutheran Church is a congregation of 125 people which hosts many GLBT groups in the community, including Lutherans Concerned/Los Angeles, the Gay Men’s Choir of L.A., and a predominantly gay AA group. The church has been welcoming of many other groups, including Armenians and Hispanics. The decision to become RIC, taken on Pentecost Sunday as a sign of the many becoming united together, was unanimous. The church plans to continue to do outreach into the gay and lesbian community in Los Angeles. OPEN AND AFFIRMING (UCC) Minnehaha United Church of Christ Minneapolis, Minnesota For six years, this 150 member, urban congregation has been engaged in a process of renewal and revitalization. Having set aside its constitution and bylaws for a year, it focused on clarifying its identity and relationship to the community. Out of this has come a new covenant and commitment to being a Just Peace, Open and Affirming, and anti-racist congregation, which is evolving into “new ways of being and doing.” Many who are joining do not have church backgrounds so the congregation is rejoicing in frequent baptisms! More gay and lesbian people have been drawn to the church since its ONA decision, and it has offered blessing ceremonies for numerous couples. It is also actively involved in urban issues, including affordable housing and hunger concerns. Forest Grove United Church of Christ Forest Grove, Oregon Located in a small town near Portland, this 400 member congregation continues to embody its historic involvement in social justice and mission outreach. Members were encouraged to participate in the area’s “Stop the Hate” vigil in October, and along with about half a dozen other churches, it is currently supporting another nearby UCC congregation with fellowship and finances, as that church discerns its direction for the future. With the retirement of its pastor of 29 years, Forest Grove is entering its own challenging time of discernment and transition, as well. As part of that ongoing process, it plans to revisit its ONA commitment to find new ways of educating and expressing this part of its congregational life. Movement News UMC Judicial Council Rejects “Labeling” The Board of Directors of the Reconciling Congregations Program has announced it has no plans of curtailing its efforts to encourage congregations to become inclusive in light of a November United Methodist Judicial Council decree that “A local church or any of its organizational units may not identify or label itself as an unofficial body or movement.” In an earlier consultation with pastors and representatives of Reconciling congregations, there was unanimous unwillingness to surrender the name “Reconciling.” This raises questions as to the mechanisms of enforcement which denominational authorities might utilize. The RCP said nomenclature should not be the issue; that congregations may find alternative ways to express their welcome of LGBT people. Lutherans Hold First Reconciling Conference Two-hundred representatives of Lutheran congregations across North America gathered in June at Augsburg College in Minneapolis to examine the connections between race and sexual orientation in the context of peacemaking. Sponsored by Lutherans Concerned, the Lutheran Human Relations Association, and the Lutheran Peace Fellowship, the conference, in part, highlighted the Reconciling in Christ program. Dr. Walter Wink was the keynote speaker. ONA List to Include Embryonic UCCs New church starts which are Open and Affirming but not yet affiliated with the UCC will be listed on the UCC Coalition for LGBT Concerns’ website (www.coalition.simplenet.com) or available through The Coalition, P.O. Box 403, Holden, MA 01520-0403. 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 Open Hands Vol 15 No 2 - Wholly Holy https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/1a9ee3047642c8d78b5774d23402b5ae.pdf 93371f8c3b363f6a5f03260733ce5f5a Issue An issue of a recurring publication. Volume Number The volume number of the issue 15 Issue Number The number of the issue (within a volume) 3 Publication Year The year the issue was published 2000 Publication Date The date the issue was published Winter Text Any textual data included in the document Vol. 15 No. 3 Winter 2000 2 Open Hands Vol. 15 No. 3 Winter 2000 Resources for Ministries Affirming the Diversity of Human Sexuality Open Hands is a resource for congregations and individuals seeking to be in ministry with lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons. Each issue focuses on a specific area of concern within the church. Open Hands is published quarterly by the Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (United Methodist) in cooperation with the Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada), the Association of Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (American), More Light Presbyterians, Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ), Open and Affirming Program (United Church of Christ), and the Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran). Each of these programs is a national network of local churches that publicly affirm their ministry with the whole family of God and welcome lesbian and gay persons and their families into their community of faith. These seven programs—along with Supportive Congregations (Brethren/ Mennonite [www.webcom.com/bmc]), Oasis Congregations (Episcopal), and Welcoming Congregations (Unitarian Universalist)— offer hope that the church can be a reconciled community. Open Hands is published quarterly. Subscription is $20 for four issues ($25 outside the U.S.). Single copies and back issues are $6. Quantities of 10 or more, $4 each. Subscriptions, requests for advertising rates, and other business correspondence should be sent to: Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 www.rcp.org/openhands/index.html Member, The Associated Church Press © 2000 Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. Open Hands is a registered trademark. ISSN 0888-8833 Printed on recycled paper. Publisher Marilyn Alexander Editor Chris Glaser Designer In Print—Jan Graves Marketing Manager Jacki Belile LIBERATING WORD Interpreting the Bible Take Back the Bible 4 IRENE MONROE Not a battle about biblical inerrancy—a battle of who’s in charge. Beyond the Human Point of View 5 PETER J. GOMES We are the future of a vital church, the “evangelistic seed for the church of the next millennium...where Christ always wanted his church to be.” Maturity and the Church of the Holy Spirit 10 JOHN J. MCNEILL “The church is twenty going on twenty-one, which is the age of maturity.” Outing the Bible 11 A Queer Biblical Agenda NANCY WILSON From Derrick Sherwin Bailey to Judy Grahn, the Bible cries out for new interpretations. The Bible and Love Between Women 15 BERNADETTE J. BROOTEN “Natural” intercourse in biblical times meant penetration of a subordinate person by a dominant one. Breaking Open Tradition 18 ANN M. AMIDEO “At twenty-one, I received the dreaded ultimatum: conform with our traditions or you are no longer a member of our family.” Scripture, Homosexuality, and the Nature of Christianity 20 DANIEL A. HELMINIAK Does Christianity itself stand or fall with lesbians and gays? The answer appears to be, Yes. QUESTION (Biblical) AUTHORITY! 24 Free in the Spirit, Not Shackled by a Text T. LYNN STOTT Questioning the whole enterprise of biblical interpretation for LGBT people. Resources .............................................. 19 Annual Welcoming List ........................ 26 Winter 2000 3 Program Coordinators Marilyn Alexander (Interim) Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (UMC) 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 773/736-5526 www.rcp.org Ron Coughlin Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada) P.O. Box 333, Station Q Toronto, Ontario CANADA M4T 2M5 416/466-1489 acpucc@aol.com Ann B. Day Open and Affirming Program (UCC) P.O. Box 403 Holden, MA 01520 508/856-9316 www.coalition.simplenet.com Bob Gibeling Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran) 2466 Sharondale Drive Atlanta, GA 30305 404/266-9615 www.lcna.org Michael J. Adee More Light Presbyterians (PCUSA) 369 Montezuma Ave. PMB #447 Santa Fe, NM 87501-2626 505/820-7082 www.mlp.org Brenda J. Moulton Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (ABC/USA) P.O. Box 2596 Attleboro Falls, MA 02763 508/226-1945 users.aol.com/wabaptists John Wade Payne (Interim) Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ) P.O. Box 44400 Indianapolis, IN 46244 941/728-8833 www.sacredplaces.com/glad Editorial Advisory Committee Vaughn Beckman, O&A Howard Bess, W&A Ann Marie Coleman, ONA Bobbi Hargleroad, MLP Tom Harshman, O&A Dick Hasbany, MLP Alyson Huntly, ACP Bonnie Kelly, ACP Susan Laurie, RCP Samuel E. Loliger, ONA Ruth Moerdyk, SCN Tim Phillips, W&A Caroline Presnell, RCP Paul Santillán, RCP Julie Sevig, RIC Kelly Sprinkle, W&A Margarita Suaréz, ONA Judith Hoch Wray, O&A Stuart Wright, RIC Next Issue: FOR ALL THE SAINTS Stories of the Welcoming Movement Call for articles, litanies, and columns for Open Hands Fall 2000 THE HEALING TOUCH Our Pastoral Concerns Theme Section: How have we and how can we, as church, provide healing for those hurt by church policies and effect reconciliation among those with differing opinions? How does the church repent of its sin of exclusion? How will our faith heal the church, making us whole? How do LGBT people let go of victimhood, once a church welcomes them? How do they graciously “accept” being “accepted”? What about LGBT families and friends and advocates in this long struggle? And what about our opposition? 1000-2500 words per article. Liturgies and litanies welcome too. Ministries Section: Columns may include: Welcoming Process, Connections (with other justice issues), Worship, Spirituality, Outreach, Leadership, Health, Youth, Campus, Children, and Parents. These brief articles may or may not have to do with the theme of the issue. 750-1000 words. Contact with ideas by June 1, 2000 Manuscript deadline: July 15, 2000 Chris Glaser, Phone/Fax 404/622-4222 or e-mail at ChrsGlaser@aol.com 991 Berne St. SE, Atlanta, GA 30316-1859 USA WE APOLOGIZE! We apologize for mailing delays of recent issues. We are transitioning into outsourcing our mailings while protecting the confidentiality of our list. Our publishing office in Chicago had a complete change in personnel last summer who have many other duties besides Open Hands. We ask your patience and continued support! Thank you! 4 Open Hands Determining which messages are discarded and which are upheld is not a battle about biblical inerrancy or God’s will. It is an unmitigated battle of human will. The authority of scripture does not lie in what God said. It lies in the hands of those in power who determine what God ought to say. The Bible has always been a troubling text in our culture. Though it should serve as a balm in Gilead to soothe the sick and protect the weak, the Bible has also functioned throughout centuries as a controlling device, and its authoritative status in our society makes us all wonder if there is truly a separation between church and state. For example, it took the end of American slavery for both the state and church to marry African Americans. Prior to the end of the Civil War, my ancestors had to “jump over a broom” in front of their slave masters to legalize their nuptials. As for us queers, there is no broom for us, but we are jumping over state and church loopholes in order to protect and consecrate our unions. Used as a controlling device, the Bible continues to promulgate moral and political agendas. The right wing Christian groups—the Family Research Council, the Christian Coalition, and Americans for Truth About Homosexuality— have advised their members to cease using the King James Version of the Bible because historians have proven that King James I of England was gay. Gary Bauer of the Family Research Council and candidate for the Republican presidential nomination has said, “I feel uncomfortable that good Christians all over America, and indeed the world, are using a document commissioned by a homosexual. Anything that has been commissioned by a homosexual has obviously been tainted in some way.” Supposedly the Bible contains the will of god, and many Christians, both blacks as well as whites, believe only heterosexuals are elected to do God’s will. Gospel singers Angie and Debbie Winans released a single last year titled, “Not Natural,” in which they self-righteously denounced our queer lifestyle. When queried by newscaster Travis Smiley on BET Tonight what compelled them to do so, Debbie Winans stated, “We don’t come as Angie and Debbie. We come as messengers of God doing his will.” “Doing God’s will” is a prodigious task and unmistakably a human enterprise. Thus doing God’s will is invariably subject to error because it is based in the human act of interpreting the Word of God. Interpreting scripture as the Word of God is always subjective and is always suspect in intent, whether it is being done in the ivory towers of seminaries or within the holy walls of sanctuaries. Interpreting scripture with menacing messages—and with litanies of dos and don’ts—is not about embracing and empowering all people, but about authority and power over certain groups. The authority of scripture does not lie in what God said. It lies in the hands of those in power who determine what God ought to say. The Bible is replete with contradictory and damning messages to all people. Determining which messages are discarded and which are upheld is not a battle about biblical inerrancy or God’s will. It is an unmitigated battle of human will. For example, there are two creation myths in the Bible in the first two chapters of Genesis. The first says that God made woman and man simultaneously. The second is our “rib story,” in which Eve is born from a rib of Adam. This story has ribbed and poked at Christian women throughout the centuries, since it is the authoritative text for substantiating gender inequity in society. The curse of Ham (Genesis 9:18-27) and the apostle Paul’s edict to slaves (Ephesians 6:5-8) served as the “scientific” and “Christian” legitimization for the enslavement of people of African ancestry. The Sodom and Gomorrah narrative (Genesis 19:1-29) is one of the most quoted scriptures to argue for compulsory heterosexuality. Yet is it the will of God to devalue the lives of women, people of African ancestry, and queers? As LGBT people, many of us allow the power of God’s will to be interpreted and executed by heterosexuals by not knowing the Bible ourselves. Our ignorance about the Bible, whether we are practicing atheists or recovering Christians, perpetuates our oppression and makes us participants in this climate of queer hatred. Our strategy to stop queerbashing has to be on both biblical and legal fronts. Much of our failure with right wing organizations results from our refusal or inability to argue for the biblical legitimation of our rights. The success of the Civil Rights Movement was because my people employed both strategies. The intent of white slave owners giving us the Bible was to keep us docile, Take Back the Bible Irene Monroe Winter 2000 5 to keep us fearful of God and them, and to keep us enslaved. However, our “hermeneutic of suspicion” told those of us who could and could not read that the words printed on the pages of the Bible meant more than what our slave owners told us, that black life was sacred and reflected positively in and throughout those pages, and the God we served was always on the side of the oppressed. The Bible became our talking book, our road map, our Declaration of Independence, our Bill of Rights. In other words, the Bible was used as a subversive tool to form and to frame a new world order. The Bible told us how to do what must be done. And in so doing, Nat Turner revolted against slavery, and Harriet Tubman conducted a railroad out of it. Today even the Southern Baptists, who used the Bible to support its bigoted stance against my people, not only know that it is illegal to discriminate against African Americans, but that it is also morally wrong and against God’s will to do so. They, too, now interpret the Bible with a filter against racism. As more and more lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people unabashedly take back the Bible, we must ask ourselves questions of each text like I ask myself: “Do I tolerate this text or do I accept it? What about this text is liberating and truth-telling, and what about it is oppressive, damning, and damaging? How is my existence as black, female, and queer, embraced, skewed, or made invisible by Christians using this text? And how has our use of this text created a welcoming world?” Irene Monroe, M.Div., is the head teaching fellow of the Rev. Peter Gomes and a doctoral candidate at Harvard Divinity School. A Ford Foundation Fellow, she views her life’s work as public theologian, and writes a biweekly column called “The Religion Thang” for In Newsweekly, a LGBT newspaper circulated widely in New England. The Vitality of Scripture A conundrum that I face frequently in my courses on the interpretation of scripture, and in my general commerce across the country, is being addressed by people in any one of my privileged minority statuses, including that of a gay man, a black man, an unmarried man, a Harvard man, a Baptist man— any one of them, choose your label—as people ask, “How can you keep loyal to a book which is used to do in every one of your distinctions? How can you maintain fidelity, when it would make so much more sense just to chuck the whole thing, or do what Thomas Jefferson did and rewrite it, editing out all the things you’d rather not have in it?” Why are we so committed to that which on a superficial basis would appear to be the instrument of our own destruction or our own inhibition? I was in a debate once with a very distinguished member of the Nation of Islam, one of the black Muslims, who argued that Christianity is so unnatural for black people, that the religion of the slave master and the oppressor is one that does more harm than good, and that that is why the only natural religion for a black person in the modern world is the Nation of Islam. How does one respond to that, at so many other levels, at so many particular divisive levels? It strikes me, as I think about how to answer that question each time it’s put to me, that I’ve never thought of myself as apart from the community of scriptural experience, scriptural inter- The Rev. Peter J. Gomes gave this presentation to the Covenant Network of Presbyterians during a luncheon at the 211th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) meeting in Fort Worth, Texas, June 21, 1999. The Covenant Network was formed in 1997 to replace or remove what is considered the antigay provision (ratified that year) of the denomination’s constitution, The Book of Order, in an attempt to allow “sessions and presbyteries more discretion in discerning God’s call for ordained office on particular people, within clear Biblical and confessional standards.” Its larger purpose is “to articulate and act on the church’s historic, progressive vision and to work for a fully inclusive church.” This is excerpted from the full presentation reproduced on its website (www.covenant network.org) with the permission of the Covenant Network and the Rev. Peter J. Gomes, with many thanks from Open Hands. The introduction and some specific references were deleted so that you, the reader, may hear the speech addressed personally to you. An audiotape of the Covenant Network Luncheon including this address is available for $10 from the Covenant Network Administrative Office, c/o Calvary Presbyterian Church, 2515 Fillmore St., San Francisco, CA 94115. It is my church, my faith, my book, it belongs to me as I belong to it, and the notion just beggars credulity that I should chuck the whole experience or reconfigure my experience to conform to it because there are parts of it which do not describe the world as I now know it or as I have experienced it. Beyond the Human Point of View Peter J. Gomes 6 Open Hands pretation, and scriptural authority. It has never been mine to look at from the outside, for I was born into the faith of my fathers and my mothers, and I was nourished by it and continue to be nourished in it. I am not there on probation; I am not an on-looker. It is my church, my faith, my book; it belongs to me as I belong to it, and the notion just beggars credulity that I should chuck the whole experience or reconfigure my experience to conform to it because there are parts of it which do not describe the world as I now know it or as I have experienced it. It simply does not make sense, nor has it ever made sense for the people of God. This makes me realize what our evangelical friends refer to as the “perspicacity of scripture,” and realize what a dynamic and vital book it is, that in every age and in every place and in every clime it has the capacity, without changing one jot or tittle, to include within its gracious orbit people who heretofore or in other circumstances would have no way of being included. It is a book that invites, that opens, that compels, that consoles, that comforts, that redefines our relationship to ourselves, to each other, and to God. And the book that is capable of doing that is the book to which I am prepared to devote all the powers and skills and graces that God has given me. The Bible in its dynamic way is an inclusive book, and our ancestors understood that. Our earliest Christian ancestors understood that the Jewish book was a book that was capable of accommodating a different revelation; and as they moved through their human experience they discovered the capacity of this book to draw them in. It certainly was true of our ancestors at the time of the Reformation, and it has been the experience of Christian people throughout the world ever since. This is not a book that belongs to somebody else, or to some prior period, or to some particular school of interpretation or exegesis. And every attempt to put a fence around this book, to keep it from change, and to keep people from it, has gone down to defeat. The history of the interpretation of scripture is a history of the capacity of God’s word to speak in many tongues and in many ways, and to draw all people into its gracious embrace. It strikes me that that is perhaps the most compelling and exciting case for what we would call the ‘authority’ of scripture. It does not mean bowing down to some inert text or to some absolute school of exegesis, but in this case means recognizing in the history of the people in the book and in the encounters of the peoples of the world with this book, the experience of people who have been called to new life and who have recognized in that experience and in that relationship the vitality of their own image created in the image of God. It is from that book that that operating principle comes. Therefore I affirm the authority of scripture, in the sense of its exemplary model, its authority for us in describing the relationship that God intends for us to have, and for all of us to share. And I recognize that the authority of scripture is based on one fundamental principle of modesty which acknowledges the fact that God knows more about human vocation and salvation than we do. That is a very important principle for my fellow exegetes, my fellow historians of interpretation, my fellow biblical scholars and expositors: it is very important to remember that God knows more about vocation and salvation than we do. This principle requires that the church take the unaccustomed position of a certain generosity and a certain modesty in imputing its values upon the values of scripture and God. That is the first thing that we must remember. We are committed to the vitality of scripture, we take the book seriously, we take the history of the book seriously, we take the interpretations of the book seriously. But we understand that the book is but a means and not an end. We do not worship this book. If you do worship it, you are in the wrong church and in the wrong tradition. There are other places in which to worship books, such as in the Morgan Library in New York City; or you might visit any fine collector of rare bindings. You can worship books there, but you can’t worship books in the house of God. The Power of the Holy Spirit The second thing that I want to affirm is the affirmation of the Holy Spirit, the power of the Holy Spirit which makes us believe, and makes us know that God speaks, not simply that God spoke. God speaks in the present tense, and the great question that we always have to be alert to is what the Spirit is saying to With his usual flair and wit, the Rev. Peter Gomes addresses the Covenant Network of Presbyterians at the 1999 Presbyterian General Assembly. Photo by Danny Bolin, General Assembly News. Winter 2000 7 the churches today. It is interesting to know what the Spirit was saying to the churches in Antioch, in Calcedon, and even what the Spirit was saying to the churches in Geneva; but it is equally important to ask what the Spirit is saying to the churches today. What does the Spirit require? In order to hear what the Spirit is saying to the churches, we have to listen, and that is a rather unfamiliar posture to so many of us in the Protestant and Reformed versions of Christ’s catholic church. We are not good listeners. We tend to stop speaking, which is not the same thing as listening, for usually we stop speaking in order to prepare our next set of remarks rather than to listen to what is being said. You may sometimes feel inhibited or strapped in by the notion that one of your tasks is not so much to convert or to triumph immediately, but simply to be heard, simply to be listened to. That is a long and tiresome vocation; but it is the vocation that has been thrust upon you, and it is the vocation that you have chosen. We know through the history of our experience as believers in this country, and in the world, that if we really do hear what the Spirit is compelling us to do, we will be forced to change our ways. We may hear things that we’d rather not hear. I suspect that’s one reason why public worship in the great generality of Protestantism is such a noisy enterprise. On Sunday mornings at ten o’clock or eleven o’clock in most churches, I would be willing to bet, there is not three minutes of unstructured sound in the services. If somebody is not speaking, somebody is singing; and if somebody is not singing, somebody’s about to sing or the organ is playing or somebody is strumming on a guitar: we desperately block out the silences for fear that we might hear something that might make a difference. You are in the business of both listening and hearing what the Spirit has to say; and then by your example, by your witness, by your perseverance, you are persuading others to listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches. Now, we realize that we’re fighting tremendous odds in any effort to bring the church from where it has been to where we think it ought to be, for the church exists in this wonderful conundrum. It is an agent for change created out of the most powerful elements for change that one can imagine. The Creation is certainly an element for change, the Incarnation is certainly an element for change, the Resurrection is certainly an element for change, the coming again of our Lord is certainly an element for change—we are built for change. And yet the church by itself is probably the most conservative institution short of private banks. We are terrified of change. We have been dragged kicking and screaming into every positive and constructive movement that the world has faced, and our track record of change is not very good. Show me where we have stood on the frontlines and I’ll applaud it, but there won’t be many such instances. If one were to be judged this moment on the church’s position on women, or the church’s position on race, few would be able to stand. “If Thou shouldst judge iniquity, O Lord, who could stand?” I believe that the question of the full inclusion of homosexual persons in the ministries of the church will have the same kind of indicting quality when the question is asked, “Where were we, where was the church, when the movement came, the moment to affirm the gifts which God has laid upon those people whom he has called into his ministry?” My friend Will Willimon, a Methodist, and dean of the Duke Chapel, reminds me that it is clearly within his memory that forty years ago, as he was entering theological school and the ministry, the vast majority of Methodist preachers were still, in tall-steeple and no-steeple churches, holding onto the inherited racial orthodoxies of a 1958 South Carolina. Now, he says, many of those people are still in the ministry, and the great terrifying question always concerns where they were thirty years ago on this issue, or even twenty years ago. It is possible that God does move in mysterious ways, but sometimes God takes a very long time to do it; and you and I and the church have to give an account of our stewardship on these matters. It would be nice to think that on the issue of sexuality, the church finally might get it right; but my researchers tell me that you have been debating this subject since the 70’s at more or less every one of your conferences. On the one hand one should congratulate you for your consistency and your steadfastness, and on the other hand one could “I yearn for the day when you will all be free of textual harassment,” Peter Gomes told the Covenant Network of Presbyterians, established to recover the “center” of the church from those on the far right. Photo by Danny Bolin, General Assembly News. 8 Open Hands think that you’re obsessed with sex, and that what you like about sex is never coming to any conclusion. My great hope is that for the sake of the rest of the church you will finally come to some conclusion, and our prayer is that it will be the right conclusion. Resistance to change is natural and persistent. And you are devoted to order, as is well known around the world, not because you are orderly but because you are chaotic; and that is why you do everything decently and in order—like the person who washes three times a day: either he is very dirty, or he is very clean. There is something of that with you, and those of us on the outside just can’t wait for some of you to hang up the wash. The work of the Spirit may at times seem chaotic, risky, and very dangerous. Although Trinitarians, many tend to place two-thirds of their emphasis on two-thirds of the Trinity, that is, on the first two members. The third member is a little loosey-goosey, a little hard to define and very hard to orchestrate or corral. The important thing to remember about the Spirit’s work at Pentecost, for example, is not the ecstasy which is usually invoked on Pentecost Sunday, the confusion and the excitement and the high energy level. That’s an interesting point, but if that were preached in my sermon course I would say that it’s a ‘B’ point, not an ‘A’ point. The ‘A’ point is the Spirit-induced understanding. That was the thing that the Spirit did, and that was how the people could say that they each heard in their own language the wonderful works of God. The work of the Spirit is designed to foster understanding and ultimate reconciliation. You are about that work. The Future Vitality of the Church The final thing I want to say to you is that you are in my opinion the future of the church, and that I think most people recognize that. I think that is why you encounter as much resistance as you do. Most people recognize that this is the way of the Spirit. You can play King Canute if you want to and vote not to allow the tide to come in; you can do it and you may even prevail in that vote. You can play Dame Partington and command the waters to recede by a majority vote in a clean procedural action; but the water will not recede. You are the future of the church because you represent the kind of hospitality, openness, and lively reading of the word of God that in the long run is going to be the evangelistic seed for the church of the next millennium; and it is to that that you should be lending your energies. You are witnesses to the sure conviction that we must transcend the world of which we are a part. You must not be driven by the agenda of the secular world, you must not be driven by fashion or custom or convenience. You are driven by conviction, and most Christians realize that there are times when conviction crosses in a very jagged way the cultural consensus. You cannot be the church of the cultural consensus, for we do not need another denomination to bless the status quo, or another group of people who pander to the fearful anxieties of our culture. We do not need that: America has enough churches of that order and you ought not to be among them. That leads me to my concluding remarks, which bring me back to where I started. This talk had a title that somehow got mangled in transmission. The title you have been given is “The Human Point of View,” and I read one of your notes saying that you weren’t quite sure what that was all about. Well, the reason you weren’t quite sure what it was all about is that it wasn’t accurate. The title is “Beyond the Human Point of View,” which makes a very big difference, especially if you’re taking as your text 2 Corinthians 5:16, which says, “From now on, therefore, we regard no one from a human point of view.” Remember, this is that dead white male Paul speaking to his community about the fact not only that did he not know Jesus after the flesh, but that the knowledge of Jesus after the flesh is now irrelevant. “We regard no one”—including Jesus—“from a human point of view,” says St. Paul, for we have been brought into “a new creation,” a new relationship. New standards obtain. “Beyond the Human Point of View” is where Christ has always wanted his church to be. And it seems to me that that is the point of view you are trying to affirm and represent. When I looked at the last Baptist of whom I knew to speak to a group of Presbyterians, I realized that it had cost him something. My old friend Harry Emerson Fosdick was very wise to preach to you but not to join you, for your predecessors would have done him in. You can’t do me in, because I’m not joining. But in his great sermon, “Shall the Fundamentalists Win?” the tone towards its close becomes actually electric. Remember when he says that the times are too important for these petty little divisions within the church to obsess the church, to curtail the mission of the church in a needy and dying and dreadful world? We should not be obsessed with these “lesser matters of the law,” as Dr. Fosdick says, quoting scripture. I hope the day passes when your denomination is defined by its sexual politics. I yearn for the day when you will all be free of textual harassment, which is not a bad way, I think, of describing the enterprise. It is a good Presbyterian professor, Diogenes Allen, who said, “The only way forward is forward,” for there is no other place to go. You cannot go backward and you cannot stay here. They know that, and that is why they are so concerned about how you carry on your business. The only way forward is forward. Three Things to Remember in the Struggle Well, three things for you to remember. The cause is just, you are on the Lord’s side. The cause is just, the record is clear, the experience of the gospel is in your direction, you are sailing with the wind of the Holy Spirit. If you feel a little grim about that from time to time, remember, “Blessed are ye when men shall revile you and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake...for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.” That’s the first thing. The second thing is that the struggle is real. This is not a metaphorical enterprise, this is a real battle. Fear and ignoWinter 2000 9 rance must never be underestimated, and there is always more money for fear and ignorance than for their opposite. Just look around and you will find that that is true. So, the struggle is very real, which means that patience is the most important witness—which is the third thing. Patience is the most important witness. How does the old hymn go? Not to the strong goes the battle, Nor to the swift goes the race; But to the true and the faithful, Victory is promised through grace. Does that mean that I’m optimistic? No. I am not optimistic. We live in a fallen world ruled by totally depraved people who do not understand the sovereignty of God. I am not optimistic, but I am hopeful. What is the difference? Optimism cannot stand the bright heat of the noonday reality: mere optimism wilts and has no inner resources with which to combat the seeming hosts of evil all around it. Optimism fades very quickly; but the hopeful are the ones who, in spite of the circumstances, in spite of apparent reality, in spite of the moment, understand that hope endures all things and ultimately carries all before it in God’s time. When we had Nelson Mandela at Harvard last fall, somebody asked him whether in prison he had been optimistic that this day would ever come. He said, “I never was optimistic, but I never lost hope.” You must remember that God knows where you are. God knows what you are doing. God honors the witness and the ministry that you are making. And while God may not deliver victory into your hands on your timetable or when you think you deserve it or want it, you are on the Lord’s side. You must never, ever give up. Never give up, never go away, never cease to work for the goal of a whole church, a whole ministry which reflects the image of God in all of its splendor, all of its diversity, and all of its glory. Speakers/leaders to include: Steve Charleston Jimmy Creech Chris Glaser Carter Heyward Grace Imathiu Mary E. Hunt Michael Kinnamon Eric H. F. Law Virginia Ramey Mollenkott Melanie May Melanie Morrison Jeanne Audrey Powers Janie Spahr Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite Mel White Walter Wink an historic ecumenical gathering of Welcoming Churches and their allies in the U.S. and Canada August 3-6, 2000 Northern Illinois University (outside Chicago) Worship * Workshops * Bible Study * Performances Celebrations * Denominational Gatherings * Youth Program Sponsored by: Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada), Association of Welcoming and Affirming Baptists (American Baptist), More Light Presbyterians, Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ), Open and Affirming Program (United Church of Christ), Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran), Reconciling Congregation Program (United Methodist), and Supportive Congregations Network (Brethren/Mennonite). Major funding provided by: The American Missionary Association of the United Church Board for Homeland Ministries, Broadway United Church of Christ (New York), E. Rhodes and Leona B. Carpenter Foundation, and First United Church of Oak Park (Illinois). For more information on this gala event or to find out how you can support WOW2000, contact: 800-318-5581 • www.wow2k.org WOW2000 •5250 N. Broadway • PMB#111 • Chicago, IL 60640 That is the work that you have chosen for yourselves. But perhaps more insistently, that is the work that has been chosen for you. “From now on, therefore,” my brothers and sisters, “we regard no one from a human point of view.” We have moved beyond that. And by God’s grace we will reach that moment, that place and time, when all of this will be seen as a mere prelude to the great ministry and work to which all of God’s people have been called. Peter J. Gomes is the Plummer Professor of Christian Morals and Pusey Minister in The Memorial Church of Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts. He is the author of Sermons—Biblical Wisdom for Daily Living (William & Morrow and Co. Inc., 1998; Avon paperback, 1999), and The Good Book—Reading the Bible With Mind and Heart (William & Morrow and Co., Inc., 1996). 10 Open Hands Jesus said, “It is necessary that I should go away in order for the Spirit to come.” Jesus was pointing out that his followers must detach themselves from their dependence on his external presence and prepare themselves to receive the Spirit of Christ who will dwell in their hearts. Again he said to them, “But because I have said these things to you, sorrow has filled your hearts. Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Advocate will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth”(John 16:6-13). Paul sees the gift of the Holy Spirit as a fulfillment of this prophesy of Jeremiah: “This is the new covenant I will make after those days. I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts: and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. No longer shall they teach one another, or say to each other, Know the Lord. For they shall all know me from the least to the greatest, says the Lord; for I will forgive their iniquities and remember their sins no more” (Jeremiah 31:33-34). Notice that Jeremiah foresees the new covenant where every human being from the least to the greatest will have direct access to a God who dwells in each heart. This access to God will not be the privilege of a few who are gifted with extraordinary intelligence, or ritual rank, or even special holiness. The Holy Spirit is a thoroughgoing respecter of democratic process. We must grow out of a passive dependent role in the church to an active and creative one. We have a special need to become mature, self-motivated, autonomous people, no longer dependent on outside sources for a sense of our identity and well-being. We must not let our enemies outside ourselves define us; we must let the Spirit of love that dwells within our hearts define us. If we approach church authorities, it should not be to get an approval which they cannot and frequently will not give us. Rather, it should be to bear witness to what the Holy Spirit is saying to us through our experience. ▼ John J. McNeill began his ministry within the GLBT community as a Jesuit priest and psychotherapist, helping to found Dignity/NYC. He has published four books: The Church and the Homosexual (1976), Taking a Chance on God: Liberating Theology for Gays, Lesbians, and their Lovers, Families and Friends (1988) and Freedom, Glorious Freedom: The Spiritual Journey to the Fullness of Life for Gays, Lesbians and Everybody Else (1995). In 1998, Westminster John Knox Press published his autobiography, Both Feet Firmly Planted in Midair: My Spiritual Journey. Maturity and the Church of the Holy Spirit John J. McNeill Excerpted from a presentation entitled, “Achieving Spiritual Maturity: A Necessary Step in the Pursuit of Global Justice,” dedicated to the memory of his sister, Sister Mary Sheila, OSF, at the Roman Catholic Call to Action National Conference meeting in Chicago, Nov. 5-7, 1999. Aprophetic Cistercian Abbot in Italy named Joachim of Flores in the early thirteenth century foresaw the total transformation of the church as it existed in his time and the dawn of an extraordinary outpouring of the Holy Spirit. He prophesied that that there would be a new form of spiritual life in which the Holy Spirit would speak directly to the human heart without ecclesiastical mediation. He believed that there is a sequence of historic stages in the Trinitarian God’s self-revelation over time. The first stage of that self-revelation was the stage of the Father, the law of Moses, and the people of Israel. The second was the stage of the Son, the New Testament, and the church. He said the third will be the age of the Holy Spirit, when the church “becoming superfluous would in time dissolve.” I think that this third stage is what is going on in the church today. I don’t see the church dissolving, but I do see it being transformed into a church of the Holy Spirit, a purely democratic church. The task of anyone who has a leadership position in the church of the Holy Spirit is to listen, just listen to what the Holy Spirit is saying through the people of God. During the years of my psychotherapy practice with gays and lesbians, I made the discovery that the Holy Spirit was most powerfully present with the twelve-step groups working miracles of healing and curing in the basement of the church, and very seldom did I find the Holy Spirit as effectively present upstairs in the sanctuary. Why is the Holy Spirit there? Because these people meet together as equals, men and women, gay and straight. There is no hierarchy. They share from the heart and they listen to each other with respect and act as total equals. What I see as the most important movement of the Holy Spirit in today’s church has to do with the development in the church of mature spirituality based on [such equality, which leads to] freedom of conscience and discernment of spirits. This insight is the primary fruit of over thirty years of ministry to lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgendered men and women. How can we develop a mature spiritual life? I want to put the emphasis on mature because as I see the new millennium, the church is twenty going on twenty one, which is the age of maturity. There is not just our individual growth to maturity; there is the development of humanity and the church into a mature stage, and I believe that is happening. The possibility is opening up of a real spiritual maturity for every human being on the face of the earth. Winter 2000 11 Stirrings of the Spirit in Biblical Research We need a pilgrimage. In 2005, gays and lesbians and our allies should make our pilgrimage to the birthplace of the late Derrick Sherwin Bailey in the United Kingdom. Dr. Bailey was the author of Homosexuality and the Western Christian Tradition, published in 1955. It will be the 50th anniversary of that book—the first book written on the subject of homosexuality and the Bible in the history of the church. I was five years old in 1955, and could have had no way of knowing how important its publication would be to me and millions of others. In fact, when I came out of the closet and in to UFMCC in 1972, his was still the only book in print on the subject. There were essays like Robert Treese’s “Contemporary Biblical Perspectives on Homosexuality” in an anthology on gay liberation and the church, and there was the Rev. Troy Perry’s early treatment of the subject in his book, The Lord is My Shepherd and He Knows I’m Gay. But Bailey’s was the only book focused on biblical interpretation and homosexuality for two decades. Now, of course, there are shelves of books, by Roman Catholics and Protestants, fundamentalists and liberals, and new, emerging queer interpretations of the Bible that Bailey could have never imagined. There are articles in respected biblical journals and commentaries, as well as an explosion of writings by gays and lesbians. The subject of homosexuality and the Bible has become mainstreamed in less than 50 years. The first writers, besides Bailey, who wrote books on the subject were not biblical scholars. They were literary scholars (e.g., Virginia Mollenkott and Tom Horner), or pastoral counselors (like Jesuit John McNeill), or historians Outing the Bible A Queer Biblical Agenda Nancy Wilson (like John Boswell). The first biblical scholars “in the guild” on the scene of this subject were heterosexual, or, assumed to be, like Byron Shafer, Robin Scroggs, Victor Paul Furnish and others. One of the best summaries of this scholarly work is former Catholic priest and present-day therapist Daniel Helminiak’s What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality, a book that, years after publication, still keeps flying off the shelves of GLBT bookstores, revealing our community’s profound interest in the subject. UFMCC, much too busy in the trenches to be doing extensive biblical scholarship, instead produced pamphlets on the subject. Our most popular, “Not a Sin, Not a Sickness: What the Bible Does and Does not Say about Homosexuality,” has been reprinted dozens of times. More than half a million copies have been distributed over the past 20 years. Other groups did the same. The Quakers produced “Toward a Quaker View of Sex,” and Evangelicals Concerned cleverly created a pamphlet whose cover read, “What Jesus Said About Homosexuality,” and the inside of the pamphlet was blank! On the back it said, “That’s right, Jesus said absolutely nothing about homosexuality.” The implication was that if Jesus didn’t say anything bad about it, how bad could it really be for Christians to be gay? Of course, some of us would now dispute the idea that Jesus said nothing— more about that later. We’ve done such a good job in our biblical apologetics, whether in book or pamphlet form, that many fundamentalists and so-called “ex-gays” seldom want to engage us on the topic. Their conferences instead focus on bogus psychology and group therapy. They have grown weary in realizing that we often know the Bible better than they do, and have answers to satisfy anyone, from a fundamentalist to a liberal feminist scholar. Essentially, I believe, the intellectual battle over the “texts of terror,” our “clobber passages” as we call them, has been won. (Those passages, of course, are the Sodom and Gomorrah story in Genesis 19, Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13; Romans 1:26 and 27; 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10). We have thoroughly disconnected Sodom and Gomorrah from the present day reality of gay and lesbian relationships, and addressed Leviticus, Romans, 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy ad nauseam. We have studied the Hebrew and Greek texts, and, with the help of D.S. Bailey and others who have followed, traced the sad story of the homophobic layers of interpretation that burden the texts. The problem is, of course, that almost no one knows this except gays and lesbians who care about the Bible, and our self-appointed opposition. Most mainstream or nominal Christians, or people who aren’t religiously identified at all, know little or nothing about biblical scholarship on the subject of homosexuality. That is because the church is afraid to teach what its own scholars know. And because the religious right continues to intimidate politicians and the public with their homophobic rhetoric based on their misreading of the Bible. Much of that misreading is now without excuse. It is not credible for them to keep claiming ignorance. New Translations Down the Road? Over a decade ago, the U.S. National Council of Churches held the first nationwide consultation on the subject of homosexuality and the Bible in a joint effort with MCC churches. I served as co-chair of the “Dialogue Committee.” 12 Open Hands We attempted at first to structure a debate among scriptural scholars “in the guild,” who would debate whether or not the Bible condemns homosexuality. Interestingly enough, the NCC members of the committee reported back that they could not find a biblical scholar to say that the Bible unilaterally condemns homosexuality. We in MCC provided them the names of scholars we knew who had gone on record that the Bible condemned homosexuality. We knew who they were because we had had to confront and debate them. The NCC folks told us that none of those scholars were respected by the leadership of the NCC. I remember the moment of shock when I first heard this. “The battle is over,” I thought to myself. That was in 1987. We ended up simply holding a consultation with scholars from mainstream NCC churches and seminaries that essentially upheld MCC’s point of view, which, of course, people (many of whom would not attend the consultation) then said was “biased.” During that consultation, it was Byron Shafer of Fordham University who said, “No serious scholar of scripture today would claim that the Bible condemns loving, mutual, respectful homosexual relationships.” I would have thought that would have been front page news. But, for the NCC, it spelled division and disaster, and they buried the report during a time of difficult leadership transitions. The leadership and hierarchy of the church knows the truth about homosexuality and the Bible. Unfortunately, they believe it is a truth that they cannot politically or economically afford to know or teach or embrace. But, the truth will will out, eventually. Dr. Gwynne Guibord, Ecumenical Officer for the UFMCC, recently reported on the 1999 annual General Board meeting of the National Council of Churches, which holds the copyright on both the Revised Standard Version (RSV) and New Revised Standard Version (NRSV). She stated that during its 50th anniversary General Assembly meeting in Cleveland, the NCC “affirmed that the ‘five-seven’ biblical passages often cited in discussions of homosexuality need to be considered for reevaluation, for clarification and possible retranslation. The process of making changes in translations is a lengthy one, often taking a ten year ‘start to finish’ journey. There is a definite movement afloat and gaining ground that is aware that the current translations and annotations are often inaccurate, soulmurdering and damaging to the entire faith community as they separate us from one another.” The day in 1983 that the NCC refused to declare MCC eligible for membership in the NCC, though we met all their stated criteria, was the same day The New York Times announced that the Pope had taken the first steps to acknowledge the church’s error in dealing with Galileo. I figured that was God’s little encouraging message to us that day. At the least, it put things in perspective. It can make 10 years not seem so long. Will we really have a Bible within 10 years that actually does not use annotations with the word “sodomy,” or that actually takes the last 50 years of scholarship, from D.S. Bailey to Peter Gomes, and use it to retranslate and reinterpret those troublesome texts of terror we are so weary of explaining? I think we may. And that is a miracle. The Politics of Biblical Interpretation I have often tried to help lesbian and gay people understand the politics of biblical interpretation. Why do some passages get studied and not others? When women and people of color are not educated and empowered to read the Bible for ourselves, we cannot undertake to reexamine the passages that have been misused to oppress us. The same is true with gays and lesbians. Biblical scholarship is an extremely conservative field. It will be years before there are many openly gay biblical scholars in the “guild.” There are closeted ones who dare not write or speak up. But there are gay and lesbian scholars who cross over and do biblical work from a cross-disciplinary perspective, as well as amateurs like me, who struggle to study and understand and interpret for the thousands of people we come in contact with who need a friendlier Bible. Peter Gomes said something which gave me great hope in The Good Book. A section discusses race and slavery under the rubric “Fixed Text and Changed Minds.” Gomes claims that the scholarship around passages about slavery in the Bible did very little to change prevailing opinion. Ultimately, the “texts of terror” about slavery still stand, relatively unchallenged. But scholars and preachers and freedom fighters began to measure those few, difficult texts against broad Biblical principles of love, freedom, hope, the Exodus, and the new Body of Christ that was neither “Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female” but all one in Christ Jesus. As hearts and minds began to change, the interpretation of the Bible changed, not the other way around. The big picture won, and the embarrassing texts once trotted out to support slavery are no longer honored or lifted up except by the most crazed of racists. There is a lot more scholarship available to debunk the texts historically believed to condemn homosexuality. Biblical passages about sexuality were not studied much at all, and we have a “No serious scholar of scripture today would claim that the Bible condemns loving, mutual, respectful homosexual relationships.” -Byron Shafer of Fordham University The institutions that support biblical scholarship are often homophobic, though some are changing. We cannot afford to run from them, we need to be running them. Winter 2000 13 lot of catching up to do. But the process seems to be picking up speed now, and that is hopeful and exciting. Walls supported by Biblical ignorance are about to come crumbling down once and for all. Can I hear an “Amen”? Biblical scholarship takes money, libraries and classrooms, and political and religious support. Biblical scholarship has not been the favorite charity of most gay people! But maybe it should be. The institutions that support biblical scholarship are often homophobic, though some are changing. We cannot afford to run from them, we need to be running them. Our Own Biblical Canon Another agenda that needs our attention is the expansion of the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered “canon within the canon.” In my book, Our Tribe, I repeated Virginia Ramey Mollenkott’s thesis that every “interpretive community” has its own “canon with the canon” of the Bible. These are the biblical stories and passages that speak to us—that, in essence, re-tell our own tribal story, stories to which we can relate. It is very new for us to see ourselves as an interpretive community of the Bible, but we are and must be. We cannot simply stick to the passages that are comfortable or familiar. We have to branch out and boldly go where no LGBT biblical scholars have gone before. It is time. Virginia Mollenkott’s point has been that we should not stay stuck in our canons (!), but build interpretive bridges. That is why it is important for gay and lesbian scholars to understand the biblical interpretive histories of people of color, African Americans, and women. They paved the way for this work, and we benefit from their methods and successes. Gay and lesbian people now have layers of this interpretive history ourselves. The first interpretive layer has been simply to de-toxify the Bible from those “texts of terror.” But then we moved on to the obvious—to the stories of Jonathan and David (or, perhaps more accurately, Saul and Jonathan and David) and Ruth and Naomi, obvious candidates for stories of same-sex relationships in the Bible. And there has begun a quiet uncovering of many possible gay or lesbian references: the story of the centurion’s slave (the Matthew 8:5-13 version), Paul’s troublesome relationships with men, and less obvious same-sex biblical couples (Tryphena and Tryphosa, for example, mentioned in Romans 16:12). But we have gone deeper than that. In Our Tribe, I posited (and I was not the first to do so, only the first to do so in great detail, I think), that the term “eunuch” is really a generic term for men and women who do not reproduce, and not simply men who were castrated. The Anchor Bible Dictionary no longer interprets eunuch in that narrow way, but understands the term more inclusively. When I started to study eunuchs in the Bible, I only could name one or two. I now have identified nearly 50. Gradually I came to see that at least the God-given role of male eunuchs was apparently to save the lives of the prophets, kings, and queens favored by God. A eunuch saves Joseph, Esther’s uncle Mordecai is a eunuch, a eunuch saves Daniel and his friends, (Daniel may have been a eunuch in training), Nehemiah is a eunuch, an Ethiopian eunuch saves the life of Jeremiah, and three eunuchs save Jesus’ life (the Magi). These are only a few examples. An Ethiopian eunuch becomes the first African Christian, and, according to John McNeill, the first gay Christian. I believe that the passage in Isaiah 56:3- 5 that pairs gentiles and eunuchs of both genders is our liberation passage. It prophesies our inclusion by the welcome of “eunuchs who keep the Sabbath,” also affirmed by Jesus in Matthew 19:12, and in the story of the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8:26-39. Note that the eunuch in Acts 8 was reading from Isaiah 53, about a Suffering Servant who would be “cut off” from his people (in the verse from Isaiah immediately following the quoted text in Acts), just like all eunuchs would have been, without heirs, no longer connected to the people of God (See Isaiah 56:5.). Jesus was a defacto eunuch. Philip used this passage to preach the gospel to the Ethiopian eunuch, and “nothing” could prevent him from being baptized: not being a eunuch, or a gentile, or a homosexual (which most eunuchs were by nature or by default). Lydia the Seller of Purple And there is Lydia of Acts 16, that seller of purple, our color, for many good reasons documented by Judy Grahn in her amazing book Another Mother Tongue. When I juxtaposed Grahn’s literary and historical/mythological research with the Bible, I learned amazing things. Lydia, the seller of purple in Philippi, who became the first European Christian (and the first lesbian Christian?), who led a women’s prayer group, had her own business and was the head of her own household in a partriarchal culture. Six hundred years before, during the time of Sappho the lesbian poet, the poet Homer wrote that the art of making purple dye was invented by two women from Thyatira, Lydia’s hometown. Lydia was the heir of an ancient, possibly lesbian, art, the making of purple dye. And she was totally enchanted with Paul’s preaching of this 14 Open Hands Jesus whose love included and empowered everyone. She is one of my favorite candidates for a lesbian in the Bible. My experience over the last 10 years is that the Bible is full of amazing, surprising details like this one that I believe, at some level, have been left in the Bible for us to find. If we are everywhere, we gay and lesbian people, then we lived in biblical times, too, and we are in the Bible. Our only task is to discover ourselves, as well as those who are bisexual and transgendered. I believe that queer scholars have to start boldly lifting up the many possibilities of our presence in scripture. Our work has barely begun. It is not enough to simply detoxify the Bible and make it safe from overt homophobia. I believe we have to go way beyond that and aggressively seek and find ourselves in the Bible, outing biblical characters, speculating about others. It will make the Bible more interesting to gay and lesbian people, which, mostly, today, it is not. The truth is, we are in the Bible and have always been. Biblical closets have to be opened—sometimes gently, sometimes not. Some people will accuse us of going too far, and I say, “So what?” I haven’t come this far in my life as a lesbian Christian preacher to be afraid of “going too far.” I fear we will not go far enough, and that we will not fully claim ourselves as included among the people of God. We’ve got a millennium of work ahead of us. Nancy Wilson is the pastor of Metropolitan Community Church of Los Angeles, a bilingual, multicultural MCC congregation in West Hollywood, California, in the heart of the gay and lesbian community. She also serves as Vice Moderator of the Universal Fellowship of MCC Churches worldwide. Nancy is an author, a civil rights activist, and ecumenist. Winter 2000 15 The Bible and Love Between Women Bernadette J. Brooten (Leviticus 18:22; 20:13), but not between females. Some have argued that Ruth had a lesbian relationship with her mother-in-law, Naomi (see e.g., Ruth 1:14, “Ruth clung to her [i.e., Naomi]”), but this is speculation, and ultimately, Ruth married a man, Boaz (Ruth 4:13). Within the New Testament, the gospels do not present Jesus as addressing the question of same-sex sexual expression, but the apostle Paul does condemn relations between both females and males. In his Letter to the Romans, chapter 1, Paul states that idol worshipers could have known God through observing God’s created works. He argues that God punished idol worshipers by giving “them up to the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the degrading of their bodies among themselves” (Romans 1:24), and that “God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another” (Romans 1:26-27). Such persons “deserve to die” (Romans 1:32). Some scholars have argued that Romans 1:26 refers to intercourse between a woman and an animal (prohibited in Leviticus 18:23; 20:16), to intercourse during a woman’s menstrual period (prohibited in Leviticus 18:19), or to anal intercourse between a woman and a man (not prohibited in the Jewish Bible and allowed by the majority of ancient Jewish rabbis). Romans 1:27, however, introduces sexual relations between males with the term “in the same way,” thereby specifying that the females’ unnatural intercourse was of the same type as that of the males. Further, other ancient sources also depicted sexual relations between women as unnatural (Plato [5th-4th C. BCE], Seneca the Elder [1st C. BCE-1st C. CE], Martial [1st C. CE-2d C. CE], Ovid [1st C. BCE-1st C. CE], Ptolemy [2d C. CE], Artemidoros [2d C. CE], probably Dorotheos of Sidon [1st C. CE]). Paul’s Sexual Attitudes Culturally Determined We can best understand Paul’s response to sexual relations between women in the context of the culture of the Roman Empire and its assumptions about proper sexual relations. While Romanperiod non-Christian writers disagree on whether to condone sexual relations between males, nearly all of these writers condemn sexual relations between women. Against the background of the common cultural assumption that sexual relations should naturally occur between two unequal parties (e.g., a man and his wife, a male slave owner and his male or female slave, a man and his mistress, a man and a prostitute), such writers as Seneca the Elder, Mar- Greek and Latin writers in his culture agreed with Paul that a woman was to be “under a man” (Romans 7:2, where the Greek word for “married” is literally “under a man”), thereby the passive object of sexual activity, and not a sexual subject who actively pursues her desires with other women. The voices of any early Christian women who may have romantically loved other women have not come down to us. Instead, we have the early Christian voices who treated such love with contempt. The apostle Paul declared that same-sex unions shared between women disturbed the natural order (Romans 1:26-27). Paul’s understanding of sexual love between women overlaps closely with the general conceptions of sexual relations found throughout the ancient Mediterranean world. Greek and Latin writers in his culture agreed with Paul that a woman was to be “under a man” (Romans 7:2, where the Greek word for “married” is literally “under a man”), thereby the passive object of sexual activity, and not a sexual subject who actively pursues her desires with other women. Paul’s teaching on this subject proved foundational for the condemnation of same-sex sexual expression by later Christian writers who argued variously that it was unnatural, impure, dishonorable, shameful, sinful, and rendered the participants deserving of punishment in hell. Further, Paul’s negative portrayal of female homoeroticism not only influenced the early church fathers’ treatment of the issue, but has also remained influential into our own century. In what follows, I am focusing on erotic relations between women, but I want to note that Mary Rose D’Angelo has applied Adrienne Rich’s concept of a “lesbian continuum” to early Christianity to denote bonding between female partners, regardless of erotic involvement (e.g., Romans 16:12; Philippians 4:11). Early Christianity did provide both women and men with opportunities for close bonding with members of their own sex. The Jewish Bible explicitly prohibited sexual relations between males 16 Open Hands tial, Soranos (1st-2d C. CE), and Lucian (2d C. CE) depicted women who had sexual relations with other women as having become like men. They applied the term tribades (cf. the later term “tribadism”) to such women and represented them as trying to transcend the passive, subordinate role accorded to them by nature and attempting to take on a dominating, penetrating role. Ancient medical writers went as far as to prescribe a selective clitoridectomy, apparently for women whose clitorises were ostensibly capable of penetration (Soranos, as excerpted in Caelius Aurelianus [5th C. CE], Mustio [perhaps 5th or 6th C. CE], and Paulus of Aegina [7th C. CE]). Paul’s condemnation fits in well with the greater awareness of sexual love between women documented in the Roman world. Paul’s earliest readers, the early church fathers, read Paul as a man of his time; they saw him as condemning homoeroticism for the same reasons that others of their culture did. Paul used the terms “impurity,” “to degrade,” “to exchange,” “natural,” and “unnatural” in the ways that others in the ancient world employed these terms. In ancient Mediterranean culture generally, “impurity” meant a blurring of boundaries, in this case, of the boundaries between femaleness and maleness. Just as, according to the Book of Leviticus, impure animals were those that did not conform to delineated categories, the people about whom Paul was speaking were not maintaining the clear gender polarity and complementarity necessary for a specific social order. Thus, taking seriously Paul’s description of homoeroticism as “impurity” helps us to see it as a societal, rather than a private concern. The term Paul uses for “degrade” can also be rendered “dishonor.”Paul’s use of this term demonstrates his conviction that the treatment of female and male bodies should differ, especially with respect to honor. Men were accorded honor because their sex occupied a superior and dominant station that afforded them that right. Paul asks in his First Letter to the Corinthians 11:14, “Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair, it is degrading to him?” This required gender differentiation in hair length points to bodily appearance as a primary basis for distinguishing between women and men. In 1 Corinthians 11:3, Paul asserts that the man is head of woman. According to 1 Corinthians 11:7, short hair and the lack of a veil signify the male body, as God’s image and glory; the opposite conditions, long hair and veil, apply to the female body, marking the woman’s subordinate status as the glory of man. In this hierarchical framework, a noncompliant woman brings shame upon her husband. Against the background of the gendered cultures of the Roman world, Paul’s earliest readers saw him as condemning men who had relinquished the honor due to the male sex and had become effeminate and women who did not conform to Paul’s model of the man as head of woman. Paul used the word “exchanged” to indicate that people knew the natural sexual order of the universe and left it behind. Some scholars contend that Paul was referring to heterosexual persons committing homosexual acts, rather than to lesbian and gay persons (e.g., Boswell) or that he did not have a concept of sexual orientation at all (e.g., Goss). While ancient constructions of the erotic differed from our own, both ancient astrological and medical texts attest to the concept of life-long erotic orientations, caused, e.g., by the constellation under which one was born, by the male and female seed not mingling well at conception, or by inheritance. Thus, Paul could well have been familiar with the concept of erotic orientation, without accepting that as a valid reason for homoerotic expression. Similarly, astrologers saw female homoerotic orientation as astrally determined, but nevertheless “unnatural” (e.g., Ptolemy). “When in Rome...” If we read Romans 1:26-27 against the backdrop of a broad range of ancient sources, “natural” intercourse means penetration of a subordinate person by a dominant one. Other Pauline texts further demonstrate that Paul shared common cultural assumptions of the Roman world, for example: Romans 7:2, in which Paul speaks of a married woman as “under a man,” and 1 Corinthians 11:2-3, in which Paul calls man “head of woman.” The shapers of Graeco-Roman culture saw any type of vaginal intercourse, whether consensual or coerced, as natural (including, e.g., between a man and his slave). Thus the “natural intercourse” that the females of Romans 1:26 gave up include such forms of vaginal intercourse as marital relations, adultery, rape, incest, prostitution, and sexual relations between an adult male and a minor girl. These understandings of “natural intercourse” derive from ancient understandings of nature generally. Two principal ways of conceptualizing nature were available to Paul: (1) nature as the order of creation, which would refer to the naturalness of marriage between women and men, based on Genesis 2, according to which God created woman from man (see Paul’s use of Genesis 2 in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16); or (2) the ancient concept that women have a different nature from men. Either concept entails a gender hierarchy. According to either concept, sexual relations between women are “unnatural,” because a sexual encounter necessarily includes an active and a passive partner, and women cannot naturally assume the active role, thus rendering natural sexual relations between women impossible. Like Paul, the early Christian writers of the second through the fifth centuries that have been passed down to us vigorously condemn sexual relations between women. Thus, Christian apocalyptic visions of hell echo Paul’s teaching that these women “deserve to die” (Romans 1:32). These visions include images of homoerotic women suffering torture in hell for their sin: being forced to cast themselves off a cliff (Apocalypse of Peter [2d C.]), burning in hell (Acts of Thomas [3d C.]), and running in a river of fire (Apocalypse of Paul [3d C.]). Tertullian of Carthage (2d-3d C.) derides homoerotic women as outsiders to polite society, associating them with prostitutes, and states that one would not want even to take a sip from such a woman’s cup (On the Pallium; On the Resurrection of the Flesh). John Chrysostom (4th-5th C.) argues that female homoeroticism is “far more disgraceful” than male homoeroticism, “since they ought Winter 2000 17 to feel more shame than men.” Chrysostom, arguing that women have a different nature from men and that by nature woman was commanded to be man’s helper, sees homoeroticism as overturning the social order, which is protected by nature: “nature knows her own boundaries.” Chrysostom attacks homoeroticism with such invectives as: “whatever transgression you speak of, you will name none equal to this lawlessness”; “there is nothing more irrational and grievous than this outrage”; and “how many hells will suffice for such people?” (Homilies on Romans). Marriage Between Women In spite of tremendous opposition by Christians and others, sources demonstrate that women in this period engaged in what they saw as womanwoman marriage. Clement of Alexandria (2d-3d C.) responds to women who had long-term relationships with other women that they defined as marriage (Instructor). (Ptolemy, Lucian, the rabbinical commentary known as the Sifra [before ca. 220 CE], Hephaistion of Thebes [4th-5th C. CE], and possibly Iamblichos [2d C. CE] also refer to woman-woman marriage. Further, in a papyrus letter from Egypt [probably 3d C. CE], a mother refers to her daughter’s wife [Papyrus Oxyrhynchos 4340].) Clement argues that such marriages were unnatural because they defied God, who created woman from man in order for her to receive men’s seed and to help him; that they prevented the male seed from finding a proper field; that the uteri of the two women were calling out to be filled with the male seed; that humans should not imitate such lascivious animals as the hare; and that Paul called female homoeroticism unnatural in Romans 1:26-27. Hippolytos of Rome (2d-3d C.) reports on a group of Gnostic Christians called the Naassenes (defined by Hippolytos as heretical), who rejected “natural intercourse” between women and men on the belief that androgyny characterized the world above. We do not know whether they promoted samesex love, but they did interpret Paul in Romans 1:20-27 as speaking about an “unspeakable mystery of blessed pleasure” (The Refutation of All Heresies). Ironically, even though early Christians generally opposed homoeroticism, they themselves created homosocial environments in which it could occur, a fact that did not escape Christian monastic leaders. Egyptian monk Shenute of Atripe (4th-5th C.) explicitly warns nuns against same-sex sexual contact (On the Monastic Life) and describes the beating of two nuns as punishment for having had such contact (Letters). In a similar vein, Augustine of Hippo (4th- 5th C) instructs that nuns go out in groups of three (Epistles). Are All Biblical Traditions Created Equal? How can Christians of today respond to this early Christian tradition of condemning sexual love between women? While some Christians might want to downplay it or to see it as just a reflection of ancient culture, I suggest that this horrific vilification of such women requires careful theological reflection. Do we want to perpetuate all biblical traditions that have persisted through the centuries? Do we agree with Paul that such love is unnatural, with the Acts of Thomas that such women should burn in hell, or with John Chrysostom that women ought to feel more shame than men? These are Christian traditions, but are they traditions of which we can be proud? Christian citizens have a special responsibility to rethink Christian teachings that have historically led to physical torture and even death. For example, an American colonial statute in New Haven placed sexual love between women under the death penalty, explicitly quoting Romans 1:26 as support (New Haven’s Settling in New England: And Some Lawes for Government). Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered persons can greatly contribute to a moral reform of Christianity by soberly facing our past and creating theologies for the future. A version of this article will appear in the Encyclopedia of Lesbianism, Bonnie Zimmerman, editor (Garland Publishers). Bernadette Brooten (brooten@mind spring.com), author of Love Between Women: Early Christian Responses to Female Homoeroticism and their Historical Context (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996), teaches at Brandeis University. As a MacArthur Fellow and a Fellow in Law and Religion at the Harvard Law School, she is currently working on feminist religious sexual ethics. She envisions a church that works to prevent sexual abuse, rather than opposing lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, and transgendered persons. 18 Open Hands ditional marriage, child rearing, family values, moral rectitude, and of course, traditional Christian values. The erroneous assumption of this propaganda insinuates that traditions are immutable and sealed with the holy stamp of God. On the contrary, sacred scripture has astonished me with numerous occasions where God alters, confronts or terminates time honored traditions. What follows are some examples. Deuteronomy and Exclusion Deuteronomy states, “No one who is emasculated or has his male organ cut off shall enter the assembly of the Lord”(Deuteronomy 23:1). The eunuchs were cast as a spiritual aberration to God because he lacked power to transmit life. However, further on in the Book of Isaiah we encounter a dramatic shift in this tradition of exclusion. The prophet Isaiah declares, “To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbath and choose what pleases me, and hold fast to my covenant, to them I will give in my house and within my walls a memorial, and a name better than that of sons and daughters. I will give them an everlasting name which will not be cut off”(Isaiah 56:4-5). God not only welcomes eunuchs into the assembly, but rewards their vibrant faithfulness with a memorial. Israel is directed by God to cease a tradition excluding those who are innately different, yet abundant in faithfulness. How much more should the church today honor the faithfulness of gay and lesbian people? In this unprecedented era, whereby the charitable spiritual gifts of gay and lesbian are visible, why do sanctions remain? Amos and Oppression The prophet Amos delivers a sobering message to the decaying religious traditions of the Israelites. They are charged with oppressing the poor, crushing the needy, and distressing the righteous. Amos unmasks a total disregard for human rights and social justice. God denounces the manipulation of religious traditions to extort material wealth and status: “I hate, I reject your festivals, nor do I delight in your solemn assemblies. Even though you offer up to me burnt offerings and grain, I will not accept them”(Amos 5:21-22). The power of this text is jarring. Outwardly pious religious traditions will not compensate for inner hypocrisy. What does God desire from God’s community of chosen people? The answer is revealed in a subsequent verse, “But let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream” (Amos 5:24). According to Amos, traditions must honor God’s people or they do not honor God. Matthew and Hypocrisy The New Testament reveals a disquieting confrontation between Jesus and religious tradition. The Pharisees and Scribes question Jesus regarding his disciples “transgressing the tradition of the elders”(Matthew 15:2). They did not wash their hands before a meal—a tradition which marked ceremonial purity as noted in Leviticus 22:46. Jesus responds, “And why do you transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?”(Matthew 15:3). Jesus hurls a revolutionary accusation at religious authorities. He exposes a tradition which deliberately opposes the commandment to “Honor thy father and mother” (Exodus 20:12). Jesus knows religious authority can manipulate tradition for selfish gain. He reveals that inner purity supersedes ritual piety: “The people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me”(Matthew 15:8). I am reminded that gay and lesbian people are the contemporary scapegoats for religious fingerpointing brigades. Yet, a comforting paradox emerges. We are also the beneficiaries of solace knowing that Jesus protects the innocent by holding a mirror to the pointing finger. Matthew and Family Values The next time you are assaulted by wellintentioned Christians with the phrase “traditional family values,” direct them Each step closer to the front door of my parents’ home intensified the pounding of my heart. The long impending spiritual battle had at last arrived. The stage was set to unveil my sexual orientation to my traditional Roman Catholic parents. Two pensive faces greeted me at the kitchen table. St. Jude’s tattered novena card was propped up against the napkin holder. A deafening moment of silence lingered. Mom impulsively rose to her feet. “You can’t expect us to accept your lifestyle! This is against every tradition of church and family we hold dear,” she asserted with rare authority. At 21, I received the dreaded ultimatum: conform with our traditions or you are no longer a member of our family. Within 24 hours, all my essential belongings were crammed into my rickety old Ford Escort. Turning the key signaled the birth of my exile. This injurious fracture in family life stirred a frenzy of unsettling questions. Technically, Mom was correct. Being a lesbian was not aligned with my family’s normative traditions. But does change in tradition always constitute a sacrilegious act? Do time-honored family and religious traditions ever mutate with age...even cease? I earnestly hungered for answers. This cataclysmic event ignited a life long spiritual sojourn and study of sacred scripture. Ten lonesome years elapsed before my parents and I arrived at a compromise resolution. Still, the word tradition remains an Achilles heel for myself and many other gay and lesbian Christians. Right wing religious and political groups continue their disingenuous application of the phrase “traditional values” with propaganda that demonizes gay and lesbian people. Like a weapon, the word “tradition” is surreptitiously aimed at gay and lesbian people to defend the status quo of exclusion. Rhetoric is manipulated to cast gays and lesbians as the enemy of tra- Breaking Open Tradition Ann M. Amideo Winter 2000 19 SELECTED RESOURCES ON THE BIBLE VIDEO Panelists: Homosexuality and the Bible, featuring Dr. Robert Goss, author of Jesus ACTED UP, New Testament scholars Dr. Dale Martin and Dr. Deirdre Good , and Hebrew scholars Dr. Sam Olyan and Dr. Ken Stone. $12 from Other Sheep, c/o Gordon Herzog, Suite 910, 319 N. 4th St., St. Louis, MO 63102. BOOKS Biblical Ethics & Homosexuality: Listening to Scripture, edited by Robert L. Brawley. Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality: Gay People in Western Europe from the Beginning of the Christian Era to the Fourteenth Century, John Boswell. The Church and the Homosexual, John J. McNeill. Coming Out as Sacrament, Chris Glaser. Dirt, Greed, and Sex: Sexual Ethics in the New Testament and Their Implications for Today, L. William Countryman. The Good Book: Reading the Bible With Mind and Heart, Peter J. Gomes. Homosexuality and the Western Christian Tradition, Derrick Sherwin Bailey. Jesus ACTED UP: A Gay and Lesbian Manifesto, Robert Goss. Jonathan Loved David: Homosexuality in Biblical Times, Tom Horner. Love Between Women: Early Christian Responses to Female Homoeroticism, Bernadette J. Brooten. Our Tribe: Queer Folks, God, Jesus, and the Bible, Nancy Wilson. Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism: A Bishop Rethinks the Meaning of Scripture, John Shelby Spong. Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe, John Boswell. Stealing Jesus: How Fundamentalism Betrays Christianity, Bruce Bawer. What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality, Daniel A. Helminiak. The Word Is Out—Daily Reflections on the Bible for Lesbians and Gay Men, Chris Glaser. FROM THE OPPOSITION Scripture & Homosexuality: Biblical Authority and the Church Today, Marion L. Soards. to Matthew 12:49-50. Again, Jesus upsets the status quo of tradition by raising the perplexing question, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?”( Matthew 2:48). In the context of Jewish tradition, blood lineage is an essential requirement for property inheritance, marital arrangements, religious community, and societal status. Depending on bloodline, you were either in or out. Jesus answers his own rhetorical question pointing to the multitudes of people (not bloodline) stating, “Behold my mothers and my brothers. For whoever does the will of my Father who is in heaven, they are my brother, sister and mother” (Matthew 12:49-50). Jesus has the audacity to announce faith and love, not biology, as the primary defining characteristics of family. His words shatter the ironclad tradition of family defined by correct gender, ethnicity, and DNA. This text offers profound liberation, not only for same-sex families, but all creations of domestic life built upon Gospel values. Christcentered family values will embrace foster children, adopted children, single people and their friends, single parent families, interracial and interfaith marriages. Our potential to plumb the depths of family intimacy will be actualized only when we recognize our common spiritual bloodline. A Living Tradition The illumination of these four biblical texts welcome all people of faith to breathe a healing sigh of relief. Our God does not stagnate in tradition. An adjustment in tradition may be imminent when the love of God, coupled with the love of neighbor, are foremost. The insights gleaned from these texts challenge the alleged immutable nature of tradition. • Religious traditions are abolished, replaced, maintained, or renovated upon God’s command. We must avoid idolizing tradition. • God honors tradition relative to its ability to reflect the divine nature of mercy, compassion, love, justice, and inclusivity. • God is not honored by tradition that: ~ serves to exclude those who are faithful, yet different, poor, or marginalized; ~ extorts material wealth for selfish gain; ~ judges or condemns the innocent; ~ manifests disingenuous religiosity in an attempt to camouflage hypocrisy. It is not my intention to cajole anyone, least of all my family, into abandoning the traditions they esteem valuable. Analogous to the prophet Isaiah, I am hoping my family of origin and faith can create room in the assembly. I would prefer to herald in the breaking open of tradition as opposed to breaking tradition. All four texts cry out for expansion and growth. We must be willing to hold our traditions with open hands rather than tight fists. I am not holding my breath waiting for conservative religious authorities to acquiesce to my conclusions. Surprisingly, Mom has since conceded to her fear: fear of losing her security, fear of being humiliated, fear of failing as a traditional parent, fear of tainting the family reputation with deviant outsiders, fear of the unknown. Love has begun to replace fear with welcome. Joyfully, Mom and Dad are still celebrating their traditions. I am discovering the delight of creating new ones. We are both learning to surrender our ideas about tradition to God. But most of all, we are both rejoicing that we are no longer slaves to tradition. Ann M. Amideo (Angel368@aol.com) holds a Master’s Degree in Theology from the Seminary of the Immaculate Conception in New York, and was instrumental in initiating a ministry for Catholic/Christian Parents of Gay/Lesbian Children in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Rockville Centre. A speaker on sexuality and religion, her writings have most recently appeared in The Other Side and the National Catholic Reporter. 20 Open Hands What does the Bible teach? In practice, it depends on what people happen to hear in it. Different listeners hear different things. “Interpretation” is central to talk of biblical teaching. Add questions about sexual ethics and the discussion becomes more complicated, for sex is emotionally charged, and emotions cloud thinking. At stake in the Christian debate over homosexuality is the nature of Christianity itself. Fundamentalists and mainline Christians would likely agree with this statement. However, and most revealing, they are also likely to differ on sexual ethics. But more important than anyone’s opinion are the broad implications of this debate. On the conservative pole stand Evangelical Christianity and Biblical Fundamentalism. Though sometimes very different religious emphases, when homosexuality is the topic, these two groups rely on what is basically a literal reading of the Bible. Thus, in Romans 1, F. LaGard Smith sees Paul condemning lesbian and gay sex as unnatural, degrading, and shameless, and R. B. Hays and Thomas Schmidt see gay sex as an affront to the very order of God’s creation. In what appears to be one of the most common mistakes in interpreting this passage, that reading runs together the verses on sex (26-27) and the verses that follow (28-32). As a result, samesex behaviors are associated with a long list of egregious offenses: evil, covetousness, malice, envy, murder, strife, and so on, which even have a death penalty attached. The conclusion is that the Bible condemned gay sex in ancient times and that the condemnation remains as strong today as ever. Scripture, Homosexuality, and the Nature of Christianity Daniel A. Helminiak Originally presented at First United Methodist Church, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, for a regional meeting of Reconciling Communities and published in unabridged form in Pastoral Psychology, Vol. 47, 1999, pp. 261-271, with full documentation. Across mainline denominations, contemporary biblical scholarship uses a more critical method of interpretation. It insists on reading Paul’s words in the context of his own time and place. As a result, the “historical-critical method” comes to a more permissive ethical conclusion. Yet even then, there is a variety of opinions. Some, like Victor Furnish and Bernadette Brooten, believe that Paul was indeed condemning same-sex acts. But, they point out, his reasons for condemning them do not hold today and his understanding of same-sex acts was simply not what we speak of today— homosexuality as a component of the personality, probably biologically determined, beyond personal choice, fixed in early childhood, and linked not just to sex acts, but to a person’s very capacity for bonding and affection. Taking into consideration the findings of today’s medicine, psychology, and sociology, these scholars conclude that the Bible’s teaching never addressed today’s questions and current ethical answers must be based on something other than scripture. Still relying on a critical reading of the historical evidence, but coming to an even more liberal conclusion, L. William Countryman and I have argued that Romans 1 did not condemn the same-sex behaviors of Paul’s day. Rather, Paul saw sexual practices as a matter of purity in the sense that the Jewish Law understood the matter. In Romans 1:24, Paul announced the topic of his discussion of sexual behavior: akatharsia, impurity. This topic stands in contrast to the topic of that long list of sins in verses 28-32: ta me kathekonta. This latter phrase, translated “things not to be done,” is a technical Stoic term for clearly unethical acts. Paul intended to contrast impurity with sin. Moreover, Paul used another technical Stoic term, para physin. It is usually translated “unnatural,” but this translation makes no sense in 11:24 where the same term refers to acts of God. So according to Paul’s usage, in contrast to the Stoic, this term should be translated “atypical.” As Brooten has shown, Paul was using the popular, not the technical, meaning for this term, and like the other two descriptors in the passage on same-sex acts, degrading and shameless, it implies no ethical condemnation. Rather, Paul painted a picture of social disapproval and disdain. He was talking about ritual impurity, not immorality or wickedness. Religious Purity and Cultural Categories Irrelevant in Christ Paul deliberately opened his letter to the Romans with a contrast between ritual impurity and wickedness. His purpose was to make one of the main points of his letter: the purity requirements of the Old Law have become irrelevant in Christ, and Jewish and Gentile converts should not splinter the Christian community by bickering over matters of custom and culture. Unless they are otherwise wrong, sexual practices in themselves are ethically neutral. B. Barbara Hall provides further support for this interpretation. Coming from a completely different direction and apparently unaware of Countryman’s interpretation of Romans 1, she concluded that Paul would not be concerned about differences in sexual orientation today. According to Hall, Paul’s vision of Christianity was revolutionary. GalaWinter 2000 21 tians 6:11-16 and 2 Corinthians 5:16- 21 present a picture of a new order in Christ. In it, all standard polarities and cultural categories are superseded and become irrelevant. Galatians 3:28 gives a specific list and shows how radical Paul’s thought actually was: “There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female, for all of you are one in Christ.” 1 Corinthians 7 illustrates that in Paul’s mind there is no one right way for Christians to live out their sexuality. Paul is open to all the options of his day. What matters for Paul is not one’s specific lifestyle, but the Christian virtue one expresses through it. There is solid argument that Paul did not even condemn the same-sex behaviors of his day. Granted this interpretation, the scriptures themselves would certainly allow loving gay and lesbian relationships today. Same-Gender Couples in Scripture Finally, pushing that conclusion a step further, there is an even more liberal reading of the Bible’s teaching on homosexuality. One could argue that, not only does the Bible not condemn samesex behaviors per se, but it actually supports them in some instances. Two cases are apropos. First, in Jonathan Loved David, Tom Horner argued persuasively that these two Old Testament heroes were sexual partners. Described in 1 Samuel, their relationship fits the model of noble military lovers. Such relationships were common and well-known throughout the ancient middle East. Second, James Miller and others suggest that Jesus’ healing of the centurion’s servant, recounted in Matthew 8:5-13 and Luke 7:1-10, reestablished the relationship of two male lovers. The provocative alternation between two Greek terms for servant, pais and doulos, in those passages; the consistent quotation of the centurion referring to the sick servant as pais; and Luke’s comment that the servant boy was entimos (dear, valuable) to the presumably wealthy centurion, easily allow that there was an important emotional bond between the two. In addition, as John Boswell pointed out, pais was sometimes used to mean male lover. It would be wrong to conclude that, by not condemning this relationship, Jesus approved of it. Still, in light of the often heard claim that homosexuality is the paradigmatic rejection of God’s plan for creation, it is peculiar that Jesus never spoke out against same-sex behaviors, especially when he was face-to-face with the Roman centurion. In any case, in order to dramatize the overall point, it can be argued that the Bible actually endorses homosexual love. There is an array of opinions about the Bible’s ethical teaching on gay sex. Either the Bible condemns it outright and totally, or the Bible condemns same-sex acts but not in terms of homosexuality as we know it today, or else the Bible does not condemn same-sex acts in themselves but is neutral on the matter, or finally, the Bible, in part, actually endorses same-sex love. A similar state of affairs applies to other ethical questions like divorce, the status of women in marriage and society, or the acceptable way to raise and discipline children. And on numerous current questions— like genetic engineering, cloning, nuclear energy, computer technology, environmental responsibility— it is hardly to be expected that the ancient texts of the Bible express any opinion at all. Thus, when the Bible is to be the source of answers about ethical questions, no clear and simple answer is forthcoming. The only honest response in this case seems to disqualify appeals to the Bible regarding ethical questions. If the biblical teaching is so ambiguous that consensus on the teaching is nearly impossible to achieve, the teaching cannot be helpful. It must be disregarded. Ethical questions must be resolved in some other way. This is a disturbing conclusion for Christians. Where does Christianity stand if the scriptures are irrelevant to Christian living? The Question of Interpretation The teaching of the Bible is not to blame for that disturbing conclusion. Actually, the principles of interpretation that were brought to bear on the Bible explain the differing opinions. So, attention needs to turn to interpretation. The line of demarcation in the previous array of opinions fell between the literal and the historical-critical approaches. Only the literal approach resulted in the absolute condemnation of homosexual relationships. In one way or another, the critical approaches all allowed room for acceptance. Therefore, not the scriptures, but the mind that one brings to them, is what determines ethical conclusions. This point needs to be emphasized. Our human minds are both a blessing and a burden. Self-aware and capable of reflection, we have become historically, psychologically, and hermeneutically sophisticated. This is to say, we now take for granted the need to get behind mere words. We routinely ask, “What is their context?” “How are they used in this case?” “What is the concern of the speaker?” “What is his or her real intent?” And thus, we cannot but ask, “What do the words really mean?” We are aware that the meaning is the key and that, like a smile or a nod, the same words can carry very different meanings in different situations. In all things human, the human subject is the bottom line. We create our own worlds. We make our own interpretations. And more and more, we all know this. (See P. Berger and T. Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge [New York: Doubleday, 1967].) Today, no one can hide from the awareness that the base of life has shifted. No longer do authority, convention, cultural inheritance, or tradition restrict individuals and societies. Rather, we routinely appropriate and adjust these, applying them to our own situation according to our own best judgment. And we realize that such a process of inheritance and adaptation was also behind the very traditions that we are now adapting. We are more aware of this process than any previous generation. A religion that relies on texts must admit that the ground has shifted. As 22 Open Hands Bernard Lonergan suggests, the thinking mind, not the text or the inherited religious teaching, is now rock bottom. Some take this realization to mean that anything goes. To this striking position they apply the name post-modernism. The implication is that we have entered a new era, and indeed we have, but what remains to be seen is how this new era will go down in history. One rendition is that the certainties of the past, and even the hope for certainty, have given way to thorough-going relativism. Nothing is absolute. Nothing is sacred. There is no right and wrong. All depends on what one wants to make of it. People concerned about ethics rightly shudder at that position. It is grossly mistaken and dangerous. The difference between truth and falsehood is real. Even the relativists must tacitly accept this fact, for they indulge in truth claims. Their claim that there are and can be no firm truths is a statement about what is supposedly the case. They do not walk their talk. Besides, if our own creative minds are a critical factor in our construction of a meaningful world, our construction also depends on factors that are independent of ourselves. For example, the density of matter remains. Gravity continues to make things fall. Emotions eventually show themselves. Hatred is inevitably self-destructive. Falsehood forebodes an unstable future. In fact, we cannot make things into whatever we would like. There are unavoidable regularities in the universe. With regard to the Bible, its verses do say something; its words and sentences do impose limits on what one could claim the Bible teaches. Though determination of the biblical teaching depends on the human mind, the Bible also has a mind of its own. Overall, the Bible fosters a spirit of wonder, praise, humility, thanksgiving, faithfulness, personal integrity, honesty, justice, welcome, concern, compassion, forgiveness, change of heart, reconciliation. These notions express the mind of the Bible, and their validity is everlasting. Only the devil could question their ongoing relevance to ethical decision- making. When the focus is on attitudes, the biblical teaching remains completely relevant to human living. Scripture still have an important role to play when we make ethical decisions. The biblical mind informs our own minds and thus influences whatever we do. The same point can be made in more technical terms. Alasdair MacIntyre discussed this matter in detail. If we return to the classical concern for aretaic ethics— that is, ethics build on virtue, excellence, and character formation—the scriptures remain fully relevant. But if our intent is the modern preoccupation with deontic ethics—that is, ethics that would spell out in legal fashion every act that is to be performed—the scriptural teaching becomes moot, for it is controverted. The array of opinions about biblical teaching on homosexuality provided an example. Four Intimations of a New Christianity 1. The biblical mind actually corresponds to the mind of the critical thinker. Biblical wonder, questioning, dedication, honesty, personal integrity, and commitment to truth are the very qualities that come to fruition in current critical thinking. Indeed, the biblical attitude, along with the contribution of the Greeks, is behind Western civilization’s achievement of modern science. And in the humanities, this scientific mentality shows itself in the emergence of the historical-critical method. Thus, when one attends to the attitude of the Bible and not to its specific pronouncements, the historical-critical method turns out to enjoy biblical endorsement, and the literalism of Biblical Fundamentalism appears to be unbiblical. By the same token, in one way or another, the liberal ethical conclusion regarding homosexuality turns out to be the biblical teaching. 2. The biblical mind also corresponds with the mind of naturalistic ethics. The Bible fosters an unreserved commitment to good and the ongoing pursuit of justice and love in every situation. These are the same attitudes that motivate any person of good will who seeks to know what is the right thing to do. Ethical people attend to all the evidence, look to personal experience, consult the experts of the day, apply their best reasoning, and collaborate with other honest seekers. Thus, they arrive at ethical decisions. In doing these things, they are also implementing the mind of the Bible. They are embodying the holy attitude that the Bible enshrines. Whether they conceive the matter in these terms or not, they are acting “as God would want,” they are doing “what Jesus would do,” they are being “led by the Holy Spirit” in their present situation. Heard with both a secular and religious ear, the biblical teaching on ethics can be summarized in the words of St. Augustine, “Love, and do what you will.” 3. Attention to the mind of the Bible brings insight into the relationship between Scripture and Tradition. The Bible is not to be read as a cookbook for Christian living. The Bible was not intended to provide ready-made answers to our ethical questions. Rather, the Bible is a record of paradigmatic examples of how godly people live. Our task is to learn a lesson from the examples and apply it in our own lives. That way of approaching the scriptures presupposes that the Bible emerged from within the Christian community. The Bible did not descend pristine and pure directly from heaven. It was not transcribed by an entranced scribe responding to divine dictation. Rather, the Bible is the historical record of people’s experience of God. To be sure, the Bible is the record of a privileged era. However, in that era the early Christians were facing their ethical questions just as Christians do today. The same process of ethical decision-making operates throughout. Recognition of that consistent process blurs the distinction between Scripture and Tradition. If tradition means the ongoing teaching of the churches, then the scriptures are a part of this tradition. But because of the Scriptures’ privileged position, they inform whatever else comes later. They inform future decisions precisely by enshrining the attitude that keeps the ongoing tradition on track. Thus, the old Protestant-Catholic debate over Scripture and Tradition dissolves, and the opposing sides fall toWinter 2000 23 gether. The historical-critical method and the mind of the Bible bring Christianity back into unity. By the same token, the nature of Christianity, at least where ethics are concerned, is clarified, and in the process, the literalism of biblical fundamentalism disqualifies it as a Christian religion. Mountains crumble. Valleys are filled. Monumental shifts are occurring. The Christian approach to ethics is complex and nuanced. The scriptures play a role, but they are only one part of a bigger picture. The Methodist “quadrilateral” usefully depicts that whole picture: Christian decision-making appeals to scripture, tradition, reason, and experience. Those four are the very elements that, in varying configurations, the other Christian churches also invoke. There is appreciable consensus on these matters across denominations. More and more, this consensus defines the Christian way. As for lesbian and gay relationships, the broad picture seems to include them. Evidence continues to mount. Most recently, we hear that the physiological functioning of the lesbian’s inner ear differs from the non-lesbian’s and that this difference is a biological given. As the findings of medical and social science and the experience of gay Christians accumulate, the critical reading of the scriptures gains more and more credibility, and the on-going teaching of the churches, Tradition, gravitates toward a new equilibrium. All the pieces—scripture, tradition, reason, and experience—converge to interlock and confirm one another. Christianity takes another transformative step forward on its life-giving mission through history. 4. The final implication is that the biblical mind is open to all religions and peoples. Insofar as the biblical mind corresponds with the mind of critical thinking and the mind of naturalistic ethics, the biblical mind also corresponds with that of authentic humanism. The openness, questioning, honesty, and good will that the Bible requires are the very same qualities that, according to Bernard Lonergan, define genuine humanity in any of its cultural expressions. The emphasis is on “genuine” because an alternative is possible. We can deform and misshape ourselves. In religious terms, we can sin. Still, the presupposition is that the human spirit in all of us, fortified by the Holy Spirit, is geared toward what is right, true, and good. In religious terms, it is geared toward God. So again with St. Augustine, we could pray, “Lord, you have made us for yourself, and our hearts are restless till they rest in you.” And this statement holds true whether a person believes in God or not, for this statement is about the human heart. A Christianity that attends to the mind of the Bible rather than to its specific ethical prescriptions is a Christianity that is open to a global and religiously diverse society. Thus, Christianity steps into and remains relevant in the third millennium. Such Christianity affirms and embraces any person of good will. And all this is said without any prejudice to the distinctive Christian beliefs about God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, and the Christian church. Although these Christian specifics do color the expression of the authentic humanism represented in the biblical mind, they do not reshape it in any way that would exclude non-Christians from human communion. True Christianity is ecumenical Christianity because it includes authentic humanism, and the inclusion of authentic humanism entails the reconciliation of religion and the human sciences. Gays and lesbians are not the only class of people that a new Christianity would embrace. At Stake: The Nature of Christianity The very nature of Christianity is at stake in the current discussion of gay and lesbian love. Claims about biblical teaching on homosexuality are linked with people’s positions on how to interpret the Bible, and the positions on biblical interpretation are linked with differing conceptions of Christianity. The present discussion envisions a Christianity that is ecumenical in the broadest sense—open through our common humanity to all peoples in their good-willed and wholesome living even while retaining the specifics of Christian belief for those who are Christian. The present discussion envisions the integration of Christianity and psychology. On the basis of that logic, as suggested here and argued elsewhere, biblical fundamentalism has abandoned authentic Christianity. Yet by turning condemnation of homosexuality into a litmus test of Christianity, fundamentalism reveals a correct intuition. It fears the loss of Christianity, and its apprehension is justified. But it is mistaken and superficial to identify homosexuality as the threat. On the contrary, this analysis suggests that the loss of Christianity will occur only if everyone adopts the literalism of biblical fundamentalism. Apart from that, not the loss of Christianity, but its transformation is at stake. The pain of this transformation is the apprehension that Fundamentalists and Christians alike are feeling. Changing attitudes toward homosexuality are merely an expression of this deeper process. Still, the fundamentalist alarm is a useful reminder that mammoth shifts are underway and that churches need to be careful about how far they allow things to shift. Surely, it is myopic to tie these shifts simplistically to homosexuality and other culturally-conditioned biblical prescriptions. But if one insists on doing so, nonetheless, a disconcerting but unavoidable question arises: Does Christianity itself stand or fall with lesbians and gays? In light of the present analysis, the answer appears to be, Yes. Daniel Helminiak is an adjunct professor in the humanistic and transpersonal psychology program at the State University of West Georgia. He holds Ph.D.’s in both theology and psychology. He is author of the best-selling What the Bible Really Says about Homosexuality (Alamo Square Press, 1994) and more recently published The Human Core of Spirituality: Mind as Psyche and Spirit (1996) and Religion and the Human Sciences: An Approach via Spirituality (1998), both from State University of New York Press. 24 Open Hands It was with eagerness that I first contacted Open Hands about writing an article for this issue. As a lesbian and a New Testament scholar who has felt alienated by the religious traditions that helped shape my commitments and as someone who has (until lately) had to remain closeted in my family and my workplace, I thought this would be an excellent forum for me to make a contribution by suggesting models of interpreting the biblical texts in ways which, as stated in the call for papers, “focus on liberating the Bible from preconceptions and prejudices and reading it as restorative and empowering.” As I began to prepare an article, however, I found my resolution crumbling. Sure, I can offer new readings of the biblical texts that have been used to legitimize the oppression and exclusion of LGBT people from church life and church blessing. However, I’m forced to acknowledge the existence of great segments of the Bible that are repressive and exclusionary. In addition, most biblical texts can be interpreted in a variety of ways. One can overlay them with different concepts of history, understandings of authority, perceptions of Jesus and Judaism in the first century, linguistic perspectives, and theoretical approaches and produce a host of viable interpretations. Some interpretations will support the beauty and sanctity of the lives and relationships of LGBT folks, some will condemn those lives (as many have). In considering how I might offer a liberating interpretation of a tiny section of a Bible of which many parts can legitimately be used to support non-liberating stances, I began to see my questions and concerns cluster around a different issue. Why do we persist in supporting the Bible as an authority for our lives? Why does this set of myths, legends, and community foundation documents from the Ancient Mediterranean world exercise such a strong in- QUESTION (Biblical) AUTHORITY! Free in the Spirit, Not Shackled by a Text T. Lynn Stott fluence in our consciousness and sense of self-worth as children of God? How does adherence to any concept of biblical authority (however defined) further the justice needs of LGBT folks in 21st century American churches and society? I should pause here to assure you that I am not opposed to the Bible, per se. I grew up in denominations deeply rooted in the Bible (Free Will Baptist and, later, Southern Baptist); I grew up loving its stories, memorizing its passages, finding in its pages comfort, spiritual inspiration, and calls to pursue justice. I have dedicated more than a decade of my adult life to studying and teaching the Bible. I have struggled time and time again to help students see its elegance, its artistry, its windows into ancient cultures and mindsets, its views of God and of humanity’s place in God’s creation, its understandings of justice, its potential for liberation, its potential for oppression, and its relevance to our lives as participants in Western cultural traditions. I speak from close in, not from some “safe” distance. The Bible’s Limitations The truth of the matter is that while I can see parts of the Bible as spiritually inspiring, comforting, and insightful with regard to models of justice and human nature, I always also see other parts of it as oppressive and exclusionary. After my years of graduate study and college teaching, I find it difficult to champion the Bible as a source of authority in any generalized fashion. Even in my desire to use my experience and knowledge to the benefit of Queer communities, I come up short regarding what I believe I can, in good conscience, suggest people do about interpreting the Bible as a source of authority for modern ethics or social policy. The Bible, you see, is a collection of ancient texts from far away cultures to which very few of us can claim ancestral heritage. It was written in languages most of us have never heard and few can read. There was no direct, uninterrupted transmission of divinely guided, sacred, and perfect ancient texts. Our translations are made from hand-written copies of still more ancient handwritten copies. The texts of the Hebrew Scriptures reflect grand mythic visions of a creator god and mythologized histories of that god’s interactions with certain (usually select and exclusive) groups of human beings. God is a god who chooses, abandons, judges, protects, vindicates, and destroys. The stories are written in the cultural languages of ancient, patriarchal, and often militaristic cultural groups. They include frequent imagery of “us versus them” and generally assume the inferiority of women and accept slavery as a given institution. The texts of the Christian New Testament are the foundation documents of a first century Jewish sect which became a major Gentile religious movement. The gospels represent four distinct interpretations of Jesus’ life, his work, and his purpose in the grand scheme of things. They also represent differing views of who the true followers of Jesus are and what they can expect in the future. Paul’s writings (as well as those of later writers whose work depends on Paul’s) struggle to identify Christians as the new “chosen ones” of God. By the time of the later epistles, Christian writers have claimed a fairly rigid rule of appropriate behavior, social structure, and exclusion of “undesirables” that parallels, in some ways, the “us versus them” language of the Hebrew Scriptures and calls, not for a radical new social order (which some would consider Jesus to have called for), but for an order in which the status quo of the Roman world is dutifully replicated. This view also assumes slavery and the “natural” inferiority of women. Certainly, there are passages in the Bible that portray the inclusive nature Winter 2000 25 of God, the grace of the spirit, and a radically egalitarian vision of God’s reign. These passages, which I imagine formed the religious views and social commitments of many of us, are, however, always in the company of the sections of the Bible that portray God as judgmental, exclusionary, vindictive, and jealous—passages which are interpreted by many as justifying “Christian” domination of the earth and of any group which can be deemed “outside of God’s will,” LGBT folks included. No Biblical Unity or Purity The texts of the Bible are not unified in one homogeneous message and everyone (and I mean everyone, literalist/fundamentalist and liberationist alike) who wishes to grant an authoritative place for the Bible in Christianity must pick and choose which parts of the Bible to emphasize and which ones to ignore. The passages or stories one holds dear demonstrate one’s own theological vision and Christian self-understanding. However, someone else can select a different set of passages and stories (or a different interpretation of the same passages) and end up with a completely different (and sometimes oppositional) vision of the same God. This clash of interpretations of the same sets of material is particularly interesting when one considers that one of the motivations driving the desire for a canon of Christian scripture in the second to fourth centuries (and one of the reasons for Paul’s writing some of his letters in the mid-first century) was the desire for unity and relative uniformity of Christian belief. This ancient selection of a collection of texts to be deemed Christian, however, has not led to a uniformity of beliefs as the centuries have passed, but to a diversity even more wide-ranging than that of the earliest Christians. Many of us Queer folk encounter aspects of the range of Christian interpretations in a painful way when our experiences of ourselves as children called by God conflicts with the possibilities allowed by our families, our church communities, or our denominational hierarchy. After all, if Jesus loves “all the children of the world,” why isn’t there room for us in his church? And so I ask, why do we feel it necessary to find biblical authority for the persons we are and the lives we lead? Generations have come to rely on the texts of the Bible as somehow revelatory of God’s will for humanity—a will that for some reason God revealed to the ancients in a more direct way than God reveals it to modern people. Many Christians read the Bible as conservative Muslims are taught to read the Qur’an, as God’s revealed will and word, divine, immutable, clear and precise. Not only does this approach ignore the historical development, transmission, and canonization of the texts which comprise the Bible, it has forced the issue of interpretation to become an effort at unlocking the secrets in this mysterious “Word” that God intends for us and our society. This attitude is not limited to literalists (a.k.a. “fundamentalists”), it shows up among Queer folk as well. After all, these ancient, foreign texts are often obscure and confusing. We believe, however, that if we only look hard enough, with the light slanted just so, and use the right interpretive trick, then we will be able to prove irrefutably that the Bible speaks God’s word of liberation to us and shame to those who would exclude us. The gyrations of mind and hermeneutics required for this task are immense. The results of our efforts at liberating interpretation, while they can be tremendously inspiring, are often fragile and tenuous, easily shot down by more conservative, traditional approaches to the text. After all, the tradition and cultural presumptions of much of the Bible are not particularly liberating at all. What is the problem then? The problem is our approach to the Bible itself. We have bought into the myth of the Bible as mysteriously divine and as foundational to the practice of modern Christianity. We have forgotten the role of experience of spirit in our own sense of belonging and in our practice of our faith and commitments to justice. Keeping a Perspective I would argue that though many of us experience the liberating, life-giving spirit of Christ in our lives, our work, and our call to be our truest selves, our desire to find legitimation for our lives in the texts of the Bible places us in collusion with the efforts of those who would deny us that same legitimation. Adherence to any theory of biblical authority supports the efforts of those who would designate the Bible as the sole source of authority (fully negative) in determining the legitimacy of our lives as Christian LGBT folks. That is very wrong. If we limit “legitimate” witness of the grace and mercy of God to the interpretation of biblical texts, even if those interpretations are our own, we help weave the rope with which others wish to strangle us. The Bible as a whole will never be completely on the side of what most of us understand as liberation. It is a text which covers too many cultures, time periods, and political ideologies to provide any consistent guidance for modern questions of social ethics. I suggest we hold the Bible near, but in perspective. It is a rich and important text to Christianity, but it is not the voice of God. It is the voice of many human attempts to envision God. Sometimes those ancient visions provide inspiration and guidance for our struggles in this day and age; sometimes they don’t. I suggest that we loosen our grip on this grand old tome, recognizing its cultural, historical, and ideological limitations, and turn to it not for authority, but for comfort, inspiration, positive and negative models of action, metaphor, and for just some good old stories. Let us, like some of the earliest Christians, value in ourselves the living spirit that called us and follow that spirit’s guidance as we seek life, justice, and a model of a new way. Lynn Stott has an M.A. and Ph.D. in Biblical Studies from Vanderbilt University and an M.T.S from Harvard Divinity School. She grew up in North Carolina, but now lives in Oakland, CA with Mary, her partner of nearly 10 years. She has recently turned her career interests from college teaching to writing and web design for online learning, informational sites, and non-profit organizations. 26 Open Hands WELCOMING MOVEMENT TOPS 1000! Since 1978, 1,046 churches, 45 campus ministries, 34 judicatories, and seven national and international ministries have publicly declared themselves welcoming of lesbian and gay people. These 1,069* welcoming communities are found in ten denominations in 46 states and the District of Columbia of the United States and in five provinces of Canada. The complete list (as of January 26, 2000) follows. The affiliation of each is designated by the following codes: CONGREGATIONS UNITED STATES ALABAMA Huntsville UU Church (WEL) ALASKA Anchorage Immanuel Presbyterian (ML) UU Fellowship (WEL) Palmer Church of the Covenant (W&A) Sitka UMC of Sitka (RC) ARIZONA Mesa Celebration of Life Presbyterian (ML) Phoenix Asbury UMC (RC) Augustana Lutheran (RIC) Faith Lutheran (RIC) Shadow Rock Cong. UCC (ONA) Scottsdale Scottsdale Cong. UCC (ONA) Tempe Desert Palm UCC (ONA) University Lutheran (RIC) Tucson Church of the Painted Hills (ONA) First Christian (O&A) Rincon Congregational UCC (ONA) Santa Cruz Lutheran (RIC) St. Francis in the Foothills UMC (RC) ARKANSAS Little Rock Pulaski Heights Christian (O&A) CALIFORNIA Alameda First Christian (O&A) First Congregational (ONA) Albany Albany UMC (RC) Altadena Altadena Congregational (ONA) Christ the Shepherd Lutheran (RIC) Baldwin Park First Presbyterian (ML) Belmont Congregational Church UCC (ONA) Benicia Community Congregational (ONA) Berkeley Berkeley/Richmond Intercity Min. (O&A) Epworth UMC (RC) First Baptist (W&A) First Congregational (ONA) St. John’s Presbyterian (ML) Shepherd of the Hills Lutheran (RIC) Trinity UMC (RC) University Lutheran Chapel (RIC) University Church (O&A) Campbell First UMC (RC) Carlsbad Pilgrim Congregational UCC (ONA) Carmel UU of Monterey Peninsula (WEL) Chatsworth West Valley UMC (RC) Chico Congregational Church (ONA) Claremont Claremont UMC (RC) Claremont UCC, Congregational (ONA) Cloverdale United Ch. of Cloverdale (ONA) Concord First Christian (O&A) Danville Danville Cong. UCC (ONA) Peace Lutheran (RIC) Davis Davis UMC (RC) El Cerrito Christ Lutheran (RIC) El Cerrito UMC (RC) Mira Vista UCC (ONA) Northminster Presbyterian (ML) Eureka First Congregational (ONA) Fair Oaks Fair Oaks UMC (RC) Fairfax Fairfax Community (ONA) Fremont Fremont Congregational (ONA) Niles Congregational UCC (ONA) Fresno College Comm. Cong. (ONA) First Congregational (ONA) Wesley UMC (RC) Fullerton Fullerton Congregational (ONA) Gardena First UMC (RC) Geyserville Geyserville Christian (O&A) Guerneville Community Church, UCC (ONA) Hayward Eden UCC (ONA) New Fellowship UCC (ONA) United Church (ONA) Westminster Hills Presbyterian (ML) Hollywood Hollywood Lutheran (RIC) Hollywood UMC (RC) Hope Lutheran (RIC) Irvine Irvine UCC (ONA) Kensington Arlington Community UCC (ONA) Lafayette Lafayette Christian (O&A) Laguna Niguel Shepherd of the Hills (ONA) Larkspur Redwoods Presbyterian (ML) La Verne Church of the Brethren (SCN) Long Beach First Congregational UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Resurrection Lutheran (RIC) Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Los Alamitos Community Congregational UCC (ONA) Los Angeles Bethel Lutheran (RIC) Mt. Hollywood Congregational UCC (ONA) United University (ML, RC) Westwood Hills Congregational (ONA) Wilshire UMC (RC) Los Gatos First UMC (RC) Skyland Community (ONA) Malibu Malibu UMC (RC) Marin City St. Andrews Presbyterian (ML) Martinez Martinez UMC (RC) Milpitas Sunnyhills UMC (RC) Modesto College Avenue Congregational (ONA) Napa Emmanuel Lutheran (RIC) Newark Holy Redeemer Lutheran (RIC) North Hollywood St. Matthew’s Lutheran (RIC) Toluca Lake UMC (RC) Oakland Beacon Presbyterian Fellowship (ML) Faith American Lutheran (RIC) First Congregational (ONA) First Lutheran (RIC) Lake Merritt UMC (RC) Lakeshore Avenue Baptist (W&A) Lutheran Peace Fellowship (RIC) Montclair Presbyterian (ML) Plymouth UCC (ONA) St. Paul Lutheran (RIC) Orinda Orinda Comm. Ch. UCC (ONA) Palo Alto Covenant Presbyterian (ML) First Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) First Presbyterian (ML) St. Andrew’s UMC (RC) University Lutheran (RIC) Pasadena First Congregational UCC (ONA) Portola Valley Ladera Community Church (ONA) Richmond Grace Lutheran (RIC) Riverside First Congregational (ONA) Sacramento Lutheran Church of Our Redeemer (RIC) Parkside Community (ONA) Unitarian Universalist Society (WEL) San Bernardino First Congregational Church, UCC (ONA) San Bruno Peace Lutheran (RIC) San Diego First Lutheran (RIC) First Unitarian (WEL) Pacific Beach UMC (RC) University Christian (O&A) San Francisco Bethany UMC (RC) Calvary UMC (RC) Christ Church Lutheran (RIC) Church of the Advent (OAS) Ch. of the Incarnation (OAS) TOTAL AC Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada) .... 15 ML More Light Presbyterians ................................................................... 95 OAS Oasis (Episcopal) ................................................................................ 58 ONA Open and Affirming (United Church of Christ) ............................. 310 O&A Open & Affirming (Disciples) ............................................................44 RIC Reconciling in Christ (Lutheran) ..................................................... 186 RC Reconciling Congregation Program (United Methodist) ................. 188 SCN Supportive (Brethren/Mennonite) ..................................................... 26 W&A Welcoming & Affirming (American Baptist) ..................................... 39 WEL Welcoming (Unitarian Universalist) ................................................ 107 *This total is lower than the sum of the numbers listed above and on the right because some welcoming communities are multiply designated and affiliated with more than one denomination. Winter 2000 27 Church of St. John the Evangelist (OAS) City of Refuge (ONA) Dolores Street Baptist (W&A) First Congregational UCC (ONA) First Mennonite Church (SCN) First St. John’s UMC (RC) First Unitarian Society (WEL) First United Lutheran (RIC) Glide Memorial UMC (RC) Grace Cathedral (OAS) Hamilton UMC (RC) Noe Valley Ministry (ML) Pine UMC (RC) Seventh Avenue Presbyterian (ML) St. Aidan’s Church (OAS) St. Francis Lutheran (RIC) St. John the Evangelist Episcopal (OAS) St. John’s UCC (ONA) St. Mark’s Lutheran (RIC) St. Paulus Lutheran (RIC) Temple UMC (RC) Trinity Church (OAS) San Jose Almaden Hills UMC (RC) Alum Rock UMC (RC) Christ the Good Shepherd Lutheran (RIC) 1st Cong. Ch. of San Jose UCC (ONA) First Christian Church (O&A) New Community of Faith (ONA, W&A) St. Paul’s UMC (RC) San Leandro San Leandro Comm. Church (ONA) San Leandro Community (W&A) San Mateo Chalice Christian Church (O&A) College Heights UCC (ONA) First Christian (O&A) San Rafael Christ in Terra Linda Presb. (ML) Faith Lutheran (RIC) First Congregational UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Santa Barbara First Congregational UCC (ONA) La Mesa Community (ONA) Santa Cruz First Congregational UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Grace UMC (RC) Santa Monica The Church in Ocean Park (RC) Santa Rosa Christ UMC (RC) First Congregational UCC (ONA) UU Fellowship of Sonoma Co. (WEL) Saratoga Grace UMC (RC) Sausalito First Presbyterian (ML) Sebastopol Community Church (ONA) Simi Valley United Church of Christ (ONA) Stockton Central UMC (RC) First Christian (O&A) St. Mark’s UMC (RC) Sunnyvale Congregational Community (ONA) Raynor Park Christian (O&A) St. John’s Lutheran (RIC) Sunol Little Brown Church (ONA) Tiburon Community Congregational (ONA) Shepherd of the Hills Lutheran (RIC) Westminster Presbyterian (ML) Vacaville St. Paul’s UMC (RC) Vallejo Fellowship UMC (RC) First Christian (O&A) Walnut Creek Mt. Diablo UU (WEL) Walnut Creek UMC (RC) West Covina Shepherd of the Valley Lutheran (RIC) West Hollywood Crescent Heights UMC (RC) West Hollywood Presbyterian (ML) Yucaipa Faith Lutheran (RIC) COLORADO Arvada Arvada Mennonite (SCN) Aurora Parkview Congregational UCC (ONA) Boulder Boulder Mennonite (SCN) Community UCC (ONA) First Christian (O&A) First Congregational (ONA) First UMC (RC) Mount Calvary Lutheran (RIC) Colorado Springs All Souls Unitarian (WEL) First Congregational (ONA) Denver Capitol Heights Presbyterian (ML) Fireside Christian (O&A) First Universalist (WEL) Our Savior’s Lutheran (RIC) Park Hill Congregational UCC (ONA) Sixth Avenue United (ONA) Spirit of Joy Fellowship (SCN) St. Paul’s UMC (RC) Washington Park UCC (ONA) Englewood First Plymouth Cong. UCC (ONA) Evergreen Wild Rose UCC (ONA) Fort Collins Fort Collins Mennonite Fel. (SCN) St. Thomas Lutheran Chapel (RIC) Grand Junction Koinonea Church (SCN) Greeley Family of Christ Presbyterian (ML) Longmont First Cong. UCC (ONA, W&A) Pueblo Christ Congregational, UCC (ONA) Telluride Christ Presbyterian (ML) CONNECTICUT Coventry Second Congregational (ONA) Ellington First Lutheran (RIC) Fairfield First Church Cong. (ONA) Glastonbury First Church of Christ Cong. (ONA) Guilford First Congregational UCC (ONA) Hamden Spring Glen Church, UCC (ONA) U Society of New Haven (WEL) Hartford Central Baptist (W&A) First Church of Christ, UCC (ONA) Madison Shoreline UU Society (WEL) Mansfield Center First Church of Christ Cong. (ONA) Middletown First Church of Christ Cong. (ONA) New Haven Church of Christ in Yale Univ. (ONA) First Church of Christ (ONA) First & Summerfield UMC (RC) United Church on the Green (ONA) Noank Noank Baptist (W&A) South Glastonbury Congregational Church (ONA) Stamford St. John Lutheran (RIC) Storrs Storrs Congregational (ONA) Uncasville Uncasville UMC (RC) Waterbury South Congregational (ONA) Westport Unitarian Church (WEL) Windsor First Church UCC (ONA) DELAWARE Newark New Ark UCC (ONA) Wilmington West Presbyterian (ML) DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Washington, D.C. All Souls Unitarian (WEL) Augustana Lutheran (RIC) Christ Lutheran (RIC) Christ UMC (RC) Community of Christ Lutheran (RIC) Dumbarton UMC (RC) First Congregational (ONA) First Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Foundry UMC (RC) Georgetown Lutheran (RIC) Grace Lutheran (RIC) Lutheran Church of the Reformation (RIC) New York Ave. Presbyterian (ML) Riverside Baptist (W&A) Sojourner Truth Cong. UU (WEL) St. Paul’s Lutheran (RIC) Westminster Presbyterian (ML) FLORIDA Clearwater UU Church of Clearwater (WEL) Gainesville United Church (ONA) Unitarian Universalist Fellowship (WEL) Key West Holy Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Lake Mary Grace UMC (RC) Miami Beach Miami Beach Community (ONA) Riviera Presbyterian (ML) St. John’s UMC (RC) North Palm Beach First Unitarian (WEL) Orlando First Unitarian (WEL) Pinellas Park Good Samaritan Presbyterian (ML, ONA) St. Petersburg Lakewood UCC (ONA) Sunrise Christ the King Lutheran (RIC) Tallahassee St. Stephen Lutheran (RIC) United Church (ONA) Tampa First United Church (ONA) John Calvin Presbyterian (ML) Unitarian Universalist (WEL) GEORGIA Athens Unitarian Universalist Fellowship (WEL) Atlanta Clifton Presbyterian (ML) Grant Park-Aldersgate UMC (RC) Ormewood Park Presbyterian (ML) Trinity UMC (RC) Marietta Pilgrimage UCC (ONA) HAWAI‘I Honolulu Calvary By the Sea Lutheran (RIC) Church of the Crossroads (ONA) Honolulu Lutheran (RIC) Kalaupapa Kanaana Hou-Siloama, UCC (ONA) IDAHO Boise First Cong. UCC (ONA) ILLINOIS Aurora Lutheran Church of the Redeemer (RIC) The N.E. Cong. UCC (ONA) Carbondale Church of the Good Shepherd (ONA) Champaign Community UCC (ONA) McKinley Memorial Presbyterian (ML) St. Andrew’s Lutheran (RIC) Chicago Albany Park UMC (RC) Augustana Lutheran (RIC) Berry Memorial UMC (RC) Broadway UMC (RC) Christ the King Lutheran (RIC) Christ the Mediator Lutheran (RIC) Ebenezer Lutheran (RIC) Epworth UMC (RC) First UMC (RC) Gladstone Park Lutheran (RIC) Grace Baptist (W&A) Grace UMC (RC) Holy Covenant UMC (RC) Holy Trinity Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) Immanuel Lutheran (RIC) Irving Park Christian (O&A) Irving Park UMC (RC) Lake View Lutheran (RIC) Lincoln Park Presbyterian (ML) 28 Open Hands Lord of Light (RIC) Mayfair UMC (RC) Nazareth UCC (ONA) Norwood Park UMC (RC) Park View Lutheran (RIC) Peoples Church (ONA) Resurrection Lutheran (RIC) St. Luke’s Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) St. Paul’s UCC (ONA) Trinity Lutheran (RIC) United Church of Rogers Park (RC) University Church (ONA, O&A) Wellington Avenue UCC (ONA) Elmhurst Maywood House Church (RIC) Evanston Lake Street Church of Evanston (W&A) Hemenway UMC (RC) Wheadon UMC (RC) Hazel Crest Hazel Crest Community UMC (RC) Jacksonville Congregational Church, UCC (ONA) La Grange First Congregational (ONA) Naperville First Congregational Church (ONA) Normal New Covenant Community (ML, ONA, O&A) Oak Park Euclid Avenue UMC (RC) First United Church (ML, ONA) Good Shepherd Lutheran (RIC) Oak Park Mennonite (SCN) Pilgrim Church (ONA) Park Forest UU Community (WEL) Rockford Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Streamwood Immanuel UCC (ONA) Waukegan First Congregational UCC (ONA) Wheaton St. Paul Lutheran (RIC) Wilmette First Congregational UCC (ONA) Winfield Winfield Community UMC (RC) INDIANA Bloomington St. Thomas Lutheran (RIC) Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Goshen Circle of Hope Mennonite Fellowship (SCN) Indianapolis First Congregational UCC (ONA) Northeast UCC (ONA) North Manchester Manchester Church of the Brethren (SCN) South Bend Central UMC (RC) First Unitarian (WEL) Southside Christian (O&A) West Lafayette Shalom UCC (ONA) IOWA Ames Ames Mennonite (SCN) Lord of Life Lutheran (RIC) University Lutheran (RIC) Cedar Rapids Faith UMC (RC) Peoples Church UU (WEL) Clinton Clinton-Camanche, Iowa MFSA (RC) Davenport Davenport Unitarian (WEL) Des Moines Cottage Grove Avenue Presbyterian (ML) First Unitarian (WEL) Plymouth Congregational UCC (ONA) Trinity UMC (RC) Urbandale UCC (ONA) Iowa City Faith UCC (ONA) KANSAS Kansas City FaithWorks Community (O&A) Rainbow Mennonite (SCN) Olathe St. Andrews Christian (O&A) Topeka Central Congregational UCC (ONA) KENTUCKY Henderson Zion UCC (ONA) Louisville Calvary Lutheran (RIC) Central Presbyterian (ML) First Unitarian (WEL) Third Lutheran (RIC) Mount Prospect Grace and Glory Lutheran (RIC) LOUISIANA New Orleans St. Mark’s UMC (RC) MAINE Bath UCC, Congregational (ONA) Camden John Street UMC (RC) Ellsworth Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Mt. Desert Somesville Union Meeting House (ONA) Portland Woodfords Cong. UCC (ONA) Rockland The First Universalist (WEL) Saco First Parish Cong. Ch. of Saco (ONA) Waterville Universalist Unitarian (WEL) MARYLAND Adelphi Paint Branch UU (WEL) Baltimore Brown Memorial Park Ave. Pres. (ML) Dundalk Church of the Brethren (SCN) First & Franklin Presbyterian (ML) Govans Presbyterian (ML) St. John’s UMC (RC) St. Mark’s Lutheran (RIC) Bethesda Cedar Lane Unitarian (WEL) River Road Unitarian (WEL) Westmoreland Cong. UCC (ONA) Columbia Christ UMC (RC) Columbia United Christian (O&A) Columbia United Christian (ONA) St. John UM-Presbyterian (ML, RC) UU Congregation (WEL) Gaithersburg Christ the Servant Lutheran (RIC) Lanham Good Samaritan Lutheran (RIC) Rockville Rockville Presbyterian (ML) Silver Spring Christ Congregational UCC (ONA) Silver Spring Presbyterian (ML) Takoma Park Takoma Park Presbyterian (ML) MASSACHUSETTS Acton St. Matthew’s UMC (RC) Amherst First Congregational UCC (ONA) South Congregational (ONA) Andover Ballardvale United (ONA, RC) Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Athol South Athol UMC (RC) Auburn Pakachoag (ONA) Boston Arlington Street (WEL) Church of the Covenant (ML, ONA) Old South Church (ONA) Braintree All Souls Church (WEL) Brewster First Parish (WEL) Cambridge First Church, Congregational (ONA) Harvard-Epworth UMC (RC) Old Cambridge Baptist (W&A) University Lutheran (RIC) Concord West Concord Union (ONA) Danvers Holy Trinity UMC (RC) Framingham Grace UCC (ONA) Greenfield First Congregational UCC (ONA) Hingham First Parish Old Ship (WEL) Hingham Congregational (ONA) Holliston First Congregational (ONA) Jamaica Plain Central Congregational (ONA) Lincoln The First Parish in Lincoln (ONA) Malden The First Ch. in Malden (ONA) Marblehead St. Stephen’s UMC (RC) Marshfield Marshfield UMC (RC) Middleboro First Unitarian Society (WEL) Needham First Parish UU (WEL) Newburyport Belleville Congregational UCC (ONA) First Parish Society (WEL) People’s UMC (RC) Newton Highlands Congregational (ONA) Northampton First Baptist Church (W&A) First Church of Christ (ONA) Unitarian Society (WEL) Osterville United Methodist (RC) Penbroke First Church in Penbroke (ONA) Provincetown Universalist Meeting House (WEL) Reading Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Roxbury Ch. Of United Community (O&A, ONA) Salem Crombie Street UCC (ONA) Shrewsbury Mt. Olivet Lutheran (RIC) Somerville Clarenden Hill Presbyterian (ML) First Cong. of Somerville (ONA) South Hadley UMC of Holyoke, S. Hadley, & Granby Springfield First Ch. of Christ Congregational (ONA) Stowe First Parish Ch. of Stowe & Acton (WEL) Sudbury The First Parish (WEL) Memorial Congregational UCC (ONA) Waltham First Presbyterian (ML) Wayland First Parish of Wayland (WEL) Wellesley Wellesley Congregational (ONA) Wendell Wendell Congregational (ONA) West Newton First Unitarian Society (WEL) Second Church in Newton UCC (ONA) West Somerville College Avenue UMC (RC) Williamstown First Congregational UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Worcester Bethany Christian United Parish (W&A, ONA, O&A) United Congregational (ONA) MICHIGAN Ann Arbor Amistad Community Church, UCC (ONA) Church of the Good Shepherd (ONA) First UU (WEL) Lord of Light Lutheran (RIC) Memorial Christian (O&A) Northside Presbyterian (ML) Bloomfield Hills Birmingham Unitarian (WEL) Detroit Truth Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) Douglas Douglas Congregational UCC (ONA) East Lansing Edgewood United Church (ONA) UU of Greater Lansing (WEL) Ferndale Zion Lutheran (RIC) Winter 2000 29 Grand Rapids Plymouth Congregational, UCC (ONA) Kalamazoo Phoenix Community UCC (ONA) Skyridge Church of the Brethren (SCN) Lansing Ecclesia (O&A) Lansing Church of the Brethren (SCN) Pilgrim Congregational UCC (ONA) Port Huron St. Martin Lutheran (RIC) Southfield Calvary Lutheran (RIC) Williamston Williamston UMC (RC) Ypsilanti First Congregational UCC (ONA) MINNESOTA Becker Becker UMC (RC) Burnsville Presbyterian Church of the Apostles (ML) Duluth Gloria Dei (RIC) Edina Edina Community Lutheran (RIC) Good Samaritan UMC (RC) Falcon Heights Falcon Heights UCC (ONA) Mahtomedi White Bear UU (WEL) Mankato First Congregational UCC (ONA) Maple Grove Pilgrims United (ONA) Minneapolis Christ the Redeemer Lutheran (RIC) First Congregational (ONA) First Unitarian Society (WEL) First Universalist (WEL) Grace University Lutheran (RIC) Hennepin Avenue UMC (RC) Hobart UMC (RC) Holy Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Judson Memorial Baptist (W&A) Lyndale UCC (ONA) Lynnhurst Congregational (ONA) Mayflower Community Cong. UCC (ONA) Minnehaha UCC (ONA) Our Savior’s Lutheran (RIC) Parkway UCC (ONA) Praxis (RC) Prospect Park UMC (RC) Spirit of the Lakes (ONA) St. Andrew’s Lutheran (RIC) St. Peter Lutheran (RIC) University Baptist (W&A) Walker Community (RC) Wesley UMC (RC) Zion Lutheran (RIC) New Brighton United Church of Christ (ONA) Northfield First UCC (ONA) Robbinsdale Robbinsdale UCC (ONA) Shoreview Peace UMC (RC) St. Cloud St. Cloud UU Fellwoship (WEL) Univ. Lutheran of the Epiphany (RIC) St. Paul Cherokee Park United (ML, ONA) Dayton Avenue Presbyterian (ML) Macalester-Plymouth United (ML, ONA) St. Anthony Park UCC St. Paul Mennonite Fellowship (SCN) St. Paul-Reformation Lutheran (RIC) Wayzatta St. Luke Presbyterian (ML) MISSOURI Kansas City Abiding Peace Lutheran (RIC) All Souls Unitarian (WEL) Country Club Congregational (ONA) Fountain of Hope Lutheran (RIC) Kairos UMC (RC) St. James Lutheran (RIC) St. Mark’s Lutheran (RIC) Trinity UMC (RC) Van Brunt Blvd. Presbyterian (ML) St. Louis Centenary UMC (RC) Epiphany (ONA) Gibson Heights United (ML) Lafayette Park UMC (RC) St. Marcus Evangelical UCC (ONA) Tyler Place Presbyterian (ML) University City Bethel Lutheran (RIC) MONTANA Billings First Congregational UCC (ONA) Mayflower Cong. UCC (ONA) Butte United Congregational Church (ONA) Missoula University Congregational UCC (ONA) NEBRASKA Lincoln Unitarian Church (WEL) Omaha First Lutheran (RIC) Reconciling Worship Community (RC) NEW HAMPSHIRE Concord South Congregational, UCC (ONA) Exeter Congregational (ONA) Hanover Our Savior Lutheran (RIC) Jaffrey United Church (ONA) Milford Unitarian Universalist Congregation (WEL) Pelham First Congregational (ONA) Plymouth Plymouth Congregational (ONA) Sanbornton Sanbornton Congregational UCC (ONA) NEW JERSEY Belleville Christ Church Episcopal (OAS) Belvedere St. Mary’s Episcopal (OAS) Bloomfield Christ Episcopal (OAS) Boonton St. John’s Episcopal (OAS) Chatham St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Cherry Hill UU Church (WEL) Chester Church of the Messiah Episcopal (OAS) Clifton St. Peter’s Episcopal (OAS) Closter First Cong. Ch. UCC (ONA) Denville Church of Our Saviour Episcopal (OAS) East Brunswick East Brunswick Cong. UCC (ONA) Englewood St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Exeter Congregational Church (ONA) Fort Lee Church of the Good Shepherd (OAS) Hackensack Christ Episcopal (OAS) Hackettstown St. James’ Episcopal (OAS) Harrington Park St. Andrew’s Episcopal (OAS) Hasbrouck Heights Church of St. John the Divine (OAS) Haworth St. Luke’s Episcopal (OAS) Hawthorne St. Clement’s Episcopal (OAS) Hoboken All Saints Parish (OAS) Jersey City Grace Lutheran (RIC) Grace Van Vorst Episcopal (OAS) St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Kearny Trinity Episcopal (OAS) Leonia All Saints Episcopal (OAS) Lincoln Park St. Andrews Episcopal (OAS) Madison Grace Episcopal (OAS) Maplewood St. George’s Episcopal (OAS) Mendham St. Mark’s Episcopal (OAS) Millburn St. Stephen’s Episcopal (OAS) Montclair St. John’s Episcopal (OAS) St. Luke’s Episcopal (OAS) Unitarian (WEL) Montvale St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Morristown Church of the Redeemer (OAS) St. Peter’s Episcopal (OAS) Unitarian Fellowship (WEL) Mt. Arlington St. Peter’s Episcopal (OAS) New Brunswick Emanuel Lutheran (RIC) Newark Cathedral of Trinity and St. Philip (OAS) Grace Episcopal (OAS) Norwood Church of the Holy Communion (OAS) Oakland St. Alban’s Episcopal (OAS) Parsippany St. Gregory’s Episcopal (OAS) Passaic St. John’s Episcopal (OAS) Paterson St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Plainfield First Unitarian Society (WEL) Pompton Lakes Christ Church (OAS) Princeton Christ Congregation (ONA, W&A) Ramsey St. John’s Episcopal (OAS) Ridgewood Christ Episcopal (OAS) South Orange First Presbyterian & Trinity (ML) Sparta St. Mary’s Episcopal (OAS) Summit Calvary Episcopal (OAS) Christ Church (ONA) Teaneck St. Mark’s Episcopal (OAS) Tenafly Church of the Atonement (OAS) Towaco Church of the Transfiguration (OAS) Titusville UU of Washington Crossing (WEL) Union City St. John’s Episcopal (OAS) Upper Montclair St. James’ Episcopal (OAS) Verona Holy Spirit Episcopal (OAS) Wantage Good Shepherd Episcopal (OAS) NEW MEXICO Albuquerque First Unitarian (WEL) Santa Fe Christ Lutheran (RIC) First Christian Church (O&A) Unitarian Church (WEL) United Church (ONA) NEW YORK Albany Emmanuel Baptist (W&A) First Presbyterian (ML) Binghamton Centenary-Chenango Street UMC (RC) UU Congregation (WEL) Blooming Grove Blooming Grove UCC (ONA) Brookhaven Old South Haven Presbyterian (ML) Brooklyn All Souls Bethlehem (O&A, ONA) Church of Gethsemane (ML) First Unitarian Cong. Society (WEL) King’s Highway UMC (RC) Lafayette Avenue Presbyterian (ML) Park Slope UMC (RC) St. John-St. Matthew-Emmanuel Lutheran (RIC) Buffalo Westminster Presbyterian (ML) Churchville Union Congregational (ONA) 30 Open Hands Copake Craryville UMC (RC) Cortland United Community Church (W&A, ONA) Dobbs Ferry South Presbyterian (ML) Fairport Mountain Rise UCC (ONA) Gloversville First Congregational UCC (ONA) Grand Island Riverside Salem (ONA) Henrietta John Calvin Presbyterian (ML) Huntington UU Fellowship (WEL) Ithaca First Baptist (W&A) First Baptist Church (W&A) St. Paul’s UMC (RC) Marcellus First Presbyterian (ML) Merrick Community Presbyterian (ML) Mt. Kisco Mt. Kisco Presbyterian (ML) Mt. Sinai Mt. Sinai Congregational UCC (ONA) New York City Broadway UCC (ONA) Central Presbyterian (ML) Good Shepherd-Faith Presbyterian (ML) Grace & St. Paul’s Lutheran (RIC) Holy Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Jan Hus Presbyterian (ML) Judson Memorial (ONA, W&A) Madison Avenue Baptist (W&A) Metropolitan-Duane UMC (RC) Our Savior’s Atonement Lutheran (RIC) Park Avenue Christian (O&A) Riverside (ONA, W&A) Rutgers Presbyterian (ML) St. Paul & St. Andrew UMC (RC) St. Peter’s Lutheran (RIC) Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Trinity Presbyterian (ML) Unitarian Ch. of All Souls (WEL) Washington Square UMC (RC) West-Park Presbyterian (ML) Oneonta First UMC (RC) UU Society (WEL) Palisades Palisades Presbyterian (ML) Plattsburgh Plattsburgh UMC (RC) Poughkeepsie Unitarian Fellowship (WEL) Riverhead First Congregational (ONA) Rochester Calvary-St. Andrews (ML) Downtown United Presbyterian (ML) First Unitarian (WEL) Lake Avenue Baptist (W&A) Third Presbyterian (ML) Westminster Presbyterian (ML) Saratoga Springs Presb.-New Eng. Cong. (ML, ONA) Saratoga Springs UMC (RC) Sayville Sayville Congregational UCC (ONA) Schenectady Emmanuel Bapt.-Friedens UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) First Unitarian (WEL) Sea Cliff UMC of Sea Cliff (RC) Slatehill Grace UMC of Ridgebury (RC) Slingerlands Community UMC (RC) Snyder Amherst Community (ONA, O&A) Syosset The Community Church (ONA) Syracuse Plymouth Congregational UCC (ONA) Troy First United Presbyterian (ML) Utica Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Williamsville UU of Amherst (WEL) Yorktown Heights First Presbyterian (ML) NORTH CAROLINA Chapel Hill Church of the Reconciliation (ML) Olin T. Binkley Memorial Baptist (W&A) United Church (ONA) Charlotte Holy Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Durham Eno River UU Fellowship (WEL) Pilgrim UCC (ONA) Raleigh Community UCC (ONA) Pullen Memorial Baptist (W&A) Wilmington UU Fellowship (WEL) Winston-Salem Parkway UCC (ONA) UU Fellowship (WEL) NORTH DAKOTA Fargo St. Mark’s Lutheran (RIC) OHIO Brecksville United Church of Christ (ONA) Chesterland Community Church (ONA) Cincinnati Clifton UMC (RC) Mt. Auburn Presbyterian (ML) Cleveland Archwood UCC (ONA) Euclid Ave. Congregational UCC (ONA) Pilgrim Congregational UCC (ONA) Simpson UMC (RC) Trinity UCC (ONA) West Shore UU (WEL) Zion UCC (ONA) Cleveland Heights Church of the Redeemer (RC) Noble Road Presbyterian (ML) Columbus Calvary Lutheran (RIC) First English Lutheran (RIC) First Unitarian Universalist (WEL) North Congregational UCC (ONA) Redeemer Lutheran (RIC) St. Mark Lutheran (RIC) Dayton Congregation for Reconciliation (ONA) Cross Creek Community (ONA) Faith UCC (ONA) Miami Valley Unitarian Fellowship (WEL) Granville First Baptist (W&A) Lakewood Cove UMC (RC) Liberation UCC (ONA) Norton Grace UCC (ONA) Oberlin First Church in Oberlin (ONA) Shaker Heights First Unitarian of Cleveland (WEL) Toledo Central UMC (RC) St. Lucas Lutheran (RIC) OKLAHOMA Oklahoma City Church of the Open Arms, UCC (ONA) Epworth UMC (RC) Tulsa Fellowship Congregational, UCC (ONA) UM Community of Hope (RC) OREGON Ashland United Church of Christ, Cong. (ONA) Beavercreek Beavercreek UCC (ONA) Beaverton Southminster Presbyterian (ML) Bend First Presbyterian (ML) Corvallis First Congregational Church (ONA) First UMC (RC) Estacada Estacada UMC (RC) Eugene First Congregational, UCC (ONA) Unitarian of Eugene & Lane Co. (WEL) Forest Grove Forest Grove UCC (ONA) Gresham Zion UCC (ONA) Klamath Falls Klamath Falls Cong. UCC (ONA) Lake Oswego Lake Oswego UCC (ONA) Milwaukie Clackamus UCC (ONA) Milwaukie UCC (ONA) Portland Ainsworth UCC (ONA) First Congregational (ONA) First UMC (RC) Metanoia Peace Community (RC) Peace Church of the Brethren (SCN) Southwest United (ONA) St. James Lutheran (RIC) St. Mark Presbyterian (ML) University Park UMC (RC) Salem First Congregational UCC (ONA) First Unitarian Society (WEL) Morningside UMC (RC) Springfield Church of the Brethren (SCN) PENNSYLVANIA Allentown Muhlenberg College Chapel (RIC) St. John Lutheran (RIC) Devon Main Line Unitarian (WEL) Harrisburg Unitarian Church (WEL) Lansdale Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Levittown United Christian Church (O&A, ONA) Lewisburg Beaver Memorial UMC (RC) Norristown Olivet-Schwenkfelder UCC (ONA) Philadelphia Calvary UMC (RC) First UMC of Germantown (RC) Germantown Mennonite Church (SCN) Holy Communion Lutheran (RIC) Old First Reformed (ONA) St. Michael’s Lutheran (RIC) Tabernacle United (ML, ONA) Univ. Lutheran of the Incarnation (RIC) Pittsburgh First Unitarian (WEL) Sixth Presbyterian (ML) St. Andrew Lutheran (RIC) State College Univ. Baptist & Brethren (SCN, W&A) Upper Darby Christ Lutheran (RIC) Wayne Central Baptist (W&A) RHODE ISLAND East Greenwich Westminster Unitarian (WEL) Newport Newport Congregational (ONA) Pawtucket Park Place Cong. UCC (ONA) Providence Mathewson Street UMC (RC) SOUTH CAROLINA Charleston Circular Congregational (ONA) Columbia Gethsemane Lutheran (RIC) SOUTH DAKOTA Erwin Erwin UCC (ONA) TENNESSEE Chattanooga Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Knoxville Tennessee Valley UU (WEL) Memphis First Congregational UCC (ONA) Nashville Brookmeade Congregational UCC (ONA) Edgehill UMC (RC) First UU Church (WEL) Hobson UMC (RC) TEXAS Austin First English Lutheran (RIC) First UU Church (WEL) Winter 2000 31 St. Andrews Presbyterian (ML) Trinity UMC (RC) College Station Friends Congregational (ONA) Corpus Christi St. Paul UCC (ONA) Dallas Bethany Presbyterian (ML) First Unitarian (WEL) Midway Hills Christian (O&A) Northaven UMC (RC) El Paso St. Timothy Lutheran (RIC) Fort Worth St. Matthew’s Lutheran (RIC) Houston Bering Memorial UMC (RC) Comm. of the Reconciling Servant (ML) Covenant Baptist (W&A) Faith Covenant (ML, ONA) First Congregational (ONA) Grace Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) Lubbock St. John’s UMC (RC) Mesquite St. Stephen UMC (RC) Plano Dallas North Unitarian (WEL) San Antonio Spirit of Life (RIC) UTAH Salt Lake City Holladay UCC (ONA) Mount Tabor Lutheran (RIC) South Valley UU Society (WEL) VERMONT Bennington Second Congregational (ONA) Burlington Christ Presbyterian (ML) College Street Congregational (ONA) Middlebury Congregational UCC (ONA) Putney United Church (ONA) Rutland Rutland UMC (RC) Thetford First Congregational Church (ONA) VIRGINIA Alexandria Hope UCC (ONA) Mount Vernon Unitarian (WEL) Peace Lutheran (RIC) Arlington Clarendon Presbyterian (ML) Unitarian Church (WEL) Charlottesville Sojourners UCC (ONA) Harrisonburg Sanctuary UCC (ONA) Oakton Fairfax Unitarian (WEL) Roanoke Unitarian Universalist (WEL) WASHINGTON Bellevue Eastgate Congregational UCC (ONA) First Congregational, UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Bellingham First Cong. of Bellingham (ONA) Carnation Tolt Congregational, UCC (ONA) Chelan Fullness of God Lutheran (RIC) Edmonds Edmonds UU (WEL) Ellensburg First UMC (RC) Everett First Congregational (ONA) Federal Way Wayside UCC (ONA) Kirkland Holy Spirit Lutheran (RIC) Leavenworth Faith Lutheran (RIC) Marysville Evergreen UU Fellowship (WEL) Medical Lake Shalom UCC (ONA) Mountlake Terrace Terrace View Presbyterian (ML) Olympia Comm. for Interfaith Celebration (ONA) Pullman Community Congregational UCC (ONA) Reston Washington Plaza Baptist (W&A) Richland Shalom UCC (ONA) Seattle Alki Cong. UCC (ONA) Broadview Community UCC (ONA) Central Lutheran (RIC) Fauntleroy UCC (ONA) Findlay Street Christian (O&A) First Baptist (W&A) Gethsemane Lutheran (RIC) Immanuel Lutheran (RIC) Keystone Cong. UCC (ONA) Magnolia UCC (ONA) Normandy Park Cong. UCC (ONA) Pilgrim Congregational (ONA) Plymouth Congregational (ONA) Prospect UCC Cong. (ONA) Ravenna UMC (RC) Richmond Beach Cong. UCC (ONA) Trinity UMC (RC) St. Paul’s UCC (ONA) University Baptist (W&A) University Christian (O&A) University Congregational (ONA) University Temple UMC (RC) Wallingford UMC (RC) Spokane Unitarian Church (WEL) Suquamish Community Congregational (ONA) Vancouver East Vancouver UMC (RC) First Congregational UCC (ONA) White Salmon Bethel Cong., UCC (ONA) WEST VIRGINIA Wheeling UU Congregation (WEL) WISCONSIN Brown Deer Brown Deer UCC (ONA) Delavan Delavan UMC (RC) Eau Claire University Lutheran (RIC) Green Bay Union Cong. UCC (ONA) Madison Advent Lutheran (RIC) Community of Hope UCC (ONA) First Baptist (W&A) First Congregational UCC (ONA) James Reeb UU Congregation (WEL) Lake Edge Lutheran (RIC) Orchard Ridge UCC (ONA) Plymouth Congregational UCC (ONA) University UMC (RC) Milwaukee Broken Walls Christian Comm. (W&A) Cross Lutheran (RIC) Pentecost Lutheran (RIC) Plymouth UCC (ONA) Reformation Lutheran (RIC) Village Church, Lutheran (RIC) Racine Our Savior’s Lutheran (RIC) Sheboygan Wesley UMC (RC) Waukesha Maple Avenue Mennonite (SCN) CANADA ALBERTA Calgary Calgary Inter-Mennonite (SCN) Edmonton Southminster-Steinhauer United (AC) Unitarian Church (WEL) BRITISH COLUMBIA Burnaby St. Paul’s United (AC) Vancouver First United Church (AC) Trinity United (AC) Unitarian Church (WEL) MANITOBA Winnipeg Augustine United (AC) First Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Young United (AC) ONTARIO Kingston Sydenham Street United (AC) Thunder Bay Lakehead U. Fellowship (WEL) Toronto Bathurst United (AC) Bloor Street United (AC) Glen Rhodes United (AC) Metropolitan United (AC) Trinity-St. Paul’s United (AC) Waterloo Olive Branch Mennonite (SCN) Westminster United (AC) SASKATCHEWAN Regina St. James United (AC) Saskatoon King of Glory Lutheran (RIC) St. Thomas-Wesley United (AC) CAMPUS MINISTRIES Key: LCM=Lutheran Campus Ministry LSC=Lutheran Student Center LSM=Lutheran Student Movement UCM=United Campus Ministry UMSF=United Methodist Student Fellowship UNITED STATES CALIFORNIA Cal-Aggie Christian House, UC-Davis (RC) UCM, UC, Riverside (RC) UCM, USC, Los Angeles (RC) Wesley Fdn., UC-Berkeley (RC) Wesley Fdn., UC-Santa Barbara (RC) Wesley Fdn., UCLA, Los Angeles (RC) COLORADO LCM, CU-Boulder (RIC) Wesley Foundation, U. of Denver (RC) DELAWARE Wesley Fdn., UD, Newark (RC) DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UMSF, American U. (RC) ILLINOIS Agape House, U. of Illinois, Chicago (RC) Ill. Disciples Fdn., UI, Champaign (O&A) UMSF, Ill. Wesleyan, Bloomington (RC) UCM, No. Illinois, DeKalb (RC) University Christian Ministry, Northwestern, Evanston (RC) INDIANA LCM, IU, Bloomington (RIC) IOWA LCM, UI, Iowa City (RIC) Stud. Cong., Luther Coll., Decorah (RIC) KANSAS LCM, KSU, Manhattan (RIC) United Methodist CM, UK, Lawrence (RC) KENTUCKY Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary (ML Chapter) MICHIGAN Guild House, UM, Ann Arbor (O&A) Wesley Fdn., Central Mich. Univ., Mt. Pleasant (RC) Wesley Fdn., U. of Michigan, Ann Arbor (RC) MINNESOTA LCM in Minneapolis (RIC) Stud. Cong., St. Olaf, Northfield (RIC) NORTH DAKOTA Univ. Lutheran Center, NDSU, Fargo (RIC) OHIO UCM, OU, Athens (O&A, RC, W&A) OREGON LCM in Portland (RIC) Wesley Fdn., UO, Eugene (RC) PENNSYLVANIA Christ Chapel, Gettysburg College, Gettysburg (RIC) LSC-LCM, Kutztown U, Kutztown (RIC) TENNESSEE Wesley Fdn., Vanderbilt, Nashville (RC) TEXAS LCM, UT, Austin (RIC) VIRGINIA Campus Christian Community, MWC, Fredericksburg (RC, RIC) WASHINGTON The Common Ministry, Washington State U., Pullman (RC) LCM, WWU, Bellingham (RIC) 32 Open Hands Wesley Club, UW, Seattle (RC) UM Fellowship, UPS, Puget Sound (RC) WISCONSIN LCM, UW, LaCrosse (RIC) LCM, Metro Milwaukee(RIC) LCM, UW-Stout, Menomonie (RIC) Wesley Fdn., U. of Wisconsin, Madison (RC) CANADA SASKATCHEWAN LSC, LSM, Saskatoon (RIC) JUDICATORIES which have passed welcoming resolutions Conferences (ONA) California/Nevada N. Central Atlantic Central Pacific Connecticut Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota New Hampshire New York Ohio Rocky Mountain Southern California Conferences (RC) California-Nevada New York Northern Illinois Oregon-Idaho Troy Wisconsin Regions (O&A) Northern California/Nevada Synods (ML) Synod of the Northeast Synods, ELCA (RIC) Eastern North Dakota Eastern Washington-Idaho Greater Milwaukee Metro Chicago Metro New York Metro Washington, D.C. Minneapolis Area Pacifica Rocky Mountain Sierra-Pacific Southeast Michigan Southeast Pennsylvania Southern California–West St. Paul (MN) Area NATIONAL MINISTRIES which have passed welcoming resolutions Disciples Justice Action Network (O&A) Disciples Peace Fellowship (O&A) Gen’l Commission on Christian Unity & Interreligious Concerns (RC) Lutheran Student Movement—USA (RIC) Methodist Fed. for Social Action (RC) Urban Servants Corps (RIC) INTERNATIONAL MINISTRIES Baptist Peace Fellowship of North America (W&A) QTY BACK ISSUES AVAILABLE ___ Wholly Holy (Fall 1999) ___ Creative Chaos (Summer 1999) ___ Welcoming the World (Spring 1999) ___ Why Be Specific in Our Welcome? (Winter 1999) ___ A House Divided: Irreconcilable Differences? (Fall1998) ___ Bisexuality: Both/And Rather Than Either/Or (Summer 1998) ___ Treasure in Earthen Vessels—Sexual Ethics (Spring 1998) ___ We’re Welcoming, Now What? (Winter 1998) ___ From One Womb at One Table (Fall 1997) ___ Creating Sanctuary: All Youth Welcome Here! (Summer 1997) ___ Same-Sex Unions (Spring 1997) ___ Transgender Realities (Fall 1996) ___ Remembering…10th Anniversary (Summer 1995) ___ The God to Whom We Pray (Spring 1995) ___ Reclaiming Pride (Summer 1994) ___ Aging and Integrity (Fall 1992) ___ Our Spirituality: How Sexual Expression and Oppression Shape It (Summer 1992) ___ The Lesbian Spirit (Summer 1991) ___ Lesbian/Gay Reflections on Theology (Spring 1991) ___ The “Holy Union” Controversy (Fall 1990) ___ Journeys toward Recovery and Wholeness (Spring 1990) ___ Images of Family (Fall 1989) ___ The Closet Dilemma (Summer 1989) ___ Lesbian & Gay Men in the Religious Arts (Spring 1989) ___ Living and Loving with AIDS (Summer 1988) ___ Sexual Violence (Fall 1987) ___ Minorities within a Minority (Spring 1987) ___ Images of Healing (Fall 1986) ___ Our Churches’ Policies (Summer 1986) ❑ Please send me the back issues indicated ($6 each; 10+ @ $4). ❑ Send me Open Hands each quarter ($20/year; outside U.S.A. @ $25). ❑ Send the current issue to name(s) attached. ($6 each). ❑ Send Open Hands gift subscription(s) to name(s) attached. Enclosed is my payment of $ _______ OR Charge $ _____________ to my VISA MASTERCARD (Circle one) # __________________________________________ Expiration _____/_____. Name on Card ____________________________________________________ Signature ________________________________________________________ My Name ________________________________________________________ Address _________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip _____________________________________________________ Daytime Phone (______) _____________________ Local Church _____________________________________________________ Denomination _____________________________________________________ Send to: Open Hands, 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 Published by the Reconciling Congregation Program in conjunction with Affirming Congregation Programme, More Light Presbyterians, Open and Affirming Ministries, Open and Affirming Program, Reconciling in Christ, and Welcoming & Affirming Baptist programs. A Unique Resource on Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual Concerns in the Church for Christian Education • Personal Reading Research Projects • Worship Resources Ministry & Outreach 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 Open Hands Vol 15 No 3 - Liberating Word: Interpreting the Bible https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/464e94e4a4bde0c5185ca71dba644ec6.pdf 36a29c612c9f108e27633f716a8bf71f Issue An issue of a recurring publication. Volume Number The volume number of the issue 15 Issue Number The number of the issue (within a volume) 4 Publication Year The year the issue was published 2000 Publication Date The date the issue was published Spring Text Any textual data included in the document 2 Open Hands Vol. 15 No. 4 Spring 2000 Shaping an Inclusive Church Affirming Congregation Programme More Light Presbyterians Open & Affirming Ministries Open and Affirming Program Reconciling Congregation Program Reconciling in Christ Program Welcoming & Affirming Baptists Interim Executive Publisher Marilyn Alexander Editor Chris Glaser Designer In Print—Jan Graves Marketing Manager Jacki Belile Editorial Advisory Committee Vaughn Beckman, O&A Bill Capel, MLP Ann Marie Coleman, ONA Chris Copeland, W&A Bobbi Hargleroad, MLP Tom Harshman, O&A Alyson Huntly, ACP Bonnie Kelly, ACP Susan Laurie, RCP Samuel E. Loliger, ONA Ruth Moerdyk, SCN Caroline Presnell, RCP Paul Santillán, RCP Julie Sevig, RIC Kelly Sprinkle, W&A Kathy Stayton, W&A Margarita Suaréz, ONA Judith Hoch Wray, O&A Stuart Wright, RIC and Program Coordinators Open Hands is the quarterly magazine of the welcoming movement, a consortium of programs that support individuals and congregations in efforts to welcome lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, and transgenders in all areas of church life. Open Hands was founded and is published by the Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (United Methodist), in cooperation with the six ecumenical partners listed above. Each program is a national network of local congregations and ministries that publicly affirm their welcome of LGBT people, their families and friends. These seven programs, along with Supportive Congregations (Brethren/Mennonite [www.webcom. com/bmc], Oasis Congregations (Episcopal), Welcoming Congregations (Unitarian Universalist), and INCLUSIVE Congregations (United Kingdom)—offer hope that the church can be a more inclusive community. Subscription is $20 for four issues ($25 outside the U.S.). Single copies and back issues are $6; quantities of 10 or more, $4 each. Subscriptions, requests for advertising rates, and other business correspondence should be sent to: Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 www.rcp.org/openhands/index.html Member, The Associated Church Press © 2000 Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. Open Hands is a registered trademark. ISSN 0888-8833 Printed on recycled paper. For All the Saints The Welcoming Movement, From Sodom to Salvation The Stories of Welcoming Programs In the Beginning, Sodom ......................................................................4 MORE LIGHT PRESBYTERIANS A Ministry and Movement of Reconciliation ......................................8 RECONCILING CONGREGATION PROGRAM Turning the Tables ...............................................................................12 OPEN AND AFFIRMING PROGRAM Revisiting Sodom.................................................................................14 RECONCILING IN CHRIST PROGRAM GLAD to Go Into God’s House ...........................................................18 OPEN & AFFIRMING MINISTRIES Baptized Into One Family ...................................................................20 WELCOMING & AFFIRMING BAPTISTS Salvation is Salvation ..........................................................................21 AFFIRMING CONGREGATION PROGRAMME Dancing At the Walls of Injustice .......................................................24 SUPPORTIVE CONGREGATIONS NETWORK Being Inclusive as God Is ....................................................................25 INCLUSIVE CONGREGATIONS Ministries of Welcome ........................................................................26 A TIMELINE OF SIGNIFICANT BEGINNINGS MINISTRIES Outreach Reconciling Congregations—Another View ............................27 JOHN BALLEW The founder of the Lutheran program questions if being welcoming is enough. Welcoming Process Saved by Grace ..........................................................................28 JACKI BELILE A Baptist church shows the way things can be when a church is welcoming and affirming. SUSTAINING THE SPIRIT Shining Like the Sun—A Sanctoral Cycle for ALL the Saints ............30 DAVID KERR PARK A more inclusive church calendar of saints and occasions. Spring 2000 3 Publisher Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (UMC) Marilyn Alexander, Interim Coordinator 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 773/736-5526 www.rcp.org Ecumenical Partners Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada) Ron Coughlin, Coordinator P.O. Box 333, Station Q, Toronto, Ontario CANADA M4T 2M5 416/466-1489 acpucc@aol.com More Light Presbyterians (PCUSA) Michael J. Adee, Coordinator 369 Montezuma Ave. PMB #447 Santa Fe, NM 87501-2626 505/820-7082 www.mlp.org Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ) John Wade Payne, Interim Coordinator P.O. Box 44400, Indianapolis, IN 46244 941/728-8833 www.sacredplaces.com/glad Open and Affirming Program (UCC) Ann B. Day, Coordinator P.O. Box 403, Holden, MA 01520 508/856-9316 www.coalition.simplenet.com Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran) Bob Gibeling, Coordinator 2466 Sharondale Drive, Atlanta, GA 30305 404/266-9615 www.lcna.org Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (ABC/USA) Brenda J. Moulton, Coordinator P.O. Box 2596, Attleboro Falls, MA 02763 508/226-1945 users.aol.com/wabaptists Call for articles, children’s artwork, and columns for Open Hands Winter 2001 WHAT ABOUT US KIDS? Affirming and Welcoming Children and Youth Theme Section: A gay uncle, a lesbian mom, emerging sexual identity, unwelcoming churches, an antigay putdown at school, societal controversy over same-gender marital rights—one way or another children and youth inside and outside of our congregations are dealing with human sexuality and homosexuality in particular. How do we reach out to them with age-appropriate information about matters of faith and homosexuality? How do we provide support for them as they discover the diversity of human sexuality? What do they have to teach us? We are looking for articles and relevant artwork from children and youth, as well as from parents (biological, adoptive, foster, etc.) and other family members of traditional and nontraditional families, teachers, Christian education directors, and anyone who can offer pertinent experience and insight. 1000-2500 words per article. Ministries Section: Columns may include: Welcoming Process, Connections (with other justice issues), Worship, Spirituality, Outreach, Leadership, Health, Youth, Campus, Children, and Parents. These brief articles may or may not have to do with the theme of the issue. 750-1000 words. Contact with ideas by August 1, 2000 Manuscript deadline: September 30, 2000 Chris Glaser, Phone/Fax 404/622-4222 or e-mail at ChrsGlaser@aol.com 991 Berne St. SE, Atlanta, GA 30316-1859 USA Next Issue: THE gOD OF VIOLENCE 15th ANNIVERSARY ISSUE The Nativity and Naíveté of Open Hands…16 Memories from Founders Mark Bowman and Beth Richardson Timelines of Prehistory and History of Open Hands “Whoever welcomes you welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes the one who sent me. Whoever welcomes a prophet in the name of a prophet will receive a prophet’s reward; and whoever welcomes a righteous person in the name of a righteous person will receive the reward of the righteous; and whoever gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones in the name of a disciple— truly I tell you, none of these will lose their reward.” Jesus in Matthew 10:40-42 4 Open Hands From the Shadows, More Light… When Bill Silver became the first openly-gay, happily-homosexual candidate for the ministry in the former United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. in 1976, that denomination didn’t know what to do with him. The issue was not addressed in the Book of Order, the part of its constitution that addresses qualifications for ordained office. The 1970 General Assembly (the denomination’s annual legislative body) had added an antigay addendum to a comprehensive Sexuality and the Human Community report, even while taking a stand for gay civil rights, and the 1974 G.A. had rejected a report of the Presbyterian Gay Caucus, organized by the Rev. David Bailey Sindt of Chicago. So a timid and fearful Presbytery of New York City, where Bill Silver was “under care” as a candidate for the ministry, overtured (Presbyterian for “requested”) the general assembly for “definitive guidance” on this matter. The 1976 General Assembly didn’t know what to do either, so they set up a task force to study homosexuality, which included only one openly-gay member, Chris Glaser, himself an openly gay candidate for ordination. Two years later, the majority of that task force declared that homosexuality, per se, was no bar to ordination to the offices of the Presbyterian Church: deacon, elder, and minister. “May a self-affirming, practicing homosexual Christian be ordained? We believe so, if the person manifests such gifts as are required for ordination. … Spiritual maturity or the absence thereof is an attribute pertaining not to any class of people but only to individual persons. Thus, it must be distinctively identified and separately evaluated in each individual candidate for ordination as the church, led by the Spirit and guided by God’s Word, seeks to discern and verify that particular candidate’s gifts for ministry.” But this recommendation was entirely too much for the 1978 General Assembly. Instead they declared homosexuality to be sin—“We conclude that homosexuality is not God’s In the Beginning, Sodom… The great irony is that a scripture oft-used to condemn lesbian, gay, bisexual, and even transgendered people is the story of Sodom, which is a story of inhospitality rather than sexuality. Lot is the welcoming congregation, who faces the wrath of his denomination by offering hospitality to two strangers, not just “to be nice” but adamantly insisting they enjoy the sanctuary he opens to them rather than spend the night in the public square, where they are likely to be bashed by Sodom’s citizens. One rabbinical tradition claims Sodom’s sin was not simply its inhospitality— wanting to humiliate the strangers by gang rape—but that Sodom had codified its inhospitality by making it illegal by city polity and amendments to the city’s Book of Order or Book of Discipline for those like Lot to welcome lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people, let alone be affirming of their ministries and marriages. Providentially for our modern-day Sodom, the church, which has too often Sodified its inhospitality, there are, within its boundaries, ten righteous persons, or welcoming movements, to save it from destruction and offer more light rather than brimstone. Seven of them formally advise and financially support this magazine. Two of them informally advise it. All of them want their churches to welcome with Open Hands lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender souls as well as their families, friends, and advocates. Several of them do their work with the encouragement and blessings of their denominations. But most of them do their pastoral work while serving as prophets to their denominations, risking the vocational and ecclesiastical lives of their members in the face of a “brood of vipers” who would figuratively kill them between the sanctuary they offer to LGBT people and the altar of a gracious and reconciling God (Matthew 24:33, 35). One such welcoming program, More Light Presbyterians, became the first of these righteous programs out of necessity. Spring 2000 5 wish for humanity”— and that therefore, “unrepentant homosexual practice does not accord with the requirements for ordination.” These conclusions were based not on fact or knowledge, but belief: “…it appears that what is really important is not what homosexuality is but what we believe about it.” Even the dramatic, poignant, and eloquent coming out of lesbian Princeton Seminary Advisory Delegate Sandra Brawders on the floor of the Assembly could not dissuade them. Yet the denomination again called for the end of criminalization, discrimination, and stereotyping in the public sector. Spiritual Apartheid For the first time since women were finally accepted as full participants and members, this new policy, still in effect, created two classes of members, with very different rules for the two classes—a kind of ecclesiastical apartheid. “Uncle Tom” gays and lesbians can gain access to the majority rules only if they hide their status (pass) or if they repudiate their status (“repent”) and promise life-long celibacy or choose to enter into a sanctioned heterosexual relationship. Happy, openly lesbian and gay Presbyterians, especially those in relationships, must abide by a set of separate laws, designed only for them. As in the South African model of political apartheid, this ecclesiastical apartheid has led in recent years, with one court decision after another, to more and more detailed separate and unequal rules: gay and lesbian Presbyterians may not be ordained, but if they are (at least as deacons), their ordinations cannot be annulled; gay and lesbian Presbyterian ministers who were ordained prior to 1978 may keep their ordinations, but they may not receive calls for service; fully qualified candidates for ministry cannot be so certified if they are openly lesbian and gay, unless they promise celibacy; congregations, presbyteries, and synods may make “welcoming” statements advocating full membership and participation for lesbian and gay Presbyterians, but they may not promise to act on them. The Nativity of the Welcoming Movement The More Light Church movement began soon after the close of the 1978 General Assembly. Several congregations adopted policies explicitly welcoming lesbian and gay members and guaranteeing their full participation, including ordination to offices of deacon and elder if elected by the congregation and found qualified by the session. These churches became known as “More Light” churches because the 1976 Assembly, in establishing its homosexuality task force, had quoted Pastor John Robinson’s advice to the Pilgrims of 1620 in search of religious freedom: “God hath yet more light to break forth from [God’s] word.” As editor, Chris Glaser had earlier renamed the newsletter of Presbyterians for Lesbian & Gay Concerns More Light. The More Light movement spawned similar movements in the United Methodist Church (Reconciling Congregations), the Evangelical Lutheran Church (Reconciling in Christ Congregations), and the United Church of Christ (Open and Affirming Congregations). Later, the movement spread to additional denominations, such as (in alphabetical order) the American Baptist Churches (Welcoming & Affirming), Brethren and Mennonite churches (Supportive Congregations Network), the Christian Church, Disciples of Christ (Open & Affirming), the Episcopal Church (Oasis), the United Church of Canada (Affirming), and the Unitarian Universalist Association (Welcoming). (The Society of Friends [Quakers] have been welcoming without a formal program.) Last year, a consortium of Roman Catholic, Church of England, and United Reformed Church people in the- United Kingdom ecumenically initiated an- INCLUSIVE Congregations movement. But there is a big difference between the More Light Churches in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) and their counterparts in other denominations. In none of these other denominations is it illegal, under church law, to permit full participation by lesbian and gay Christians at the congregational level in such 6 Open Hands roles as member of a governing council or in special ministries to those in need. But it is illegal under Presbyterian law, which prohibits the ordination of any open, self-affirming, “non-repentant” homosexual as deacon or elder by the session of a local congregation. Unlike most other denominations, local leaders in the Presbyterian Church—deacons and elders— are ordained under the same standards (apart from education and training) as ministers. This makes the apartheid policies of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) the most restrictive of any major mainline denomination. Law vs. Grace Here we speak of legalities, and the Presbyterian Church is a very “legalistic” church, with a well developed system of law and of courts to handle legal challenges and complaints. The years 1984 and 1985 saw the first national ecclesiastical court case in the Presbyterian Church against a More Light Church. Several congregations in the Presbytery of Western New York brought Westminster Church of Buffalo to trial over their More Light Statement, which promised full participation, including ordination as deacons and elders, to lesbian and gay members. Westminster hadn’t done anything but make a statement! The complaining churches were not satisfied by the “discipline” offered by the presbytery, so they appealed to the Synod of the Northeast. The Synod Permanent Judicial Commission (PJC) ruled that the ban on ordination of lesbian and gay Christians was clearly unconstitutional: “By its action in 1978, the General Assembly violated the constitutional power of each congregation to control the selection of its own officers for ordination. The Church is committed to inclusiveness, and segments of the membership cannot be excluded except by constitutional amendment” to the Book of Order (a foreshadowing of things to come). In February of 1985, the Permanent Judicial Commission of the General Assembly reversed this lower level decision, declaring the “definitive guidance” of 1978 to be the law of the church and binding on every session and presbytery. All the male members of that commission except one voted to take away from lesbian and gay Christians the rights guaranteed to all members in the Church’s constitution. All the female commissioners except one voted to uphold the rights of lesbian and gay members. Since the commission was heavily dominated by males, the traditional male fear, ignorance, and hatred of homosexual persons easily prevailed. A minority report by five dissenting members declared: “This is the kind of discriminatory treatment we have been taught to abhor.” “The decision…contravenes constitutional guarantees related to inclusiveness… : ‘No persons shall be denied membership because of race, ethnic origins, worldly condition, or any other reason not related to profession of faith.’” “Such denial of access to church office is in direct opposition to an unequivocal provision of the current Book of Order, which states: ‘An active member is entitled to all the rights and privileges of the church, including the right… to vote and hold office.’” This serious challenge to the very existence of More Light congregations led to the first More Light Churches conference in 1985, called and hosted by the West Hollywood Presbyterian Church and its ministry of reconciliation between the church and the LGBT community, the Lazarus Project, which had been founded in 1977. This gathering resulted in a national network of congregations that met annually and published a newsletter. Hiding More Light Under a Judicial Basket Ecclesiastical court cases attacking individuals, More Light congregations, and supportive presbyteries began popping up all over the church after the rejection of another gay-positive General Assembly report in 1991, this time on the broader concern of human sexuality. Up to this time, the only court case to reach the national level and to receive national attention was the earlier challenge to the More Light congregation in Buffalo, New York. Now, in quick succession, there were challenges against St. Luke Presbyterian Church in the Twin Cities Area Presbytery and Mt. Auburn Presbyterian Church in Cincinnati Presbytery simply for declaring themselves “More Light.” St. Luke was barred from ordaining a gay elder who had been elected and certified eligible, so the position was kept vacant and he served on the session as a “non”-elder. Mt. Auburn not only declared “More Light,” but preceded to ordain a gay elder. Another complaint was lodged against Central Presbyterian Church in Eugene, Oregon, for installing a previously-ordained gay deacon and ordaining a lesbian deacon. The court of the Presbytery of the Cascades ruled the ordinations “irregular” but refused to annul them as demanded by Hope [sic!] Presbyterian Church of Portland, Oregon. The court of the Synod of the Pacific ruled that Spring 2000 7 there was no constitutional or biblical basis for the ban on the ordination of gay and lesbian Presbyterians and that the Presbytery was out of order in ruling the ordinations “irregular.” On October 31, 1993, the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission— the highest court— split the difference, saying, yes, the ordinations were “irregular,” but, no, they did not constitute “a rebellion against the Word and will of God,” and no, they should not (could not?) be annulled. The Trouble With Happy Lesbians The most famous of the recent court cases involved Lisa Larges and the Rev. Jane Adams Spahr. Larges, a lesbian seminarian, had been certified by the Presbytery of Twin Cities Area as ready for a call and ordination. The presbytery reasoned that the ban was on ordination, not on certifying that all requirements had been met. Spahr, ordained to the ministry in 1974 before she realized she was lesbian, had been called to serve as co-pastor of the Downtown United Presbyterian Church in Rochester, New York. She was a minister member in good standing of the Presbytery of the Redwoods, and for the past ten years had been founding director of The Ministry of Light (now Spectrum), an outreach and support ministry with lesbian, gay and bisexual people, their families, and friends in Marin County, California. Since she had been ordained prior to the 1978 ban, she was protected, most people believed, by the “grandparent” clause of that policy (Paragraph 14) which declared that “these actions shall not be used to affect negatively the ordination rights of any United Presbyterian deacon, elder, or minister who has been ordained prior to this date.” The PJC of the General Assembly ruled, in the case of Larges, that an “unrepentant” lesbian (or gay) person had no right to certification, since it was impossible for them to meet the requirements for ordination, which demanded repentance and celibacy of gay and lesbian Presbyterians. In the case of Spahr, the PJC ruled that no call was valid for an “unrepentant” non-celibate lesbian (or gay) person, and that the famous “grandparent clause” of the 1978 policy was null and void, at least in the clear sense that most people understood it. Instead, its scope was sharply narrowed to “acts” committed prior to 1978: “Paragraph 14…provides protection from the removal of ordination for homosexual practices which occurred prior to its adoption. Paragraph 14 provides amnesty for past acts but not license for present or future acts.” The sin of both these candidates was that both were happily and proudly lesbian. Both Larges and Spahr initiated their own ministries to tell our stories and serve as evangelists to the church, Witness for Reconciliation and That All May Freely Serve. In honor of all those denied their ministries, Martha Juillerat and Tammy Lindahl began the Shower of Stoles Project, a collection of stoles representing LGBT people who have served, are serving, or wished to serve the church in ordained ministry. Chastity and Fidelity Recognizing in the votes on LGBT issues at General Assembly and its Permanent Judicial Commission shifts in our favor, reactionary forces in the church chose the strategy of codifying in the Book of Order the denomination’s anti-gay posture in 1996. The so-called Amendment B, ratified by a simple majority of presbyteries in 1997, limited ordination to those who practiced “chastity in singleness” and “fidelity in marriage between a man and a woman.” Amendment A, passed by the following assembly in an attempt to soften the hardcore stance, failed to be ratified. Already, Amendment B has led to complicated legal battles. It is expected to choke the church courts as protestors to the amendment “selfaccuse,” since the amendment also rejects ordination of those guilty of sins listed in the Confessions of the church, which include working on Sunday, gluttony, and displaying pictures of Jesus. In the struggle over these amendments, yet another powerful network of churches has formed called The Covenant Network, which wants to reclaim the church from the far right and remove these new requirements of ordination. Though some are also More Light churches, most are churches which claim to represent the moderate middle of the church, reluctant to break church law, but resistant to those who hold the denomination captive to an intolerant agenda of injustice. In 1999, Presbyterians for Lesbian & Gay Concerns and the More Light Churches Network merged, hiring a full-time “field coordinator” for the first time to organize members and member churches at the grass roots, Michael Adee. 8 Open Hands Gay and lesbian United Methodists began to identify themselves about the same time “the gay issue” came into the consciousness of the broader U.S. culture. Among them were clergy like Earnest Reaugh of upstate New York, Richard Huskey of Minnesota, and Texan Gene Leggett. Coming out cost Huskey and Leggett their annual conference relationships. Reaugh and Leggett, among others, came to Atlanta in the spring of 1972 to make their witness at a General Conference that would be giving structure to the merged United Methodist Church and enacting a statement of Social Principles drafted to say: Homosexuals no less than heterosexuals are persons of sacred worth, who need the ministry and guidance of the church in their struggles for human fulfillment, as well as the spiritual and emotional care of a fellowship which enables reconciling relationships with God, with others and with self. Further we insist that all persons are entitled to have their human and civil rights ensured. The Atlanta gathering had many of the signs of a progressive event. Delegations of youth, young adults, and seminary students were given voice, though they would complain bitterly about the difficulty of getting recognized from their places in the back rows. Leggett, Reaugh, and their small group were not the only gays or lesbians present. Others who would become leaders in what eventually became Affirmation: United Methodists for Lesbian/ Gay Concerns were there in the seminarian, youth, and young adult caucuses. Conservative leadership from the southeast and south central jurisdictions of the church were unable to defeat the creation of commissions addressing religion and race and the status and role of women. But, aided by parliamentary process “errors” of presiding Texas bishop Eugene Slater, they were able to add a negative clause to the draft statement about homosexuality: “…though we do not condone the practice of homosexuality and consider this practice incompatible with Christian teaching.” The 1972 Social Principles statement also said, “We do not recommend marriage between two persons of the same sex.” Questioning Motives While the General Conference held a negative posture toward LGBT people for at least the ensuing generation, a collective of lesbians and a separate group of gay men were at work on the last two issues of motive magazine. Founded in 1941 by the Methodist Student Movement, motive had been published for thirty years by the denomination’s Board of Education. According to an editorial in the lesbian/feminist issue, “radical dissension within limits had been tolerated with a few slaps on the wrist” until “the church fathers really squirmed” following a special issue on women in the spring of 1969. Because the magazine could not survive without church funding, the staff and editorial board closed the magazine. A new organization, MOTIVE, Inc., published the last two issues using its remaining resources. There was little directly church-related content in the gay and lesbian issues of motive. The writers reflected a critique of contemporary culture that went beyond sexual liberation to address racism, classism and misogyny. For example, in a manifesto entitled “What Every Lesbian Should Know,” Rita Mae Brown and Charlotte Bunch wrote that the lesbian “has little vested interest in maintaining the present political system since all of its institutions—church, state, media, health, schools— work to keep her down.” Still, many of those who became early leaders in United Methodism’s Reconciling movement might have written, as did a former seminarian in the gay men’s issue: Luckily for me, a year of radical organizing in a working class neighborhood in Chicago put me in touch with my roots and forced me to be honest with A Ministry and Movement of Reconciliation “Do not press me to leave you…your God shall be my God.” Ruth proclaimed to Naomi out of love and loyalty. The modern-day Ruths are feminists, racial minorities, and LGBT people and our allies who say this to our denominations no matter how male and patriarchal and white and straight and gendered they think they want to be! The psalmist has the right vision of God’s community: “You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies…and I shall dwell in the house of God my whole life long.” Henri Nouwen used to quip that community was inevitably the place where the person you’d least like to be with always lives! How can our opposition, as wealthy and vicious and uncompromising as they are, remove us from God’s house and our place at God’s table? It’s time for them to “get over it,” just as we have had to coexist with those who question our sacred worth. A true test of Christ’s reconciling Spirit is to identify who’s trying to kick who out of the church. And look who’s the vulnerable party as we offer ourselves as “living sacrifices” to be reconciling! Spring 2000 9 myself. It gave me the courage I needed to walk into a GLF [Gay Liberation Front] meeting (half-drunk but making it!) in August 1970. “Hello, my name is Dan, and this is my first time here and I’m scared.” There were many of us there for the first time. Very much like myself. Alone. Frightened. But we’d had enough. The United Methodist Gay Caucus Following the 1972 General Conference, “had enough,” already described the feelings of some gay and lesbian United Methodists. They began organizing themselves, in the San Francisco Bay Area, Kansas City, Texas, and elsewhere. In July of 1975, Wheadon UMC in Evanston, IL, hosted the organizing meeting of the United Methodist Gay Caucus (UMGC). In addition to Leggett, Reaugh and Huskey, the key leaders included Peggy Harmon (Dallas), Keith Spare (Kansas City), and Steve Webster (Madison, WI), who had been denied admission to Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary because of his sexual orientation. Dick Cash, a student at Northwestern University who was an active youth/young adult member of several United Methodist agency boards, was a key behindthe- scenes organizer and strategist. To the horror of some denominational leaders, they received a sympathetic hearing from the United Methodist Council on Youth Ministries (UMCYM), among other official bodies. By early the next year, UMGC had linked with caucuses in the Bay Area and southern California and was planning for a presence at the 1976 General Conference in Portland. Constraint on “Condemn,” but Prohibition of “Promote” In the spring of 1975, with a fury echoed 25 years later, conservatives in the denomination were whispering about potential schism if the Discipline were to be changed. The United Methodist Reporter published a series of articles by the Rev. Harvey Chinn, then pastor of Faith United Methodist Church in Sacramento, California. Relying on a handful of medical psychoanalysts whose views had already been repudiated by the American Psychiatric Association, Chinn promoted the mental illness view of homosexuality as one basis for maintaining the “incompatibility” clause. The result was a barrage of both affirmative and negative legislation in 1976. That conference resisted an effort to toughen the language “we do not condone the practice of homosexuality” to “we condemn the practice….” It also softened the position about marriage to a statement saying that relationships between persons of the same sex would not be recognized as marriage. Delegates struggled through considerable parliamentary confusion to approve a footnote intended to restrict ordination of gays and lesbians. A human sexuality study was defeated, and the famous ban on the use of general church funds “to promote the acceptance of homosexuality” was imposed. Keith Spare, speaking to the conference on behalf of UMGC prior to debate about the Social Principles statement, called on the body to act in a way that would “reflect a willingness of our church to continue in dialogue.” In response, professor Albert Outler of Perkins School of Theology, argued against a proposed explicit welcome of “all persons regardless of sexual orientation into the fellowship and membership of the United Methodist Church.” He attacked GLBT people for their promiscuity (After all, he said, “we stipulate against homosexual marriage.”) In addition, he held that such a welcome would constitute an “irreversible disaster in the United Methodist Church” of “antinomian” support for “moral decadence.” The welcoming language was defeated by a wide margin. Despite the regrettable legislation, UMGC joined with the Women’s Caucus, the Young Adult Caucus, and the Methodist Federation for Social Action to offer a variety of more userfriendly experiences at the conference. Among these was a worship service at which Bishop Jesse DeWitt, Theressa Hoover, Jeanne Audrey Powers, and Hazel Decker were speakers. One attendee, an executive of a denominational agency, wrote to organizers to thank them for “the single most uplifting experience of this General Conference.” Anti-Gay Backlash Officially sanctioned church discrimination against GLBT people worsened following the 1976 conference. Garrett seminary denied graduation to two gay students solely because of their sexual orientation. Support for the UM Council on Youth Ministries declined because officials saw it as subversive. Nevertheless, the UM Gay Caucus remained strong, hosting at least a hundred participants in a spring 1978 meeting at Broadway Church in Chicago, and renaming itself Affirmation: United Methodists for Lesbian/Gay Concerns. In the Fall of 10 Open Hands that year Affirmation adopted a plan to support two staff people at subsistence level to travel the church until the 1980 General Conference. It was perhaps the most ambitious effort the group has ever undertaken, and in many ways the most important in terms of the larger reconciling movement. Peggy Harmon and Michael Collins traveled around the country through those months. Their efforts spawned local groups of Affirmation across the country and enabled many new leaders to emerge. In April of 1979, deaconess Joan Clark was fired by the Women’s Division of the Board of Global Ministries after seven years working for the agency because she affirmed her lesbian identity in the report of her study leave. As Joan wrote in the June 11, 1979, issue of Christianity and Crisis, the event gave the Women’s Division an opportunity to feel “the impact of what happens to lesbian/gay persons when well-meaning folks who want survival at any price refuse to speak out for justice.” This event, which enabled Joan Clark to become a more visible strategic leader, helped catalyze an even greater presence by Affirmation and other progressive groups in the church at the General Conference of 1980, yet the final result was no change for better or worse. The impact on those in Affirmation and elsewhere who had believed in the likelihood of positive change was devastating. Perhaps it was no coincidence that the next two meetings of Affirmation nearly brought an end to the national organization. Our Divisions Parallel the Church’s A meeting in Texas surfaced an ideological difference between two groups of men. On one side were those— mostly with seminary backgrounds and some kind of experience at the church’s national level—who did a radical social analysis focusing on the systemic issues of race, class, and (to a lesser degree) gender. On the other side were those—mostly in the hosting group and/or newcomers to national church “politics” and to Affirmation—whose social analysis was seen as inadequate by the first group. The conflict surfaced during a lavish party that included a drag act and was held in the home of a wealthy gay man. The latter group saw themselves as simply offering good old-fashioned Texas hospitality and considered the others to be boors who did not observe basic conventions of polite society. Gender-based conflict erupted at a meeting the following spring, ostensibly because a group of gay men wanted to leave the site 40 miles from San Francisco to go to bars in The City. Affirmation has in some senses never recovered from the loss of participants such as Joan Clark and Peggy Harmon that followed the painful breach. Attendance at Affirmation’s next national meeting, in the Fall of 1981, was the lowest it had been since well before the 1980 General Conference. This series of events prompted for some a serious reconsideration of the role of Affirmation, as shown in a journal note Michael Collins wrote in 1982: All in all, we have reflected the same style and struggles as the UMC as a whole: a floundering and unsure leadership, a scatteredness in focus, soulsearching, anger, and finally a commitment to continue wandering, journeying on—with the hope that it will get much better but a fear that what is ahead may be nothing but another dose of the same. Following the 1980 General Conference and subsequent events in Affirmation, Michael became increasingly critical of himself and others. He questioned the integrity of closeted church leaders who looked for sexual adventures with people of their own gender but were silent or lukewarm when it came to advocacy for lesbian and gay concerns. He did not understand staff members at the General Board of Global Ministries who advocated strongly for organized labor and racial justice outside the church but worked to defeat union organizing among clerical workers at the Board of Global Ministries, who were mostly people of color. Thus it is not surprising that he would assess Affirmation’s work, and therefore his own ministry of ten years, all in the same breath. The assessment reminded Michael that Affirmation should not judge its success solely or even primarily on legislative results at a General Conference. He called on the group to recognize the much greater value of its role as a broader ministry to a church struggling to be true to its own calling, an element that had already been explicit in the early mission statement of the UMGC. He also urged that organizing prior to the 1984 General Conference include a focus on what Affirmation would do after that conference so that what he saw as the inevitable legislative defeats would not once again be so devastating to the group. The illness that claimed Michael’s life in October of 1984 soon made it impossible for him to travel and participate in the Spring 2000 11 work of Affirmation. Nevertheless these two key perspectives informed the development of the Reconciling Congregation program and its eventual announcement at the Baltimore General Conference on the day after the delegates voted an explicit prohibition of the ordination or appointment of “self-avowed practicing homosexuals.” Reconciling Work Begins On the day after that vote, members of Affirmation gathered outside the conference center to pass out brochures to delegates and visitors inviting their congregations to become “reconciling.” Within two weeks two congregations had voted to become Reconciling Congregations. Symbolically, they spanned the country: Washington Square United Methodist Church in New York City and Wesley United Methodist Church in Fresno, California. What preceded the invitation and response was a decision at the September 1982 meeting of Affirmation to develop “a program in which local churches will declare their support for the concerns of lesbians and gay men.” Mark Bowman, D. J. Porter, and Perry Wiggins agreed to develop a plan. The model of the Presbyterian More Light Program begun in 1978 in which a local church adopted a statement affirming lesbians and gay men and inviting their full participation in the life of the local church was adapted for United Methodist congregations. Discussion about the need for “reconciliation” between the United Methodist Church and lesbians/ gay men at a November 1982 meeting of Affirmation’s General Conference Task Force inspired the name “Reconciling Churches,” later modified to “Reconciling Congregations” in order to emphasize that this will be a local church network. (The second choice was “Self-Avowed, Practicing Churches”!) The three appointed planners presented a design for the program to the September 1983 Affirmation meeting that was remarkably similar to what the program has become. Beth Richardson and Mark Bowman served as volunteer co-coordinators in the developmental state of the Reconciling Congregation Program (RCP), eventually conducting training sessions for “RC Enablers” and Reconciling Congregations. In 1985, Richardson and Bowman began a quarterly magazine, Manna for the Journey, as a resource for the Reconciling Congregation movement. Renamed Open Hands, and celebrating its fifteenth year, it now serves as an ecumenical resource to the entire welcoming movement within denominations in Canada and the United States. By March 1987, twenty-two churches had become Reconciling Congregations. They sent 125 representatives to a nationwide convocation in Chicago for a weekend of worship, training, sharing, and celebration. Additional gatherings followed. By July 1990, the Reconciling Congregation Program became a nonprofit organization with its own board of directors, subsequently establishing a national office in Chicago in 1992 with Mark Bowman as full-time coordinator, a position he held until 1999. Marilyn Alexander, co-author of We Were Baptized Too, now serves as interim coordinator. United Methodist church courts have recently ruled against churches and conferences using designations such as “Reconciling.” It is yet unknown what effect, if any, this will have on the program. Despite a Homosexuality Study Report received by the UMC’s General Conference in 1992, the 1992 and 1996 gatherings have not reversed the denomination’s unwelcoming policies, and the latter added a ban on samegender unions to the Social Principles, leading to recent church trials of clergy who perform them. “Be Reconciling…” What lessons are there for our welcoming work from the United Methodist experience to date? 1. A solid theological foundation for the work is not simply an “option.” The founders and early leaders of Affirmation sought to articulate a broadly based theology that expressed their understanding of the Gospel and of the church beyond biblical and theological “justification” for homosexuality and “homosexual practice.” Among the important contributions of Peggy Harmon, apart from her work as a field organizer prior to the 1980 General Conference, was her role as a co-convener (with Richard Huskey) of the UMGC’s task force on theology. The caucus saw itself also as a community of faith whose self-understanding was driven not by the sexual orientation of its members but by their faith commitments. They affirmed in early conversations and documents their intention to live their lives as lesbian and gay people in the context of an underlying commitment to Christian discipleship, not the reverse. 12 Open Hands nection between their feminist understandings and issues related to gay and lesbian people in the church. It is also true that the welcoming movement has faced the challenge of racism, with a limited expression of solidarity with people of color. Fortunately for the Reconciling movement, the continuing leadership in the arena of homophobia and heterosexism by African- Americans like the Rev. Gil Caldwell in New Haven, Connecticut has not been contingent on being recognized and thanked for it. The whole welcoming movement should increase its attention to the pervasive impact of racism. 4. The welcoming movement should include and benefit from the diversities of a faith community incorporating the multiple “styles” people bring to their lives, as well as various leadership styles and attitudes toward issues. Among the denominations that have welcoming groups, the United Methodist Church may well be the most heterogeneous. The people of Affirmation used to enjoy dancing and prancing around the room while singing “All God’s children got a place in the choir.” The Reconciling Congregation Program has been better than Affirmation in bridging these gaps, but there is work to be done all around. The Open and Affirming program in the United Church of Christ (UCC) began at the 1983 General Synod, which also voted to address institutional homophobia, support nontraditional as well as traditional families, encourage AIDS ministries, and include openly gay, lesbian, and bisexual members of Church & Ministry Committees. The Rev. Raymond Bradley, Jr. introduced a resolution urging local churches to welcome gay and lesbian people. This resolution was debated and sent to the Executive Council for referral to national bodies of the denomination for study and further action. Several months later, members of the (then-named) United Church Coalition for Lesbian/Gay Concerns in Massachusetts gathered to revise the 1983 resolution. Their document was submitted to the Massachusetts Conference Annual Meeting, which adopted it in June 1984 and forwarded it for consideration at the General Synod in 1985. 2. With a theological foundation, the work of system and issue advocacy is seen as a ministry, not merely a political agenda. The call to the organizing meeting of UMGC included a specific reference to going “beyond political organizing to become a group in mission.” The mission, like all effective ministry, was to be based on an understanding of the divinely-gifted nature of the prodigal church, recalling the institution to itself, so to speak, not manipulating it into something unrecognizable to its Creator. This does not mean that political understandings and tactics were or are “unclean” tools that should not be used. It means rather that they should be evaluated and used in light of the Gospel mandates. There are profound implications in this assertion, for example, regarding the way opponents should be characterized or treated. 3. If the work is a ministry in the name of Christ, it must be done with an explicit commitment to address systemic injustice tied to race, gender, and class, as well as homophobia/ heterosexism. Many of the early leaders of Affirmation had also been involved in social struggles related to racial and economic justice and the Vietnam War. In addition, women leaders such as Joan Clark, Peggy Harmon, and later Mary Gaddis, among others, understood and articulated the con- Turning the Tables “Jesus entered the temple and…overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who sold doves.” Not enough has been said about the fact that the money changers and dove sellers were only helping the people meet their ritual obligations of not defiling the temple with Roman currency and having a sacrificial dove handy. But purveyors of ritual purity were taking up space in the Court of the Gentiles, the closest that women, eunuchs, and converted Gentiles could come to Yahweh, veiled within the Holy of Holies walled within the court of sacrifice where Israelite men could gather to offer sacrifice. Many of the welcoming movements have played Jesus’ role overturning the tables of church gatherings where church purity has been placed ahead of welcoming the stranger. How refreshing it is, therefore, to have one denomination which turned the tables themselves, inviting congregations to be open and affirming of lesbian and gay people! In 1983, the United Church of Christ echoed Jesus echoing Isaiah, “My house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples,” and began the ingathering of the church’s outcasts who are gay and lesbian, and subsequently, those who are bisexual and transgendered. Spring 2000 13 In the spring of 1985, the resolution encountered a roadblock. A new rule stated that resolutions which had been debated at General Synod in prior years could not be resubmitted. After much negotiation, the Resolutions Committee agreed to place the “Open and Affirming” resolution on the agenda. The 1985 General Synod resolution, “Calling on United Church of Christ Congregations to Declare Themselves as Open and Affirming,” encouraged congregations to “adopt a nondiscrimination policy and a Covenant of Openness and Affirmation of persons of lesbian, gay, and bisexual orientation within the community of faith.” The resolution was passed by ninety-five percent of the voting delegates on July 3, 1985. Today local churches, conferences and associations (within conferences) may officially become “ONA” by endorsing a statement of welcome after a period of study, reflection, and prayer on the subjects of sexual orientation, homophobia, and biblical messages about sexuality and inclusiveness. The Rev. Ann B. Day administers the program. But what paved the way to that hot, historic day in Ames, Iowa? It Only Takes A Spark… In 1970, a gay seminarian at the Pacific School of Religion came out publicly and announced his intention to seek ordination within the United Church of Christ. The Rev. William R. Johnson became the first openly gay person to be ordained to ministry in a historic mainstream Christian church in the United States. He was ordained in 1972 by the Golden Gate Association, a regional grouping of UCC congregations in northern California, after serious study and debate. His ordination was widely reported in the media, giving hope not only to those who wanted to reconcile their sexuality and their Christianity of various denominations and traditions, but also to those already serving in ministry and those who wished to serve who were gay or lesbian. He would later serve as executive director of the Council on Religion & the Homosexual, the first attempt to bridge the chasm between gays and religion which had been founded in 1964 at the Glide Urban Center (Glide Memorial United Methodist Church) of San Francisco. The UCC Executive Council, the main deliberative body of the church between biennial meetings of the General Synods, recommended in 1973 to regional UCC associations that “as they continue to clarify their understanding of the theology of ordination, they give serious consideration to the position of the Council for Church and Ministry in the matter of human sexuality: In the instance of considering a stated homosexual’s candidacy for ordination, the issue should not be his/ her homosexuality as such, but rather, the candidate’s total view of human sexuality and his/her understanding of the morality of its (expression).” Within a few years, open lesbians joined the ranks of ordained UCC clergy, including the Rev. Anne Holmes of Virginia in 1977. Shortly after his ordination, the Rev. Bill Johnson founded the UCC Gay Caucus in December 1972, which was given Special Interest Group status during the 1973 UCC General Synod. By 1975, the group was able to shepherd through a pronouncement favoring gay and lesbian civil liberties, with logistical support from the Unitarian Universalist Gay Caucus and the Friends Gay Caucus, both from denominations already welcoming of gay men and lesbians. A human sexuality study was also commissioned, with an emphasis on discerning a Christian ethic regarding sexuality. Loaves and Fishes When Anita Bryant launched her successful campaign against a civil rights ordinance in Dade County, Florida in 1977, the UCC Gay Caucus introduced a resolution to that year’s General Synod deploring the use of scripture to generate hatred of gays and lesbians, and reaffirming the 1975 pronouncement on civil liberties. This was passed by a 90 per cent majority. The same year, the report of the human sexuality report, with 17 recommendations, was endorsed by a two-thirds majority. The caucus became the United Church Coalition for Gay Concerns in 1979, and subsequently added “lesbian,” “bisexual,” and “transgender” along the way. Always present at General Synods, the Coalition began holding annual gatherings preceding the synods in 1981. The United Church of Christ Coalition for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Concerns (The Coalition), considered the heart of the ONA movement and program, enjoys “voice without vote” at meetings of the UCC General Synod. The Rev. Diane Darling became the first openly lesbian woman called to parish ministry in the UCC in 1984, as a pastor of College Avenue United Church of Christ in Modesto, California. Previously, lesbians had been ordained to specialized ministries. The 1983 General Synod had passed a resolution rec14 Open Hands “But [Jesus said to his disciples], ‘You give them something to eat.’” And so, from a humble beginning of a few loaves and fishes, there was enough food to feed the 5000-plus souls gathered to hear the gospel. A seminarian’s faith-full decision in 1970 to be openly gay and an association’s faith-full willingness to ordain him proved enough to bring the United Church of Christ a harvest that has so far culminated in the largest number of churches associated with any welcoming program to date—well over 300! ▼ ommending to associations that “in considering a candidate’s qualifications for ministry, the candidate’s sexual orientation should not be grounds for denying the request for ordination.” By 1991, the General Synod went further, resolving the UCC “boldly affirms, celebrates, and embraces the gifts for ministry of lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons” and “calls upon local churches, associations, and conferences to extend their welcome and support to openly lesbian, gay, and bisexual students incare, and to facilitate the ordination and placement of qualified lesbian, gay, and bisexual candidates.” University Congregational Church, a UCC church in Seattle, became the first church of a mainline U.S. denomination to extend a call to an openly gay clergy couple in 1994. A three-fourths majority of the church endorsed the ministries the Rev. Peter Ilgenfritz and the Rev. David Shull. Begun under the name “Reconciled in Christ,” the program was designed to encourage, recognize, and connect Lutheran congregations that publicly welcome lesbian and gay believers to their communities of faith. The program intent has always included Lutheran congregations of all affiliations. The Reconciling in Christ roster contains independent Lutheran churches, as well as churches from the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada. One congregation is jointly ELCA and Missouri Synod (very conservative!). The program, administered by Bob Gibeling and Jan Bussert, has grown to include 14 ELCA synods representing over 20 per cent of that denomination’s geographical synods and 25 per cent of its 5.2 million memberships. Lutheran organizations, such as the Lutheran Student Movement-USA and the Urban Servants Corps, have also become “reconciling in Christ.” In the past year alone, growth has doubled to 180 congregations. In 1997 the Board of Directors of Lutherans Concerned approved using the language, “people of all sexual orientations” in the affirmation of welcome. In 1998 the name was altered slightly to become “Reconciling in Christ” to reflect the ongoing nature of the welcoming movement. The first North Revisiting Sodom “But whenever you enter a [church] and they do not welcome you, go out into its [vestibule] and say, ‘Even the dust of your [church] that clings to our feet, we wipe off in protest against you. Yet know this: the kingdom of God has come near.’ I tell you, on that day it will be more tolerable for Sodom than for that [church].” It was just such an experience of inhospitality that led to the establishment of the Reconciling in Christ movement within Lutheran denominations. Former president of Lutherans Concerned/North America, John Ballew had once been ejected from a Lutheran Church/Missouri Synod when the pastor learned he was gay. While on the board of Lutherans Concerned, Ballew introduced the welcoming concept in 1984, drafting the original affirmation of welcome language which is the basis for the whole program. [See Ballew’s current thoughts on the program on p. 27.] Spring 2000 15 America gathering of RIC communities will be held in San Francisco in 2001, and is anticipated to expand the network and ministry. Roots of Reconciliation Before the merger that formed the ELCA, Jim Siefkes, director of developing ministries in the American Lutheran Church’s Division for Service and Mission in America in 1974, decided that since every other denomination had a gay caucus, Lutherans should have one too. He gathered six Lutherans and three advisors (which included John Preston, then of SIECUS, and Louise Rose of the American Baptist Gay Caucus) and helped form and fund Lutherans Concerned for Gay People (the final three words were later dropped). Allen Blaich was the first national spokesperson; Diane Fraser became the first openly gay faculty member at a Lutheran College by her public association as one of those early organizers. A professional journalist, Howard Erickson, edited the excellent newsletter, The Gay Lutheran, the very name of which “boggled the minds of many church bureaucrats,” according to Jim Lokken, the only clergy member of that first group. In the late 70’s Lutherans Concerned played a significant role in the revision of a 1966 ALC sexuality statement. As Lokken explained recently, “The 1980 ALC statement which resulted was not all that we hoped it might be, but it was very much better than the first draft. For example, while the 1966 ALC statement had regarded homosexuality as, in effect, a sin, a crime, and a disease, the 1980 statement only regarded it as a sin.” Lutherans Concerned published an outstanding resource in 1985 entitled A Call for Dialog, the result of a two-year process of drafting, discussion, and revision in which every LC chapter participated and for which respected theologians gave feedback. Fifteenthousand copies were printed and distributed. An ALC study that followed in 1986 concluded that the church can “neither absolutely condemn nor ignore nor praise and affirm homosexuality,” but that “many more of our congregations can extend a welcome, withhold judgment, and offer pastoral support” to gay men and lesbians. Ecclesiastical Disobedience in Luther’s Footsteps Lutherans Concerned and the Reconciling in Christ Program are contemporary expressions of Martin Luther’s famous quote facing down the church of his time: “Here I stand, I can do no other.” Celibacy was required of gay and lesbian clergy by the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) in 1989. Just as More Light congregations have done in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), two churches decided in 1990 to challenge this requirement by an act of ecclesiastical disobedience—the equivalent of the civil disobedience practiced by the Civil Rights Movement. Saint Francis Lutheran and First United Lutheran, both in San Francisco, ordained non-celibate pastors: Jeff Johnson, Ruth Frost, and Phyllis Zillhart. A church trial found the congregations in violation of ELCA policy but did not specify exclusion until 1995, when the unrepentant churches were expelled. In 1991, the ELCA Churchwide Assembly, seeming to contradict itself, declared “Gay and Lesbian people, as individuals created by God, are welcome to participate fully in the life of the congregations of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.” The 1993 Assembly expressed strong opposition to all forms of verbal or physical harassment or assault of persons because of their sexual orientation, and supported civil rights for all regardless of sexual orientation. But that same year, the press coverage of a draft of a Social Statement on Human Sexuality outraged conservatives within the ELCA, and the document was never adopted. Since then, however, positive steps have been taken. An Open Letter from the ELCA Bishops in March of 1996 set a tone of welcome for gay and lesbian people and their families. In 1997, the ELCA Churchwide Assembly passed by an 80 per cent vote a “memorial” from the Southeastern Synod endorsing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) before the U.S. Congress. “Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Working Together Week” at the denomination’s offices in Chicago, approved by Presiding Bishop H. George Anderson, surpassed in attendance any previous diversity week. The ELCA Division for Outreach completed a formal research project in the fall of 1998 on how congregations can become more welcoming to gay men and lesbians, entitled “Congregational Ministry with Gay and Lesbian People.” The report was presented to the Conference of Bishops and the ELCA Church Council in the spring of 1999, and now resource materials for congregations have been made available through the Division of Outreach. The gift of naiveté is its release from worldly limits and conveniences. Beth Richardson and I were novices at magazine publishing back in 1985 when we began thinking about an ongoing resource for Reconciling Congregations. Had we known that most new magazines fold within their first year and that it takes a large amount of capital to start a magazine, we might not have taken such a foolhardy step. The initial act of faith was to call on United Methodist churches to become “Reconciling Congregations” at the General Conference in May of 1984. Ten churches responded to the call within a few months. In this euphoria, anything seemed possible. Realizing that some kind of ongoing resource would be essential to nurturing such congregations and cultivating the collective welcoming movement, Beth and I knew a magazine was the ideal answer. So, one year after launching the Reconciling Congregation Program, we took the next risk of publishing the first issue of Manna for the Journey. Publishing the first issue (“Be Ye Reconciled”) was truly a labor of love and innocence. Beth edited the articles. I typed the text into an unfriendly word processor. Graphic artist Brenda Roth created titles, drew illustrations, and pasted up the copy. Two Affirmation friends raised the funds to print 1,000 copies. —Mark Bowman Soon after we began publishing Manna for the Journey, we received a letter from the United Methodist Renewal Services Fellowship, a charismatic group in the United Methodist Church. This organization, in its letter to Morris Floyd and Affirmation, charged that our publication’s title was an infringement on the federal trademark they held on the title of their newsletter MANNA. We were informed that if we did not change the name of our publication, we would be subject to legal action. A few months later, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office denied our trademark application for the title, Manna for the Journey. Rather than pursue an appeal, we made the difficult decision to change the name to Open Hands, which had been the title of Affirmation’s daily newsletter at the 1984 General Conference. The idea and image of Open Hands came from John Wesley’s sermon, “The Catholic Spirit,” which was based on 2 Kings 10:15, “Is your heart true to my heart as mine is to yours? … If it is, give me your hand” (RSV). Wesley’s interpretation of this passage states first that Jehu is not inquiring if he and Jehonadab are of the same opinion or worship in a similar fashion. Instead, says Wesley, the question simply is, “Is thy heart right with God? … Dost thou believe in the Lord Jesus Christ? … Is thy faith filled with the energy of love? … Is thy heart right toward thy neighbor?” Second, according to Wesley, the statement “give me your hand” is a bond of faith and love and does not convey a unity of belief and thinking. Wesley concludes by saying that a person of “catholic spirit” is one whose “heart is enlarged toward all mankind, those he knows and those he does not; he embraces with strong and cordial affection neighbors and strangers, friends and enemies.” In the summer of 1986, beginning with Volume 2, Manna for the Journey became Open Hands, noting that “Hands joined together span divisions and brokenness, even if they do not erase them.” —Beth Richardson The first few issues of the magazine, along with some recognition in the church media and other circles, brought a steadily growing number of readers. It also brought overtures to publish it with welcoming groups in other mainline denominations. While the early magazine readers were predominately United Methodist, a significant number were from other traditions. Since a similar magazine did not exist in other denominations, a joint venture was appealing. A year of discussion and negotiations led to the publication of the first ecumenical issue of Open Hands in January, 1993. —Mark Bowman BEFORE OPEN HANDS The Publishing Context of Open Hands Though not listed here, most newsletters of organizations and programs in the Ministries of Welcome timeline preceded the establishment of Open Hands. (Publisher is indicated when associated with a denomination.) 1955 Homosexuality and the Western Christian Tradition Derrick Sherwin Bailey 1967 Social Action (UCC) and Social Progress (Presbyterian) Joint issue on lesbian and gay civil rights. 1972 motive magazine (United Methodist) Two issues highlight gay men and lesbians. Controversy ends magazine. Is Gay Good? Dwight Oberholtzer, ed. (Westminster Press [Presbyterian]) The Lord Is My Shepherd and He Knows I’m Gay Troy Perry 1973 Trends magazine (Presbyterian) Features homosexuality. Controversy ends magazine. 1974 Loving Women/Loving Men—Gay Liberation and the Church Sally Gearhart and William R. Johnson 1976 The Church and the Homosexual John J. McNeill Insight is founded. A journal of gay Catholic opinion, becomes ecumenical in 1981. 1977 Church & Society (Presbyterian) First issue devoted to homosexuality. Christianity & Crisis (Ecumenical) First issue devoted to homosexuality. 1978 Is the Homosexual My Neighbor? Letha Scanzoni and Virginia Ramey Mollenkott Jonathan Loved David Tom Horner (Westminster Press [Presbyterian]) Take Off the Masks Malcolm Boyd’s coming out book. 1980 Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality John Boswell OPEN HANDS HISTORY 1985 Manna for the Journey first appears as a quarterly resource for Reconciling Congregations. 1986 Manna for the Journey becomes Open Hands Melany Burrill and Bradley Rymph, Coeditors. 1988 Accepted as a member of the Associated Church Press. 1989 Honored with two Associated Church Press honors, one for general excellence and the other for in-depth coverage of a current issue (AIDS). 1991 Melany Burrill retires as coeditor. Ann Thompson Cook serves as interim until Betsy Halsey is hired. 1992 Receives Award for Merit for General Excellence for smaller magazines from the Associated Church Press. Publication process changed to one editor and an ecumenical advisory committee. Mary Jo Osterman is hired as editor, and Jan Graves as designer. 1993 First ecumenical issue published with More Light, Open and Affirming, and Reconciling in Christ programs. 1996 Welcome & Affirming Baptists join the cooperative publication. Mary Jo Osterman leads year-long ecumenical process of creating new Bible study curriculum Claiming the Promise, published in January of 1997 to widespread acclaim. 1998 Chris Glaser succeeds Mary Jo Osterman as interim and then editor. Jan Graves continues as designer. Open & Affirming Ministries of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) and the Affirming Congregation Programme of the United Church of Canada join as ecumenical partners. 1999 Open Hands Advisory Committee and publisher, the Reconciling Congregation Program, begin planning spinoff of magazine as an independent publication as early as 2001. Executive publisher Mark Bowman is succeeded by interim Marilyn Alexander. 1981 A Disturbed Peace Reflections of an Irish Catholic Homosexual Brian McNaught 1984 The Other Side (Ecumenical) Special issue on homosexuality. 1985 Lesbian Nuns: Breaking Silence Rosemary Curb & Nancy Manahan 16 Open Hands Spring 2000 17 18 Open Hands The Kansas City General Assembly of 1977 defeated a resolution opposing homosexuality as a viable lifestyle for Christians, simply referred a resolution calling on regions and congregations to deny ordination to gays and lesbians, and approved a study document on the issue. A riveting moment occurred when Carol Blakely of Caldwell, Idaho, stood at the microphone to read a coming out letter from her son. As she read she was ruled out order because her time had expired; the person waiting to speak (Rev. James Stockdale) yielded his time to her so that she could finish reading the letter. The 1979 Assembly in St. Louis left the question of ordination to the discretion of regions, but approved a resolution that “the ordination of persons who engage in homosexual practices does not accord with God’s will… If the Church ever comes to a conclusion concerning homosexuality which differs from those now held, the change will be the result of the transformation of insight through prayer, informed study and discussion rather than the result of votes on resolutions.” It was at this Assembly that people began to organize what became Gay, Lesbian and Affirming Disciples (GLAD) Alliance. “I was at the first secret meeting for GLAD,” recalls Debra Peevey. “We met off site and gave only our first names. We were trying to simply find each other.” She was already out to her ordination committee in the Northern California Region, which adopted the policy, “We affirm that no one human condition can be an absolute barrier to ordination.” She was ordained by Lafayette (CA) Christian Church in 1981, just a month after the first openly gay or lesbian Disciples minister had been ordained: Christine Leslie by University Christian Church, Berkeley, California. Judith Hoch Wray remembered: “We gathered in a home somewhere in the suburbs of St. Louis. Clandestine, fearful, and yet energized by the sheer numbers, so many that chairs and floor were filled with Disciples, clergy and laity. Aware that others had not heard the cautiously passed message to meet. Concerned that among us would be one who would betray us.” GLAD Alliance, Inc. became an organization at its first pre-assembly gathering in Louisville in 1987. Laurie Rudel described the gathering: “I remember the pre-assembly gathering…It was by invitation only held in a local church. Judith Hoch Wray led us in a Bible study. She made the scripture sing with grace. I believe we were studying one of the letters of Paul. Her understanding of and compassion for Paul, her love of the church, startled and surprised me. As part of a closing ritual we told our stories and placed candles in the sand. By the end of the event the candlelight shone brightly on our faces. It seemed to light the path ahead that would lead from the informal to the formal organization of GLAD. I remember Holly Beaumont, Candy Cox, Debra Peevey, and myself sitting in our hotel room and dreaming up names for this fledgling organization.” At this particular Assembly, delegates rejected a resolution that homosexuality was an unacceptable lifestyle for Christians. Three Churches Lead the Way The first Disciples of Christ congregation to publicly name itself as a welcoming community was First Christian Church in Alameda, California when, in December of 1987 it declared itself a “Welcoming Faith Community.” This was in direct response to the ostracism many persons who were affected by AIDS were experiencing in society and in the church. Findlay Street Christian Church in Seattle, Washington concurrently was seeking to understand the place that lesbian and gay Christians have in the life of that congregation. In response to a request by an elder to preach about homosexuality, the Reverend Debra Peevey preached a sermon on March 15, 1987 which catapulted the congregation into a period of discussion and prayer. The process culminated in the winter of 1987-1988 when it developed a Vision Statement inclusive of persons of “all sexual orientations, races, cultures and economic circumstances.” In April of 1988 University Church in Chicago, Illinois, affiliated with both the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) and the United Church of Christ, released a similar statement of “Openness and Affirmation,” GLAD to Go Into God’s House “I was glad when they said to me, ‘Let us go into the house of the Lord!’” Thus begins Psalm 122, and here the King James Version speaks more clearly to the welcoming movement than other translations. It is not enough to “go to ” the house of God as the RSV and NRSV have it; we must be enabled and empowered to enter, to “go into ” the church. This means to be welcomed into the life and ministry of a congregation or denomination. It has been GLAD Alliance and its Open & Affirming Ministries Program that has welcomed LGBT people into the life and ministry of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ). Spring 2000 19 that said in part, “We welcome gay and lesbian persons into University Church membership and all of its privileges and responsibilities, including full opportunities for positions of leadership and ministry.” These three congregations and the diverse ways in which they approached the possibilities and concerns of homosexuality in the church formed the basis for the structure of the Open & Affirming Ministries Program. In the fall of 1988 the GLAD Alliance met for its annual event in the facilities of University Church. It was there that the leadership of the Alliance was urged to formulate a structure which would recognize and develop Open And Affirming Congregations. An initial coalition of pastors and laypersons was formed to organize informative and inspirational activities at the 1989 General Assembly of the Christian Church, meeting in Indianapolis, Indiana. At that gathering an “Interact Group” was offered to all Assembly participants entitled “Ministry With Gay and Lesbian People: Open And Affirming Congregations.” Additionally, a booth was provided in the exhibit hall to provide resources for congregations interested in the Open and Affirming Program. Under a banner that read, “The Body of Christ is Living with AIDS,” GLAD held an AIDS prayer service. The Assembly called the Church and its members to treat persons with AIDS as children of God and to “act as instruments of God’s compassionate love and tender care where the seeds of fear, prejudice and alienation have been sown.” Expanding Ministry With seven Open and Affirming Congregations and one Open and Affirming Campus Ministry dedicated to the process, the Coordinating Committee (now called the Alliance Council) of the GLAD Alliance, at its January 1991 meeting, reorganized the program and appointed two persons, the Rev. Laurie Rudel of Seattle, and the Rev. Allen V. Harris, of New York City, as official Co-Developers of the Open And Affirming Congregation Program. The Rev. Roger Wedell of Dallas later replaced Laurie Rudel following her resignation in 1995 as Co-Developer. During 1991 the GLAD Alliance and the United Church Coalition for Lesbian/Gay Concerns agreed to explore the possibilities of cooperation between the GLAD Alliance Open and Affirming Congregation Program and the Open and Affirming Congregation Program of the United Church of Christ. This was grounded in the Ecumenical Partnership the two denominations have been in since the 1970’s. While recognizing the unique aspects of each of the two programs, both organizations endorsed the mutual use of the title “Open and Affirming Congregations,” agreed to use different shorthand to easily distinguish the programs, with the UCC using “ONA” and the Disciples using “O&A,” and reaffirmed similar goals for the two programs. The purpose and structure of the Program continue to be defined. At its meeting in conjunction with the 1991 General Assembly in Tulsa, Oklahoma, the Alliance formally adopted a document which established procedures for becoming an Open & Affirming Ministry. This Assembly is remembered as the one in which Michael Kinnamon was not elected as General Minister and President because of his support of gays and lesbians. GLAD’s membership increased by 200 percent in the aftermath, according to Liz Lang. By 1993, gay-supportive Richard L. Hamm was elected to serve a six-year term as General Minister and President. In January of 1993 the Alliance Council updated the name of the Program to be more in line with its purpose. It became, and remains, the Open & Affirming (O&A) Ministries Program of the Gay, Lesbian and Affirming Disciples Alliance. The first issue of CrossLinks, the newsletter of the O&A Ministries Program, debuted in October of 1993. In 1997 a Provisional Advisory Board for O&A Ministries was formed in order to begin to envision the future direction of the program. Five members of the Advisory Board were selected at the 1997 GLAD Alliance Event prior to the General Assembly in Denver, Colorado, an Assembly that voted to name homosexuality as a topic for discernment by the whole church. In January of 2000, at the Alliance Council meeting in Dallas, Texas, a fully constituted Advisory Board was formed to oversee the work and future of O&A Ministries. Allen Harris resigned as Developer of Open & Affirming Ministries in November of 1998. In 1999 the Rev. John Wade Payne, recently retired Sr. Pastor of Park Avenue Christian Church in New York City, agreed to serve as Interim Developer of the O&A Ministries Program from his home in Alva, Florida. 20 Open Hands In May of 1972, during the American Baptist Convention in Denver, what became American Baptists Concerned for Sexual Minorities reminded Baptists that gays and lesbians were also baptized into their body. During the Charleston Biennial in 1991, the Rev. Michael Easterling, pastor of Madison Avenue Baptist Church in New York City, led a meeting of fifty persons to establish a network of American Baptist Churches that would be open and affirming of lesbian, gay, and bisexual people during the Charleston Biennial in 1991. American Baptists Concerned was authorized to administer the network based on the principle of association and to begin recruiting member congregations. Meanwhile, the delegates to the Biennial approved both an antigay “Statement of Concern” and one calling for a study on human sexuality. University Baptist Church of Minneapolis called Nadean Bishop as the first openly lesbian pastor of an American Baptist Church in January of the following year, 1992. By March, Binkley Memorial Baptist Church of Chapel Hill, North Carolina, granted a pre-ordination license to an openly gay man, John Blevins, and Pullen Memorial Baptist of Raleigh voted to bless same-sex unions after a careful study process. In June, ABConcerned approved the organization of “The Association of Welcoming and Affirming Baptists.” The first churches listed as W&A appeared in the fall issue of the ABConcerned newsletter, The Voice of the Turtle. Through a never-before-used referendum process, the General Board of the American Baptist Church/USA (ABC/USA) passed a resolution in October, saying, “We affirm that the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching.” The first W&A Association Coordinator, Brenda Moulton, was appointed in February of 1993. Four months later, the General Board of the ABC/USA voted in favor of a “Resolution for Dialogue on Issues of Human Sexuality.” The same month, the W&A Association held its first biennial meeting with twenty congregations and three groups as charter members. Dissin” the Welcoming Movement Mark Crosby, an openly gay pastoral counselor, was denied an ecclesiastical endorsement by the ABC/USA Committee on Chaplaincy and Pastoral Counselors in March of 1994. In May, W&A congregations were asked to retract their welcome of gays and lesbians; those in the west were threatened with disfellowshipping. In August, a process began to disfellowship First Baptist Church of Granville, Ohio, for its welcome. The church was disfellowshipped from the Columbus Baptist Association in 1995. Since then, one American Baptist church in Alaska and four in California have been disfellowshipped from regional associations. The general board of the denomination since voted to remove the four California churches from the denomination, but this decision has been stayed pending adjudication requests of eight American Baptist regions that allege due process and church autonomy have been violated. (Two Southern Baptist churches in Atlanta and adjacent Decatur were disfellowshipped by the Georgia Baptist Convention last fall for welcoming lesbians and gay men.) In September, the Pacific Southwest region revoked the ordination standing of Susan Vanderburgh, a lesbian pastoral counselor. Her church rescinded her ordination and the denomination withdrew its endorsement of her as a pastoral counselor. By December, openly gay candidate Randle (Rick) Mixon’s third attempt to be ordained in twenty years was rebuffed by the Ordination Commission of the ABC/USA of the West. [For a happier Baptist story, read Jacki Belile’s article on p. 28.] Baptized Into One Family “Whoever does the will of God is my brother and sister and mother.” Thus Jesus welcomed family regardless of biology or marriage. The new family would be the family of faith. “When you give a luncheon or a dinner, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors…invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind. And you will be blessed…” In other words, welcome those in need, those who might not be able to return the favor. “Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?” Because God desires mercy, not sacrifice, Jesus replied. God desires welcome, not scapegoating. Jesus is the founder of the welcoming movement. “For in the one Spirit we were all baptized into one body…” Christ’s Body is by definition welcoming. “ MINISTRIES OF WELCOME 1964 Council on Religion and the Homosexual (CRH) organized at Glide Urban Center, San Francisco. 1968 The Rev. Troy Perry founds first congregation of the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches (UFMCC). 1969 Father Pat Nidorf founds Dignity in San Diego, California. 1970 Rev. Richard Nash of Los Angeles and Elgin Blair of Toronto organize Unitarian Universalist Gay Caucus. 1971 Rev. Ron Mattson of Minneapolis founds the Committee of Concern, American and Canadian Friends, to deal with lesbian and gay concerns. Name changed to Friends for Lesbian and Gay Concerns in 1978. Sister Jeannine Gramick organizes weekly masses for gay Catholics in Maryland. 1972 Metropolitan Community Temple, first lesbian/gay synagogue founded in Los Angeles. Rev. Bill Johnson founds the UCC Gay Caucus, later renamed the United Church Coalition for Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgender Concerns. American Baptists Concerned for Sexual Minorities organized (under another name). 1974 Rev. David B. Sindt begins the Presbyterian Gay Caucus, which becomes Presbyterians for Lesbian & Gay Concerns. Living in rural Georgia, professor Louie Crew organizes Integrity. Gay United Methodist Caucus, later called Affirmation, is founded in Evanston, Illinois. 1976 Dr. Ralph Blair organizes Evangelicals Concerned in New York. Ben Pickell begins organizing lesbian and gay Seventh Day Adventists in southern California. 1977 Jeannine Grammick, a nun, and Robert Nugent, a priest, form New Ways Ministry, a ministry for LGBT Roman Catholics and their families, based in Mount Ranier, Maryland. Chris Glaser begins Lazarus Project at the West Hollywood Presbyterian Church, the first fully funded ministry of reconciliation between the church and the LGBT community in any denomination. Affirmation: Gay and Lesbian Mormons founded in Salt Lake City, initiated by Steve Zakharias. 1978 Presbyterian churches opposed to the antigay denominational policy designate themselves “More Light Congregations.” The welcoming movement begins. Rev. Bill Johnson organizes Maranatha, Riversiders for Lesbian/Gay Concerns at New York’s famed Riverside Church. Circle of Light organized for LGBT folk at West Park Presbyterian Church, New York City. 1979 First national gathering of gay and lesbian seminarians held at Union Theological Seminary in New York. GLAD Alliance forms in the Disciples of Christ (The Christian Church). Martin Rock begins the Brethren/Mennonite Council for Gay Concerns. The Diocese of California begins the Parsonage, a ministry in the Castro in San Francisco. 1980 National Gay Pentecostal Alliance is founded in Schenectady, New York, by William H. Carey and Judy M. Schwarz, as a welcoming denomination. 1981 Evangelicals Together (emerging from Evangelicals Concerned) organized in Southern California by the Rev. Steve Preston as a ministry with a focus on Bible studies in members’ homes. 1982 Affirm: Gays and Lesbians of the United Church of Canada is founded in Montreal. Reconciling Congregations initiated in the United Methodist Church by Affirmation. First such congregations in 1984. Wingspan Ministry with LGBT folk begun by St. Paul-Reformation Lutheran Church in St. Paul, Minnesota led by Anita Hill and Leo Treadway. Rev. Janie Spahr begins Ministry of Light, a ministry with LGBT persons and their families based in three Presbyterian churches in Redwoods Presbytery, California. 1983 United Church of Christ General Synod calls for churches to become Open and Affirming. Gay People in Christian Science / Chicago organize first national gathering. The national group Emergence emerges in 1985. 1984 Lutherans Concerned begins Reconciling in Christ program. First RIC: St. Paul- Reformation Lutheran Church. 1987 Open and Affirming churches movement begins in the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ). 1989 Bishop John Spong ordains and commissions Robert Williams as chief missioner for the Oasis, a diocesan ministry with lesbians and gay men. Oasis becomes the name of the welcoming movement in the Episcopal Church. 1990 Christian Lesbians Out Together (CLOUT) grows out of an invitation extended by Revs. Carter Heyward, Jan Griesinger, Melanie Morrison, and Cathy Ann Beaty. 1991 Supportive Congregations Network formed for congregations from Mennonite, Church of the Brethren, and other Anabaptist faith traditions. That All May Freely Serve, founded in Rochester, New York, with Rev. Janie Spahr as a national “lesbian evangelist,” now has ministries in Baltimore, Chicago, and New York City, and is organizing others. 1992 Welcoming and Affirming church program started by American Baptists Concerned. Affirming Congregation Programme begun in the United Church of Canada. First church in 1995. Other Sheep: Multicultural Ministries with Sexual Minorities begun by missionary Tom Hanks as an international and intercultural ministry, largely focused on Latin America. 1995 Shower of Stoles of LGBT people in ministry begun by Martha Juillerat and Tammy Lindahl. 1999 INCLUSIVE Congregations movement begins among Roman Catholic, Church of England, and United Reformed churches in the United Kingdom. 26 Open Hands Spring 2000 21 In God’s Image…Male and Female,” was one of a series of reports and study documents prepared by the United Church of Canada (an ecumenical union of several mainstream Protestant denominations) dealing with issues of human sexuality. It wasn’t primarily about sexual orientation or about ministry. In 1972, the General Council agreed to carry out a comprehensive study of human sexuality, but for various reasons it wasn’t until 1978 that a task group met to prepare a report. The document they wrote, “In God’s Image,” was approved as a study document by the 1980 General Council and circulated to the wider church for discussion and reflection. It focused broadly on issues of sexuality, marriage, and family. The impetus for this focus on sexuality was a growing concern about marriage and family breakdown, changing roles of women and men in society, feminism, inclusive language, gender roles, and growing awareness of injustice and violence against women. The issue of homosexuality and eligibility for ministry had not yet begun to surface as a major discussion in the church. It was in many ways only a minor comment in a much larger document. Rev. Pierre Goldberger, Principal of the United Theological College in Montreal, has noted that the issue of homosexuality and ministry was really only a subset of a much broader discussion about roles and relationships. “‘In God’s Image…Male and Female’ was a telling title,” he said. “We were addressing a whole range of issues— theology, the Bible, and of course sexuality. And one of the footnotes of the debate was discussion of the variety of sexual orientations that exist.” An issue that was initially quite peripheral to the conversation took on a life of its own. This “by the way” took on a whole new dimension, and became the focus for a whole lot of unresolved issues within the United Church. It wasn’t an issue that most people would have chosen as a focus for the church’s energy and life for more than a decade. But it came to be the focal point around which the United Church was forced to make decisions, and to decide who it was, and who it was to become as the United Church of Canada. Affirm: Gays and Lesbians of the United Church of Canada was founded in Montreal in 1982 as a national network of regional groups. At the same time, Affirm established “Friends of Affirm” for others who supported their goals. Affirm held its first national conference in Vancouver in 1983. In February 1984, the Division of Ministry, Personnel and Education studied a taskgroup report entitled “Sexual Orientation and Eligibility for the Order of Ministry” and approved its principal recommendation that “in and of itself sexual orientation should not be a factor in determining membership in the order of ministry of the United Church of Canada.” The full report was to be acted on by the upcoming General Council in Morden, Manitoba later that summer. It was circulated to every member of the United Church, as an insert in the United Church Observer. Some 800,000 households across the country received a report that recommended ordination for gay and lesbian people. There was an immediate furor. The media had a heyday. The 1984 General Council adopted recommendations from the report that urged an end to discrimination against homosexual persons, “towards full civil and human rights in society.” The Council also acknowledged that, throughout its history, the church had condoned and even encouraged the rejection and persecution of homosexual persons. But the “ Salvation is Salvation “Friend, I am doing you no wrong; did you not agree with me for the usual daily wage? I choose to give to this last the same as I give to you. Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or are you envious because I am generous?” Thus Jesus, in the parable of the laborers paid equally though some had been there longer, illustrated the egalitarian nature of the commonwealth of God, and the church as its reflection. Salvation is salvation—one cannot be “saved” more than another. Yet many Christians are envious that God’s generosity, God’s grace, should extend to LGBT people. When the United Church of Canada recognized that God’s grace did, in fact, extend to lesbian and gay people, many of the “first laborers grumbled” that God “made them equal to us…” 22 Open Hands issue of ministry, particularly ordained ministry, remained unresolved. The Council concluded that further study was needed, and postponed the decision for another four years. Yet another task-group was formed to prepare a church-wide study, collate congregational responses, and prepare a report for the 1988 General Council in Victoria. It wrote a document called “Towards a Christian Understanding of Sexual Orientation, Lifestyles and Ministry.” By the time the task-group released its report in preparation for General Council there were petitions flooding in from all across the church. There had been non-stop media coverage, most of it tending to pick up the loudest and most polarized voices in the debate. The church had not experienced such a crisis since the decision to ordain women in 1936. That had taken ten years of rancorous study and debate; some people had threatened to leave the church if women were ordained. And some people did. The 1988 General Council of the United Church of Canada made a historic decision. The irony is that it was in many ways a nondecision. The Council in essence voted not to change existing policy, that is, not to erect a barrier that had not previously existed. “All people, regardless of their sexual orientation, who profess Jesus Christ and obedience to him are welcome to be or become full members of the Church,” said the final statement. Nothing had changed. There never had been criteria for excluding any groups of persons from membership. And as for ordination, the question that was at the heart of this whole debate, the final resolution stated that “all members are eligible to be considered for ordered ministry.” Again, nothing changed. That had been policy since The United Church came into being. All existing procedures for discerning and approving candidates for ministry were reaffirmed, from the congregation’s role in putting forward candidates to the role of a conference in final recommendation for ordination and commissioning. Nothing changed. Everything changed. Affirming Congregations Begin Affirming Congregations in the United Church are local churches that welcome bisexuals, lesbians, gay men, and their families in all aspects of church life. They are congregations that promote reconciliation of gay, lesbian and bisexual people within the church and also in the larger society. And they are congregations that minister both to and with people of all sexual orientations. The Affirming Congregation Programme, initiated in 1992, modeled on similar ones in other denominations, was created to give greater visibility to those United Churches that offer a ministry of inclusion and welcome to gays and lesbians, but also to encourage all congregations to find ways to be more open in their welcome. A congregation that declares explicitly that it is welcoming can create a safer place for gays and lesbians to share who they are. The congregation takes on more of the risk, because there’s no doubt the decision sometimes creates conflict and controversy. But congregations often find they gain new members and a renewed sense of ministry as a result of the experience. Congregations joining the program, now led by the Rev. Ron Coughlin, agree to undertake a process of study and discussion. They consider what it means for them to be inclusive and welcoming; they look at the barriers and ways in which they might become more inclusive; they consider what ministry and outreach they can offer to and with gay and lesbian people, and they prepare an official congregational statement that declares their intention to be welcoming of all. Then, there’s a celebration! Augustine United, in downtown Winnipeg, is no stranger to diversity. As an inner city congregation, it encounters people from all walks of life. Bethan Theunissen, a South African, a lesbian, a lay woman with Methodist background and Baptist and Mennonite theological training, is Augustine’s full-time minister. Sunday morning worship reflects considerable diversity as well. The beautiful polished wood and stained glass reveal its distinguished Presbyterian origins. There is a visible presence of gay and lesbian people, people from the neighborhood, and people whose roots go deep into Augustine’s 100 or so years of history. Augustine made history in 1995, when it became the first Affirming Congregation in the United Church of Canada. Although the congregation had studied and reflected on issues of sexual orientation for over twenty years, it undertook four years of intense study and debate before its public statement and celebration as an affirming congregation. The first motion was rejected in 1993, not because people disagreed with the vision of inclusion, but because many people felt the congregation needed to do more work to become a Spring 2000 23 truly safe and welcoming place for lesbians and gays. A statement in its Sunday worship bulletin reads, “Augustine is a community that welcomes, recognizes and accepts lesbian, gay and bisexual people in our midst as full and equal participants in all aspects of our life, work and worship.” “Behold, I Am Doing a New Thing…” The United Church has changed since its decision, in its policy, its attitudes, its theology, and its practice. Inevitably, other denominations around the world have been forced to face their own Issue Years. Many of them look to The United Church for models and ways to get through. They look at how far it has come, and they ask how. The process of change in The United Church of Canada is not over, nor would anyone say it has “arrived,” but there are many signs the church is a very different place than it was in 1988. At that time, most people believed it would be a decade or more before even one congregation would accept an openly lesbian or gay minister. There have been at least 10 out lesbian or gay candidates since then. Many more clergy have been called as openly gay or lesbian, or have subsequently come out to their congregations. A dozen or more congregations have made public statements declaring themselves to be affirming and welcoming of lesbians and gays in all aspects of their congregational life, including ministry. Many more are reflecting more quietly on ways their congregation might offer a more inclusive welcome to all regardless of sexual orientation. Like all major denominations in Canada, the United Church still struggles with declining membership and increasingly limited finances. But there are many signs that it is still a strong, healthy church, offering spiritual nurture to the nearly two million Canadians within the bounds of its pastoral care, and a life-giving and caring presence in four thousand communities across the country. There is no question that the United Church lost members because of the issue— some estimate the losses to be as high as 3.5 percent— but it gained members as well. In some places it also acquired a new sense of its mission and a whole new vitality. The real costs and gains of the United Church’s 1988 decision are in many ways immeasurable. There was no way the United Church could have faced the issue of ministry and homosexuality and come out unscathed. Whatever it decided, it would have lost members. If it had chosen, as some people thought it should, to completely bar lesbians and gays from ministry, it might have lost the skills and resources of at least 10 percent of its clergy (some say the numbers are even higher) and members, as well as many friends, family members, and supporters of lesbians and gays. Even in its compromise decision, the Church lost people from both sides who were unwilling to live with its uneasy ambiguity. There are some who fought bitterly against any inclusion of lesbians and gays in the church, and some who fought just as bitterly against putting up barriers— not always because they approved of homosexuality, sometimes just because it’s not very United Church to shut people out, any people. Many people were very angry. Some left. Sometimes those confrontations left a bitter legacy. It took a long time for people to start feeling good again about being the United Church. Generally, United Church people don’t like extremism, and they don’t like people attacking one another personally. As the more vitriolic feelings died down, many people felt sad and a bit disappointed that the church had slipped into such a morass. That wasn’t how they wanted to be as a community of faith— whatever their position on this particular issue. The United Church is no stranger to risk or controversy. It was born out of a difficult and painful union. Through all of its history it has spoken and acted on social issues— Japanese internment in World War II, apartheid in South Africa, abortion, capital punishment, rights for women, human rights, refugees, native land claims, economic justice, child poverty, homosexuality. It often runs counter to popular opinion, and constantly strives to live with integrity with its own internal disagreements. That’s just who the United Church is. It’s not a denomination insulated from the world around it, and it refuses to stick its head in the sand. It changes, and it creates change. It is very far from perfect, as any United Church person would be the first to tell you. Yet it continues to risk talking about and living out what it believes, and, above all, it dares to be the church in the world. 24 Open Hands Rather than remaining victims, the Supportive Congregations Network redirected its energy from banging heads against church walls to “dancing” at the walls of the church. The “dancing” conferences that have resulted have proven to be inspiring sacred places for telling congregational stories, developing new paradigms for dialogue, and participating in poignant worship experiences. The first of five dancing conferences, Dancing at the Wall of Fear, Bigotry, and Oppression took place in Charlotte, North Carolina in 1995. Most recently, Leading the Dance: Living the Church Re-Imagined Conference was held in Milwaukee last summer. The Supportive Congregations Network was formed in 1991 as a grassroots organization comprised of people and congregations from Mennonite, Church of the Brethren, and other related Anabaptist faith traditions. SCN is committed to offering support, resources and opportunities for dialogue among congregations which welcome gay, lesbian and bisexual members; encouraging meaningful dialogue at the denominational level; and offering support and resources for individuals who are working toward welcome. Focusing on these goals, SCN builds closer links between congregations which are discussing issues of homosexuality and direct a network of welcoming congregations. The Supportive Congregations Network offers something unique among welcoming programs: three distinct categories of participation. Exploring Congregations are those in conversation about welcoming gay, lesbian, and bisexual members. Accepting Congregations welcome gay, lesbian, and bisexual persons as full members. Publicly Affirming Congregations have adopted a written and public statement of welcome and agree to have their name listed with other welcoming congregations. The Network is now identifying individuals who are also supportive of its work under the “Friends of SCN” program. The Supportive Congregations Network was the progeny of the Brethren/Mennonite Council for Lesbian and Gay Concerns (BMC), begun by Martin Rock in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania in 1976. Shortly after founding BMC, Martin Rock lost his job with the Mennonite Central Committee and moved to Washington, D.C., where BMC gained strength, momentum, and additional supporters. BMC’s founding mission statement was “to educate and dialogue with the church, and support gay men and lesbians.” In 1978 early BMC pioneers published its first edition of Dialogue, which provided a forum for BMC to initiate conversations about homosexuality with Mennonite and Church of the Brethren folks. In 1983, the Mennonite Church and the General Conference Mennonite Church established a Listening Committee for Homosexuality Concerns, while the Church of the Brethren narrowly approved an amendment prohibiting same-sex covenantal relationships to a statement on sexuality. The General Conference Mennonite Church prohibited sexual relations outside of heterosexual marriage in 1986, and the Mennonite Church followed suit the following year. The first welcoming congregation punished for its stance was the Ames Mennonite Church, expelled in 1987 from the Iowa/Nebraska Conference of the Mennonite Church. Germantown Mennonite Church, the oldest Mennonite congregation in North America, was expelled from the Franconia conference in 1997. Dancing At the Walls of Injustice “You have turned my mourning into dancing,” the Psalmist wrote (30:11). Think of Miriam dancing with a tambourine after the Israelites’ deliverance from Egyptian oppression, or David dancing virtually naked as the Ark of the Covenant was brought to the new capital city of Jerusalem. Think of the walls of Jericho tumbling down because the Israelites marched around the city. Think of the dividing walls of hostility between Jew and Gentile in the church of Ephesus broken down by the Lord of the Dance. And consider the man “lame from birth” in Acts who was able to enter the temple gate “walking and leaping and praising God,” the very temple he was unwelcome to enter because his disability made him spiritually “impure.” Spring 2000 25 One-hundred forty people have attended various workshops, and 50 discussion packs developed by the Lesbian Gay Christian Movement (LGCM) have been sold, on the concept of INCLUSIVE Congregations, a new movement put together by Roman Catholic, Church of England, and United Reformed Church people in the United Kingdom. Four congregations to date have produced inclusive statements and are living up to some of the criteria for being registered as INCLUSIVE, according to Janet Webber, retiring volunteer administrator of the program. These criteria include a period of study, an agreed statement of inclusiveness with clear evidence of the congregation’s support, an annual renewal of the statement and an annual contribution to the movement’s administration, publicity of the congregation’s stand internally and externally, a consideration of blessing same-gender relationships, and availability of church buildings for gay and lesbian groups. Because of the ecumenical nature of the work, precision is impossible and there is a need to be flexible in interpreting the above criteria and accepting various responses in fulfillment of the requirements. The designation of INCLUSIVE represents a theological understanding of the nature of God, as compared with words Welcoming or Affirming which tend to suggest human activity. It is fair to say quick results were not expected. Conversations with Open and Affirming congregations in the USA suggested that it usually takes years rather than months for firm commitments to be made, and while there are already a considerable number of congregations where LGBT people are genuinely included and affirmed, it perhaps takes even longer than in the USA to overcome natural British reserve and make a public stand. The British are rather good at keeping quiet even about their good points! God’s Open Hands Are Our Own “I was a stranger and you welcomed me.” In the day of reckoning, those who enjoy the commonwealth of God are those who welcome the stranger. “Listen! I am standing at the door, knocking…Let anyone who has an ear listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches.” The stranger outside knocking on the church’s door is Christ; the stranger knocking on the church’s closet door inside is a part of the Body of Christ. “Who was I that I could hinder God?” Peter rhetorically asked the early church about his decision to baptize those whom God had already baptized with the Spirit. Who are we, as the church, that we can hinder God’s work welcoming lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered people in the church and into the church? Even if there were a kind of divine intervention to effect metanoia, a positive aboutface conversion of the church in which LGBT people would be welcomed wholeheartedly, the work of reconciliation, affirmation, welcoming, openness, and more light would need to continue for decades. As conclusion, it is helpful to review our needs as a movement from Morris Floyd’s analysis of the United Methodist experience: 1. A solid theological foundation for the work is a necessity. 2. With a theological foundation, the work of systemic change and issue advocacy is seen as a ministry, not merely a political agenda. 3. If the work is a ministry in the name of Christ, it must be done with an explicit commitment to address systemic exclusion and injustice tied to race, gender, and class, as well as homophobia/heterosexism. 4. The welcoming movement should include and benefit from the diversities of a faith community incorporating the multiple “styles” people bring to their lives, as well as various leadership styles, strategies, and attitudes toward issues. It has become much clearer in the last few years than it was in the early days of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered movement that the controversy about homosexuality in the churches is a symptom of deeper divisions over biblical interpretation, ecclesiology and, ultimately the meaning of the Gospel. It is unclear when and how—or whether—these wounds can be healed. But we can support with our prayers and presence those with the faith, hope, and courage to keep at it in the welcoming movement. Being Inclusive as God Is “Therefore be inclusive, evenly as your heavenly Parent is inclusive.” The word inclusive is usually translated as perfect, but the word so translated means mature. If maturity is integrity, a bringing together, a reconciliation, then surely inclusive might also be used. After all, the verse follows the one about God sending rain and sunshine on everybody and thus we are to include everybody in our love. Therefore, since we are surrounded by SO GREAT A CLOUD OF WITNESSES, let us also lay aside every weight and the sin that clings so closely, and let us run with perseverance the race that is set before us, LOOKING TO JESUS the pioneer and perfecter of our faith who for the sake of the JOY that was set before him endured the cross, disregarding its SHAME, and has taken his seat at the right hand of the throne of God. Hebrews 12:1-2 Spring 2000 27 Outreach In 1981 I was the member of an unremarkable Lutheran congregation in rural Illinois. In response to an article in the Lutheran Standard, the church-wide publication of the American Lutheran Church, I wrote a letter to the editor in which I came out as a gay man. Ironically, the article that prompted my letter described a Metropolitan Community Church in Ohio that ministered to gay and lesbian Christians who felt unwelcome in other churches. Members of St. Paul’s were appalled to read that they had an unrepentant gay man among their members. Some expressed the fear that homosexuals would flock to their small town and that they would become known as a “gay church” if they took no action. The president of the church council thought beating me up might be a good way to make their displeasure known. Fortunately, the pastor declined his offer. They held a church trial instead, and in 1982 they expelled me from the congregation. I became the president of the Board of Directors of Lutherans Concerned/North America later in 1982. Hoping to identify congregations that would provide a safe haven for lesbians and gay men, I helped establish the Reconciled In Christ Program (now Reconciling In Christ). It was my hope that doing so would help others avoid the spiritual trauma I had experienced. We intentionally set the threshold for membership in the program very low. Congregations were not asked to take a stand on any issue related to homosexuality other than membership in the parish, and then only to state that gay and lesbian folks were welcome on the same terms as all other people. Queer folk were encouraged and expected to participate in the general and sacramental life of the congregation. This was not intended as a program for radical congregations committed to social justice. The intention was only to identify places where lesbian and gay Lutherans might worship in peace. In 1982 I also moved to Atlanta and joined the large downtown church to which several of my Lutheran friends belonged. One friend commented that the congregation (which will remain nameless) was a good choice for gay people because it was “so big you can just get lost here, and nobody cares who you are.” For better or worse, I found this to be true. The pastor was supportive when I spoke with him about joining. I had no membership to transfer, having been disfellowshipped by St. Paul’s Church. I joined without difficulty or controversy. When I talked to him later about our congregation joining the RIC program, he was adamant in his opposition. His church would never join the program; it was not the congregation’s place to welcome or refuse to welcome anyone. “Everyone” was welcome in the church, and there would be no “special” welcome to anyone. What about my previous experience, I asked? That was unfortunate, he told me, but an anomaly. There was no need for a special welcome for lesbians and gays. To this day the congregation remains a place where gay folk are welcome to sing in the choir and to give their tithes…and where they remain largely invisible. Eighteen years later, 180 congregations have joined the RIC program—about one percent of the congregations of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. At last count, 14 synods (out of 65) have also affirmed the principles of welcome. The glass is half-full or half-empty, depending on your perspective. The principles remain largely the same—minimal in what they ask of congregations. They continue to affirm membership for queer folk, not our ordination or even the blessing of our relationships. There is no expectation that congregations will become advocates for justice on our behalf, either in secular society or within the church. I find myself ambivalent. It is hard to know what it means when a synod— the Lutheran equivalent of a district or a diocese— joins the RIC program. It feels like an accomplishment to have that sort of affirmation. Does it mean that the congregations within the synod all welcome lesbians and gay men as members? I wonder. Would these synods take action should a congregation be hostile to gay or lesbian people? I doubt it. If these principles of inclusion were rather conservative in the early 1980’s, they seem even more so now. It is true that explicitly welcoming gay members would still be a large step for many Christian congregations. Within the context of the gay community, such programs seem overtaken by events. A block away from the Lutheran congregation which has— still— refused to become explicit in its welcome of gay folk, a Methodist congregation has shamelessly thrown open its doors and shouted its welcome from the rooftops. Gay folk are included not only in membership and in the choir, but find their lives included in sermons. They are a vital part of every aspect of congregational life. The result is that a declining congregation has been reinvigorated by hundreds of lesbians and gay men who have found a genuine spiritual home. Gay women and men make tremendous contributions to the congregations and parishes of which they are members. For congregations to simply welcome these gifts is no longer enough. Churches that want to be relevant to the lives of queer folk and their families need to find their voices and their courage, to speak up and put their welcome into action. John R. Ballew, M.S., is a licensed professional counselor in private practice in Atlanta. 28 Open Hands Welcoming Process Ten years ago this month my partner Carla and I were in a crucible of life-changing decisions. Seniors at Taylor University, a conservative evangelical institution in Indiana, we had just begun the journey toward joy and self-acceptance as a lesbian couple. Only a few months before, we had journeyed for the first time to visit Grace Baptist Church in Chicago. Grace was a fairly new congregation, and still an independent Baptist evangelical community. Founded as an independent welcoming Baptist church, it was one of the earliest Midwestern witnesses of welcome. Supported with Grace’s love and prayer, we survived our senior year at Taylor and sought refuge at Grace upon graduation. The story of our salvation is just one of countless stories which the walls of Grace could shout. We moved to Chicago in 1990 to become a part of the Grace community. We have been sustained by our loving congregation as we have declared our story in the face of condemnation and rejection by loved ones. We have grown in our understanding of the Gospel, and I have grown in my understanding of and call to leadership in ministry. After more than a year of discernment, Grace sought affiliation with the American Baptist Churches of Metro Chicago in 1991. There was no small amount of fear on the part of the congregation. Why risk this affiliation? Wouldn’t we be abused and rejected, ultimately? Considered second class citizens? After much discussion, strong consensus led us forward: We wanted to proclaim our witness to the Gospel of Jesus Christ in partnership with others. We were clear that our motives were focused on the desire to do common mission in a Baptist context of theological diversity. Several meetings occurred with the regional investigating committee and any significant doubts which they had were, if not dismissed, bracketed. With NO consensus about the nature or appropriateness of homosexuality, the committee recommended that we be approved for affiliation. Testimony to our life was clear, and they responded with faithfulness in recognizing it. We were voted into fellowship in March of 1992. In the months that followed there were numerous attempts led by individuals and churches to remove us, or to qualify the region’s acceptance of us with disclaimers about acceptance of homosexuality. At every turn, brothers and sisters who are liberal, moderate or conservative on the issue of homosexuality held the “center” and resisted such moves. For these people, the testimony of our congregation to the redeeming and healing power of Jesus, which called us into mission, was sufficient. If they had not already encountered our story, they were nevertheless committed to preserving the possibility of such encounter within the context of formal partnership in ministry. Those who would “put the disease out of the camp” (an exact quote) had no way of entering into such encounter and have, in fact, missed out on the complete joy of fellowship. Over the years several congregations have withdrawn their fellowship from our region, citing their opposition to our presence as “the” reason. Grace’s witness has continued within our region as we consistently model commitment to regional events, involvement in committee responsibilities, financial commitments and mission commitments. Between 1996 and 1999 we ordained three individuals from Grace, each with the region’s recognition and affirmation of our candidate preparation process. The Metro Chicago region has responded, again and again, with an openness to actual encounter. Has it been perfect? No! But a consistent witness remains. Those early resistances to our exorcism were key. A tone of sanity and study was forged. In 1993, when we put forth our first two candidates for regional recognition of ordination, neither were then approved. One disclosed nothing about her sexual orientation, but the Ordination Commission, operating in a context of fear in a highly politicized climate did not provide a safe and affirming context for the exploration of call. In response to the other candidate, who identified himself as a gay man, they froze the application process for any openly gay, lesbian or bisexual candidate and entered into a “study process” in order to adopt a policy on openly homosexual candidates. Of course, many regions in ours and other denominations have entered into such study processes. They often become embittered battles over the nature of homosexuality and/or who is the legitimate reader of scripture. They seem constructed to identify winners or losers. By contrast, the leaders in Chicago were intentional about selecting a culturally and theologically diverse Task Force for the study process, on which I was privileged to serve. We all committed in the first meeting that we would only produce a document which we could all sign, and that we would, above all, model the kind of discernment and community which we desired for our region. From the first discussion, we approached our task from a desire to identify its implications for ministry. What do we really believe about Who calls people to ministry? In what context do Baptists historically believe this is best discerned? What are the gifts and challenges in relating to external bodies (ordination commissions) who share a role in such discernment? The process was one of the most amazing, Spirit-led processes I have experienced. In the end, our group produced a clarifying document, rather than a simple one-dimensional recommendation. In it we highlighted the theological ground of our work and the implications for proceeding in several ways. Two committees and two years later, in March of 1997, the region adopted an ordination policy which affirms the local church’s role in the initial assessment of a candidate’s call to ministry. Our policy clearly states that homosexual persons will not be barred for this sole reason from entering the regional interview process. By adopting this policy, the region affirmed both the local church and the standing Ordination Commissions as sites of discernment in the affirmation of one’s call. We clarified the relationship between these two sites as it relates to any controversial issue. Spring 2000 29 In 1998 I became the first openly gay or lesbian candidate to enter our regional process. My two interviews, nearly a year apart, were intense discussions of my call, my “lifestyle” and my theology. I entered the discussions with a spirit of peace which, indeed, passes understanding. I engaged people with respect and boldness because there was an invisible cloud of witnesses in the room with me, and because a number of people present were people whom I trusted in the discernment process. I had clarity and joy as I testified to my call because I was well-prepared by Grace’s ministry and my studies at Chicago Theological Seminary. They approved me for recognized ordination in March 1999. In June 2000, an interfaith gathering of 180 people proclaimed a blessing on my ordination, laid hands on me (one-by-one) and committed to supporting my leadership in ministry. It was a lavish, sensual, joyful proclamation of Gospel— known with such certainty to those who have been cut off from its proclamation. What a wonder it was to have people bless my leadership who are outside of the institutional church! It was sacred ground of connection and hope for the future of the church. Nearly ten years ago, my friend and mentor Tim Phillips (founding pastor of Grace) said to me “We’ll never change anyone’s mind about homosexuality with mere discussion. It takes the testimonies of our lives; our lives are the parables which speak God’s gospel.” This truth has been borne out over and over again in my relationships with family and friends, at Grace, in our Region and denomination and throughout the welcoming movements. At the heart, his words were about incarnational witness. Maybe its the latent evangelical in me, but I absolutely believe that our lives are essential witnesses in the process of transformation. The transformations which we seek can not be reduced to the helpful strategies of political organizing, or the naivete of quietism and caution. As our lives are lived, as we mature in and bear out the fruits of the spirit, we become the parables which open up new possibilities of Gospel. It was the contagious (yes, perhaps we ARE contagious!) evangelistic nature of our witness that he was talking about. Why has Chicago, admittedly not perfect, been fertile ground for American Baptists? I believe it’s because there has been a consensus among those who have remained active in regional life that the Gospel is revealed in unexpected places. They have stood by historical theological principles which preserve not only the liberty of individuals (soul liberty) but the liberty of God. It must be reiterated: There is no consensus in our region about the nature or appropriateness of homosexuality. This disappoints some of my beloved activist-oriented friends. What we do have is a consensus about the ground of our relationships in shared ministry. Grace has led the way in incarnational witness, and the region has responded with a renewed vision and witness of grace itself. Jacki Belile (jbbelile@aol.com) is Associate Pastor at Grace Baptist Church in Chicago and Marketing Manager for Open Hands magazine. She lives in Chicago with Carla Riggs, her beautiful partner of thirteen years. Together, they are in search of other LGBT alumni/ae of Taylor University. ❑ Send me Open Hands each quarter ($20/year; outside U.S.A. @ $25). ❑ Send Open Hands gift subscription(s) to name(s) attached. Enclosed is my payment of $ _______ OR Charge $ _____________ to my VISA MASTERCARD (Circle one) # __________________________________________ Expiration _____/_____. Name on Card ____________________________________________________ Signature ________________________________________________________ My Name ________________________________________________________ Address _________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip _____________________________________________________ Daytime Phone (______) _____________________ Local Church _____________________________________________________ Denomination _____________________________________________________ Send to: Open Hands, 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 Published by the Reconciling Congregation Program in conjunction with Affirming Congregation Programme, More Light Presbyterians, Open and Affirming Ministries, Open and Affirming Program, Reconciling in Christ, and Welcoming & Affirming Baptist programs. A Unique Resource on Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual Concerns in the Church for Christian Education • Personal Reading Research Projects • Worship Resources Ministry & Outreach an historic ecumenical gathering of Welcoming Churches and their allies in the U.S. and Canada August 3-6, 2000 Northern Illinois University (outside Chicago) The largest ever Christian conference addressing concerns of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered persons! Worship * Workshops * Bible Study * Performances Celebrations * Denominational Gatherings * Youth Program For more information on this gala event or to find out how you can support WOW2000, contact: WOW2000 5250 N. Broadway • PMB#111 • Chicago, IL 60640 800-318-5581 • www.wow2k.org Introduction to Shining Like the Sun A Santoral Cycle for ALL the Saints David Kerr Park The writer of the book of Hebrews wrote eloquently of the meaning of faith, and of those who set an example for us to follow, including Abraham, Moses, and primarily, Jesus: “Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight and let us run with perseverance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus the pioneer and perfecter of our faith” (Hebrews 12:1-2). William How expressed the same idea in that hymn set to the stirring music of Vaughn Williams: For all the saints, who from their labors rest, who thee by faith before the world confessed, thy name, O Jesus, be forever blest. Alleluia, Alleluia! This great cloud of witnesses surrounds us like a sports stadium full of cheering fans. We are on the field of life and they are there encouraging us to faithfully run our race. They point beyond themselves to Jesus as our great example. This is why it is important to remember them. Robert Ellsberg, in All Saints: Daily Reflections on Saints, Prophets, and Witnesses For Our Time, explained in his Introduction: “No, the saints are not perfect human beings. But in their own individual fashion, they became authentic human beings, endowed with the capacity to awaken that vocation in others. Dorothy Day, as I have noted, did not like to be called a saint: ‘When they call you a saint, basically it means you are not to be taken seriously.’ This book offers a different argument: that to call someone a saint means that his or her life should be taken with the utmost seriousness. It is a proof that the gospel can be lived.” Remembering the examples of those who have gone before us gives us role models for what it means to live the gospel. Thomas Merton said, “There is no way of telling people that they are all walking around shining like the sun.” We are the only saints most people will ever see. Like the saints, we are walking around shining like the sun. They give us an idea of what that looks like. One part of the Church Year that is unfamiliar to most Protestants is the ongoing remembrance of the saints on the anniversaries of their deaths. While the Reformation omitted most of this ancient Christian tradition, many Protestant denominations today have begun to recover its practice. The ecumenical movement has rediscovered the value of looking to our common past to find our identity as God s people today. This list is called the Sanctoral Cycle, and there are many versions. When most people think of saints they think of white, European, Catholic, male, presumably heterosexual clergy from ancient history. Little wonder. The official lists in the Book of Common Prayer and Catholic prayer books are pretty much just that. When was the last time you were inspired by Wulfstan, Bishop of Worcester, who died in 1095? Not many modern people can identify with most of the names in the historic Sanctoral Cycle. Some of them are so significant they transcend the distance of time. Some may have meant something in a particular place and time, but aren t as important now. For this ancient Christian idea to have any purpose, a new list is needed that speaks to us and our time. I have developed a Sanctoral Cycle for use in my congregation, which includes people from very diverse backgrounds. On any given Sunday nearly 500 people will gather, with over half coming from Catholic or Episcopal backgrounds. We affirm spiritual diversity as a positive value, so we also welcome a significant number of people from non-Christian faith traditions. We are a Eucharistic church with an odd mix of Anglo- Catholic liturgy and Protestant music, flavored with New Thought and Liberation theology. The list we are now using is more reflective of the faith and contributions of women (Fanny Crosby, Julian of Norwich), lay persons (Dorothy Day, Thoreau), ethnic minorities (Sojourner Truth, Seattle), non-Europeans (Oscar Romero), Protestants (Luther, Kierkegaard), and especially modern examples we can better relate to (Mother Teresa, Ann Frank). The objective has been to create an inclusive, contemporary Sanctoral Cycle that can be used in practical ways, especially in a gay and lesbian context. It is a work in progress, and will be updated. I have retained only a core of historical and biblical names that are still meaningful today (Mary the Mother of Jesus, St. Francis of Assisi). Then I added others not usually represented, such as persons of other faith traditions through whom the light of Truth has also shown (Rabbi Abraham Heschel, Gandhi), or artists and musicians (Michaelangelo, Bach). In selecting contemporary examples I have emphasized persons who stood for inclusiveness, justice, and spiritual diversity (Martin Luther King, Clarence Jordan). I’ve also included gay and lesbian saints (Dag Hammarskjold, St. Aelred, Sts. Sergius and Bacchus) and martyrs (Matthew Shepherd, Harvey Milk) because it is critical for us to reclaim our own heritage as spiritual leaders and people of faith. Beyond the Sanctoral Cycle itself, some days in the Cycle of Commemorations are not saints’ days. Some are other days in liturgical calendars (Epiphany, Ash Wednesday, Week of Prayer for Christian Unity). There are many days on the civil calendar (Thanksgiving, Mother’s Day) which, while not part of the liturgical calendar, are still important in people s lives. It is important, in the United States, at least, to keep American Civil Religion (Independence Day, Memorial Day) from taking an inappropriate place in our worship. That is not to say these cannot be occasions for prayer and awareness. There are civil recognitions which can have spiritual significance for a congregation, such as Black History Month, Earth Day, Peoples of the Americas, and others. Even those Hallmark holidays can present pastoral opportunities, like a Blessing of Relationships on the Sunday nearest Valentine’s Day. In some congregations it may be appropriate to remember the celebrations of other faith traditions, especially those of our spiritual parents, the Jewish people. In our congregation we have a significant number of mixed faith couples. We do not cease to be a Christian church, but we are sensitive to find some ways of recognizing the passing of days like Rosh HaShanah, Yom Kippur, Passover, Hanukkah, and Yom HaSho-ah (Holocaust remembrance). For a congregation that affirms the experience and pastoral needs of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered 30 Open Hands persons, there are several days that should be included, such as National Coming Out Day, World AIDS Day, and GLBT Pride Month. Depending on the particular congregation, the founding dates of Dignity, Integrity, the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches, or the various reconciling and affirming organizations represented in Open Hands could be celebrated and remembered in the prayers. My hope is that this Cycle of Commemorations can be used creatively in a number of practical ways. A contemporary calendar that is sensitive to the spirituality of sexual minorities (among others) could well form a core of spiritual models for use in preaching, teaching, and prayer. This list is not suited for each church. We all have different denominational and local factors that must be taken into consideration. I encourage each church to develop their own list that speaks to their own people; but don t be afraid to expand people’s awareness of other traditions, races, nations, and religions. How better to emphasize our common humanity? Those selected should be persons whose lives are prayable, as a United Methodist cycle suggests. Each week in the Communion liturgy at my church we remember persons who have recently died, as well as loved ones on the anniversary of their deaths. To this is added those names from the Sanctoral Cycle. Some of these go by the traditional designation of saint, while others don’t. Here is the closing portion of our Great Thanksgiving: One of the more popular special services we hold each year is on All Soul’s Day. A large cross is formed with tables in the center of the sanctuary, on which are placed hundreds of small votive candles. Following the sermon there is a solemn Time of Remembrance which brings many to tears. A song is sung, such as Charles Wesley’s “Come, Let Us Join Our Friends Above,” or others written within our congregation. While the song is sung several large candles on the tables are lit from the Paschal Candle, which stands at the top of the cross. The cross is blessed with incense on all sides. Verses of Scripture are read, such as portions of Rev. 7:9-17 or 14:13. People are invited to come to the tables informally and light a candle in memory of a loved one as they speak the name aloud. Also included are the names of those from the Sanctoral Cycle that people find personally meaningful. It is a very moving experience. The ceremony closes with a prayer that concludes with the traditional prayer: “Rest eternal grant to them, O God, and let light perpetual shine upon them. May the souls of all the faithful departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace.” Each month we publish a short biography of those from the Sanctoral Cycle being remembered, and the significance of each day to our lives and faith today. Our web site will soon include this information for the entire year’s cycle. (And I am certainly open to suggestions and additions!) Not all the names in the Sanctoral Cycle are familiar. They were selected not because they were perfect—far from it—but rather because they really made a difference in our world (Florence Nightingale, Albert Schweitzer). In the Christian Scriptures, of course, the saints are the entire company of the baptized. One is called a saint, not for being holy, in the sense of exhibiting some special sanctity unobtainable by the rest of us, but for doing something holy for God. Oskar Schindler did not live an especially virtuous or religious life, but he is remembered because he was used by God to do something holy. Those whom God has chosen for special tasks have always been flawed persons. Moses was a murderer. Peter denied even knowing Jesus. Paul was sexist (and maybe closeted!). Luther had a terrible temper. In spite of these failings, God used them to do something holy. Just like Jesus, these saints embody what God calls us to do and be. May their witness of faith inspire us to share our light! In the words of the contemporary hymn writer Fred Pratt Green: Rejoice in God’s saints, today and all days; a world without saints forgets how to praise. In loving, in living, they prove it is true: the way of self-giving, Lord, leads us to you. David Kerr Park is the Associate Pastor of Sunshine Cathedral MCC (www.sunshinecathedral.org), and a former United Methodist clergyperson. His M.Div. is from the Methodist Theological School in Ohio and D.Min. from South Florida Center for Theological Studies. His primary work has been in the liturgical and psychosocial dynamics of ritual in the gay and lesbian community. He lives in Ft. Lauderdale, FL, where he is raising his two sons. He can be contacted at DKPark@aol.com. For further information see: Robert Ellsberg, All Saints: Daily Reflections On Saints, Prophets, and Witnesses For Our Time (New York: Crossroad Publishing, 1997). Clifton F. Guthrie, ed., For All The Saints: A Calendar of Commemorations for United Methodists (Akron, OH: Order of St. Luke Publications, 1995). The Proper for the Lesser Feasts and Fasts together with The Fixed Holy Days (New York: The Church Hymnal Corporation, 1980). A wonderful collection of icons is offered by Bridge Building Images (www.bridgebuilding.com). They make both traditional and contemporary icons, including several of interest to our community: Sts. Sergius and Bacchus, David and Jonathan, St. Aelred, Sts. Perpetua and Felicity, Christ the Bridegroom (with the Beloved Disciple’s head on Jesus’ breast), St. Joan of Arc, We wha (a Zuni berdache), and even Harvey Milk! We honor our ancestors of family and of faith affirming our inheritance as daughters and sons of God to manifest wholeness, abundance, health and peace in our lives, our communities, our Earth-home and the Cosmos. We commemorate this Eucharist to those who have recently died: [names inserted here] We commemorate this Eucharist, on the anniversary of their death to our loved ones who live in the dimension called Eternity: [names inserted here] Together with your servants, [names from Sanctoral Cycle inserted here] all this we ask in the name of our Master, Jesus the Anointed: By Christ, and with Christ, and in Christ… Spring 2000 31 JANUARY 1: Holy Name of Jesus 3: Takashi Nagai (1908-1951) mystic of Nagasaki 5: Lanza del Vasto (1901-1981) founder of the Community of the Ark and Catholic follower of Gandhi 6: The Epiphany of Jesus 7: Felix and Mary Barreda (d.1983) Lay apostles and martyrs in Nicaragua 13: George Fox (1624-1691) Renewer of society and founder of the Society of Friends 14: Martin Niemoeller (1892-1984) Confessing pastor 21: St. Agnes (d. 304) Free woman and martyr 22: Alexander Men (1935-1990) Russian Orthodox priest and martyr 24: St. Francis de Sales (1567-1622) Bishop of Geneva 25: The Conversion of St. Paul 26: Timothy and Titus Companions of Paul 28: St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) Theologian and Doctor of the Church 30: Mohandas K. Gandhi (1869-1948) Apostle of nonviolence FEBRUARY 2: Presentation of Jesus in the Temple (Candlemas) 3: St. Aelred of Rievaulx (1110-1167) Cistercian abbot and patron saint of Integrity 4: Cornelius the Centurion 8: Martin Buber (1878-1965) Jewish philosopher and theologian 11: Fanny Jane Crosby (1820-1915) Blind hymn writer and musician 14: St. Valentine (d. 269) Martyr 16: Janani Luwum (1924-1977) Anglican Archbishop of Uganda and martyr 18: Martin Luther (1483-1546) Reformer of the Church 20: Frederick Douglass (1818-1895) Abolitionist 25: Felix Varela (1788-1853) Cuban priest and theologian MARCH 2: John and Charles Wesley (1703-1791, 1788) Anglican priests and founders of Methodism 5: Karl Rahner (1904-1984) Theologian 7: Sts. Perpetua and Felicity (d. 203) martyrs 10: Harriet Tubman (1820?-1913) Abolitionist 14: Fannie Lou Hamer (1917-1977) Prophet of freedom 17: St. Patrick (389-461) Bishop and missionary of Ireland 19: St. Joseph Temporal father of Jesus 21: Johann Sebastian Bach (1685-1750) Composer of sacred music 24: Archbishop Oscar Arnulfo Romero (1917-1980) martyr of El Salvador 25: The Annunciation to the Blessed Virgin Mary 26: Bishop Richard Allen (1760-1831) Founder of African Methodist Episcopal Church 27: Meister Eckhart (1260-1329) Dominican theologian and mystic 30: Sister Thea Bowman (1937-1990 African-American Franciscan APRIL 4: Martin Luther King, Jr. (1929-1968) Apostle of freedom and renewer of society 9: Dietrich Bonhoeffer (1906-1945) Theologian and martyr 10: Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955) Mystic and scientist 23: Cesar Chavez (1927-1993) Farmworker organizer 25: St. Mark Apostle and Evangelist 28: Oskar Schindler (1908-1974) Righteous Gentile 29: St. Catherine of Siena (1347-1380) Doctor of the church MAY 1: St. Thomas à Kempis (1380-1471) Spiritual master and priest 6: Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) Naturalist and social critic 8: Beatified Julian of Norwich (1342-1416) Mystic 17: Beatified Josephine Bakhita (1869-1947) Ex-slave and nun 22: Rabbi Baal Shem Tov (1700-1760) Founder of Hasidism 27: John Calvin (d. 1564) Founder of Reformed movement 30: St. Joan of Arc (1412?-1431) Maid of Orleans and martyr 31: Visitation of the Blessed Virgin Mary JUNE 1: St. Justin of Rome (c. 167) martyr 3: Pope John XXIII (1881-1963) Reformer of the church 7: Seattle (1786?-1866) Chief of the Suquamish 12: Anne Frank (1929-1945) Witness of the Holocaust 25: Sadhu Sundar Singh (1889-1929) Indian Christian mystic 27: Anniversary of Stonewall Riots 29: St. Peter and St. Paul Apostles JULY 6: Hus (1372-1415) Czech reformer and martyr 9: Augustus Tolton (1854-1897) First African-American priest 21: Albert Luthuli (1898-1967) Zulu chief and Nobel laureate 22: St. Mary Magdalene 29: William Wilberforce (1759-1833) Abolitionist 30: Mary, Martha, and Lazarus of Bethany—Jesus’ family of choice 31: St. Ignatius of Loyola (1491-1556) Founder of the Society of Jesus AUGUST 7: John Mason Neale (1818-1866) Liturgical reformer and hymn writer 11: St. Clare (1193-1253) Abbess at Assisi 13: Florence Nightingale (1820-1910) Nurse and health care reformer 14: St. Maximilian Kolbe (1894-1941) Polish Franciscan priest and martyr 15: St. Mary, Mother of Jesus 21: Georgia Harkness (1891-1974) Theologian and social critic 24: Simone Weil (1909-1943) Philosopher and mystic 28: St. Augustine (354-430) Bishop of Hippo and Doctor of the Church 31: John Bunyan (1628-1688) Puritan preacher and writer SEPTEMBER 3: Samuel Checote (d. 1884) Creek Native-American Chief and preacher 4: Albert Schweitzer (1875-1965) Missionary doctor and Nobel laureate 5: Mother Teresa of Calcutta (1910-1997) Founder of the Missionaries of Charity 15: Martyrs of Birmingham (d. 1963) Four young girls 17: St. Hildegard of Bingen (1098-1179) Abbess and visionary 18: Dag Hammarskjold (1905-1961) Secretary General of the UN 20: Henri Nouwen (1932-1996) Priest and spiritual guide 21: St. Matthew Apostle and Evangelist 27: St. Vincent de Paul (1580-1660) Apostle to the poor 29: St. Michael and All Angels OCTOBER 4: St. Francis of Assisi (1182-1226) Friar and founder of Franciscan order 6: Founding of Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches (1968) Anniversary of first service held by Troy Perry 7: Sts. Sergius and Bacchus (d. 290) martyrs in death and lovers in life 11: National Coming Out Day—Anniversary of National March on Washington for Gay Rights 12: Matthew Shepherd (1976-1998) Victim of hate crime 15: St. Teresa of Avila (1515-1582) Mystic and doctor of the church 16: Archbishop Thomas Cranmer (d. 1556) Creator of the Book of Common Prayer 18: St. Luke Apostle and Evangelist 22: Maura O’Halloran 1955-1982 Christian Zen monk 23: St. James of Jerusalem (c. 62) Brother of Jesus and martyr 29: Clarence Jordan (1912-1969) Founder of Koinonia Farm 31: Reformation Day NOVEMBER 1: Feast of All Saints 2: Commemoration of All Faithful Departed (All Soul’s) 9: Martyrs of Kristallnacht (1938) Victims of anti- Semitism 11: Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1855) Philosopher 12: Sor Juana Ines de la Cruz (1651-1694) Poet and scholar 16: St. Margaret (1046-1093) Queen and patron of Scotland 26: Sojourner Truth (1797-1883) Abolitionist preacher 27: Harvey Milk (1931-1978) First openly gay elected official (USA) 29: Dorothy Day (1897-1980) Co-founder of the Catholic Worker DECEMBER 1: World AIDS Day 3: St. Francis Xavier (1506-1552) Jesuit missionary to Japan 9: Blessed Juan Diego (16th century) Witness to Our Lady of Guadalupe 10: Thomas Merton (1915-1968) Trappist monk 12: Sister Alicia Domon (d.1977) French nun and martyr of Argentina 23: Rabbi Abraham Heschel (1907-1972) Teacher and prophet 25: Nativity of Jesus (c. 4 bce) 26: St. Stephen (c. 34) First deacon and martyr 27: St. John Apostle and Evangelist 28: The Holy Innocents Children of Bethlehem 29: St. Thomas Becket (1118-1170) Archbishop and martyr Shining Like the Sun The Cycle of Commemorations compiled by David Kerr Park Sustaining the Spirit 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 Open Hands Vol 15 No 4 - For All the Saints https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/f2f55a56b3e4ddfd2ad3d0c4e0ead4fd.pdf 359a5302fc2c8999bb3dd785963da601 Issue An issue of a recurring publication. Volume Number The volume number of the issue 16 Issue Number The number of the issue (within a volume) 1 Publication Year The year the issue was published 2000 Publication Date The date the issue was published Summer Text Any textual data included in the document 2 Open Hands Vol. 16 No. 1 Summer 2000 Shaping an Inclusive Church Affirming Congregation Programme More Light Presbyterians Open & Affirming Ministries Open and Affirming Program Reconciling Congregation Program Reconciling in Christ Program Welcoming & Affirming Baptists Interim Executive Publisher Marilyn Alexander Editor Chris Glaser Designer In Print—Jan Graves Marketing Manager Jacki Belile Editorial Advisory Committee Vaughn Beckman, O&A Bill Capel, MLP Ann Marie Coleman, ONA Chris Copeland, W&A Bobbi Hargleroad, MLP Tom Harshman, O&A Alyson Huntly, ACP Bonnie Kelly, ACP Susan Laurie, RCP Samuel E. Loliger, ONA Ruth Moerdyk, SCN Caroline Presnell, RCP Paul Santillán, RCP Julie Sevig, RIC Kelly Sprinkle, W&A Kathy Stayton, W&A Margarita Suaréz, ONA Judith Hoch Wray, O&A Stuart Wright, RIC and Program Coordinators Open Hands is the quarterly magazine of the welcoming movement, a consortium of programs that support individuals and congregations in efforts to welcome lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, and transgenders in all areas of church life. Open Hands was founded and is published by the Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (United Methodist), in cooperation with the six ecumenical partners listed above. Each program is a national network of local congregations and ministries that publicly affirm their welcome of LGBT people, their families and friends. These seven programs, along with Supportive Congregations (Brethren/Mennonite [www.webcom. com/bmc], Oasis Congregations (Episcopal), Welcoming Congregations (Unitarian Universalist), and INCLUSIVE Congregations (United Kingdom)—offer hope that the church can be a more inclusive community. Subscription is $20 for four issues ($25 outside the U.S.). Single copies and back issues are $6; quantities of 10 or more, $4 each. Subscriptions, requests for advertising rates, and other business correspondence should be sent to: Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 www.rcp.org/openhands/index.html Member, The Associated Church Press © 2000 Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. Open Hands is a registered trademark. ISSN 0888-8833 Printed on recycled paper. NEXT ISSUE: THE HEALING TOUCH—Pastoral Concerns THE gOD OF VIOLENCE The god of Violence 4 CHRIS GLASER God’s “tough love” doesn’t care about control, coercion, or conformity. Toward a Nonviolent Understanding of Atonement 5 CARTER HEYWARD God as a Spirit of “revolutionary patience” rather than bloodthirsty judge. Lament of Matthew Shepard 6 ELAINE BLANCHARD A psalm of lament with no happy ending. A Poem by J. Barrie Shepherd 8 The Biblical Word on Violence—Oppression vs. Liberating Justice 11 TOM HANKS The perceived difference between violence and force. They Know Not What They Do 13 MARTHA JUILLERAT “Just kill them,” one delegate to the United Methodist General Conference shouted. Becoming Joseph 14 THOMAS KELSON LEWIS A poem about transgender minister Joseph Lobdell. No Excuse for Abuse 15 MICHAEL KINNAMON Handling violence with grace. The Sacrifice — A Short Story 16 D. S. CARLSTONE Abe and Sara, we have a problem. Real Presence 18 J. BARRIE SHEPHERD A poem about gay pride and eyes of faith. I Speak Today As One Black Gay Man 19 A Poem for the Millennium March KEITH BOYKIN Summer 2000 3 Publisher Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (UMC) Marilyn Alexander, Interim Coordinator 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 773/736-5526 www.rcp.org Ecumenical Partners Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada) Ron Coughlin, Coordinator P.O. Box 333, Station Q, Toronto, Ontario CANADA M4T 2M5 416/466-1489 acpucc@aol.com More Light Presbyterians (PCUSA) Michael J. Adee, Coordinator 369 Montezuma Ave. PMB #447 Santa Fe, NM 87501-2626 505/820-7082 www.mlp.org Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ) John Wade Payne, Interim Coordinator P.O. Box 44400, Indianapolis, IN 46244 941/728-8833 www.sacredplaces.com/glad Open and Affirming Program (UCC) Ann B. Day, Coordinator P.O. Box 403, Holden, MA 01520 508/856-9316 www.coalition.simplenet.com Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran) Bob Gibeling, Coordinator 2466 Sharondale Drive, Atlanta, GA 30305 404/266-9615 www.lcna.org Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (ABC/USA) Brenda J. Moulton, Coordinator P.O. Box 2596, Attleboro Falls, MA 02763 508/226-1945 users.aol.com/wabaptists MINISTRIES MARRIAGE A Letter from Jimmy Creech 22 JIMMY CREECH Reflections on the Second Jimmy Creech Trial 23 MARILYN ALEXANDER Law vs. Truth 24 DAVID COOPER Let Us Be Impatient With Prejudice 25 WILLIAM SLOANE COFFIN WELCOMING PROCESS Conflict Resolution 26 DEETTE BEGHTOL CAMPUS Pacific School of Religion Opens Center for Lesbian and Gay Studies 27 JANE AUSTIN SUSTAINING THE SPIRIT “Diversity” 28 A NEW SONG BY MARSHA STEVENS WELCOMING COMMUNITIES ............ 30 MOVEMENT NEWS ............................. 31 Call for articles and columns for Open Hands Spring 2001 DOWN ON THE FARM Addressing Rural Issues Theme Section: How is it for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people, their families, friends, and congregations, in rural communities and towns? How do agrarian congregations and governing bodies deal with issues of diversity and inclusion, especially in the area of sexual diversity? And what are some of the misconceptions of their urban brothers and sisters? For this issue, we welcome a good mix of personal stories of individuals or individual congregations (or church bodies) as well as analysis articles. 1000-2500 words per article, photographs welcome. Ministries Section: Columns may include: Welcoming Process, Connections (with other justice issues), Worship, Spirituality, Outreach, Leadership, Marriage, Health, Youth, Campus, Children, and Parents. These brief articles may or may not have to do with the theme of the issue. 750-1000 words. Contact with ideas by December 1, 2000 Manuscript deadline: January 25, 2001 Chris Glaser, Phone/Fax 404/622-4222 or e-mail at ChrsGlaser@aol.com 991 Berne St. SE, Atlanta, GA 30316-1859 USA 4 Open Hands In the film Dominick and Eugene, the mentally disabled Dominick witnesses child abuse firsthand, perpetrated by a father on his son, a boy whom Dominick befriended along his garbage route. Seeking refuge in the sanctuary of his Catholic church, a priest approaches him to see if he can be of any help. Tearfully Dominick points to Jesus on the cross and passionately says, “I would never let that happen to my son!” Even growing up as a fundamentalist biblical literalist, the concept of a bloodthirsty god who demanded the death of his own son seemed out of kilter with what I had otherwise been taught about God. Singing hymns like “There Is a Fountain Filled With Blood” and “Washed in the Blood of the Lamb” offered gruesome images. (I also wondered how blood could make me “clean” or “white as snow!”) And yet there was some comfort in it. Jesus paid the price that I deserved. But in turn, that conjured up frightening possibilities. What could I have done by the age of six, when I was baptized, to deserve crucifixion? And though I was taught that Jesus was crucified so others would not be, I grew up recognizing that the crucifixions had not stopped. Like the one of the beloved volunteer youth worker in my American Baptist Church who was chased out of our congregation simply for being homosexual (he himself thought it was a sin and chose not to practice) and then outed by our “pastor” in three congregations he subsequently tried to join. This spiritual abuse would appear to the perpetrator mild compared to the abuse God “required” “his” own son to endure. I write this on Maundy Thursday evening in the year 2000 when most self-respecting Christians are in church observing Christ’s premonition of his death and his offering of the first eucharist, the last supper. They’re doing the right thing being in church on this holy anniversary of that event. But I felt that my own devotion should be spent in this exercise of exorcizing the supposed violence of god. For those who want a more detailed argument in favor of a different understanding of the atonement, I encourage you to read Carter Heyward’s article that follows—better yet, read the book from which it’s excerpted, SAVING JESUS From Those Who Are Right. And I have the chutzpah to suggest my own book Coming Out As Sacrament, which explores traditional notions of atonement in the light of LGBT experience and René Girard’s school of thought regarding the scapegoat mechanism. When the Open Hands Advisory Committee chose this theme, The god of Violence, I knew I would have to put in my two cents. I can’t remain silent in the slandering of God. Because I believe that, in the biblical witness, even before Jesus comes along, God comes out to us as One who desires mercy and not sacrifice, justice rather than solemn assemblies, kindness and humility rather than sacrifice of the firstborn, whether God’s or anybody’s. God comes down from a mountain of expectations (Mount Sinai) and descends to a grave, a creed says even to hell itself, to embrace us and our human experience and vulnerability. What kind of love is this? It’s the toughest love— not the “tough love” some parents and friends and congregations practice toward their gay and lesbian and bisexual and transgendered children that pushes them away, but the tough love that goes the extra mile to embrace us. This is a love that doesn’t care about ancient Jewish or Roman or latter-day American understandings of retributive justice (“an eye for an eye” or a life for a life), nor about cultural mores or governmental or denominational laws, but only about open hands, welcoming arms, affirming hugs, reconciliation of persons, and more light from the Spirit. This is a love that doesn’t care about control or coercion or conformity. This is the love of the Good Shepherd, the rabbi, the healer, the evangelist, the Suffering Servant, the Messiah, that leads, teaches, touches our wounds, proclaims the Good News, is vulnerable, and delivers us from oppression. This is the love that is the power of God. As humans, we have mistaken and limited and distorted notions of power. We think of it as control. But God’s power is love, which is not about control but about persuasion. When we really understand ourselves as the beloved, we are transformed, certainly, better able to love ourselves and to love others. But we are not asked to change our spots anymore than the leopard. We are called only to come out, to come out of ourselves, and any confining space, to love (with agape and eros) and serve (providing hospitality) and celebrate (thanksgiving). Coming out is a sacrament, a sacred act in which God’s presence is felt, not because of the suffering it may cause us, but because of the vulnerability we offer and therefore invite. Coming out begets coming out. And God is present in vulnerability— that is, for those with faithful vision and open hands and hearts. God is there choosing life for us, the abundant life Jesus promised. As “living sacrifices,” the sacrifice is not the goal but the life to be lived to its fullest. Crucifixion is a product of human evil. Resurrection is the promise of God’s will. The god of violence is a false god. The God of loving vulnerability is the one true God. God comes to us not as an armored warrior, nor even a robed cleric waving the Bible as a weapon. God comes out to us as a naked lover, ready to share his/her body. “This is my body.” “You are the Body.” May we receive the body with open hands. Chris Glaser, M.Div., is the editor of Open Hands and the author of Coming Out As Sacrament (Westminster John Knox Press, 1998). The god of Violence Chris Glaser Summer 2000 5 The Crucible of Atonement The historical context of evil is the crucible of atonement. Wrong relation between groups of people, in which one group is violating and destroying another, or in which people are destroying other creatures and the earth itself— this is the context in which right relation with God always need to be made. But what does such atonement actually involve? And how does it happen? We sometimes can image atonement more easily if we have a personal picture of God as “one of us”— anthropomorphized, if only momentarily, so that we can notice the relational dynamics of atonement. In this spirit, let us image God for a moment as one of us: She is devastated that Her human friends have betrayed her. Our response to God’s call, historically and still today, has been to turn away. We deny our white privilege. We are oblivious to our anti-Semitism. We trivialize our misogyny. We justify our homophobia. We make excuses, always excuses, for ourselves. What is God’s response? As the source of justice-love, God is also the wellspring of compassion, the creator and liberator of all that is wise and good. Because She knows the secrets of our hearts and our wounded, frightened places. She also understands that we are not being true to ourselves, one another, or Her. God knows that, in this sense, we do not know what we are doing. Still, She loves us and She yearns for our well-being. She grieves our violence against one another and ourselves. In her yearning and grief, She offer us Herself—as friend. Reaching for us, She longs for us to reciprocate, to meet Her as companion. This is her forgiveness— the YES which is Her yearning, Her grief, Her offering, Her reaching, without ceasing. God forgives us. But She knows that we cannot “accept” this forgiveness, because we do not experience it. And we do not experience it because we have not turned around to meet Her. We fail to notice that She is with us. In our ignorance or fear, we do not hear God, we do not believe Her, and we don’t yet know that we need Her. Instead, we malinger in violence and confusion, guilt and self-justification. Over time, we languish, cut off more and more from others, from ourselves, and from the Spirit, descending to that “place” in ourselves and our world that many poets and religious teachers have called “hell,” a place of utter isolation. Our own experiences tell us that nothing is sadder than to watch those whom we love turn away from us and slowly, or not so slowly, descend into hell. So too with God, nothing could be sadder for God than when we turn away, knowing not what we do, and slip away into hells of our own making. How then, in this situation, is right relation made? Where is atonement? Like forgiveness, atonement has two “moments.” The first is eternal: the Spirit is constantly yearning, offering, and reaching for us. There is never a moment in or beyond time and space in which this is not the case. In the second, we are moved through solidarity, community, friendship, prayer, and other resources to go with God, to live willingly in her Spirit. This often involves our repentance, our commitment to turn from the wrong we have done and live differently by turning to God and one another in the struggle for mutuality. But turning to God, going with God, choosing to live in the Spirit of mutuality, has consequences. For Christians, this is what the cross represents: consequences. It is also what the Empty Tomb points to. Going with God, we suffer at the hands of those who turn away from her. Yet mutually involved with the Spirit of Life and love, we are sustained a day a time through friendship, community, prayer, and other spiritual gifts. Living in the Sacred, embodying its power, we ourselves become agents of atonement, participants in making right relation with God and one another. This is the historical and spiritual process of incarnation. It is also the historical and spiritual process of atonement. It is what the Jesus story was all about and still is, insofar as we embody it in our lives. In the Spirit that sparked Jesus, we too live. And we suffer because we too live passionately with God. The Problem With Atonement Tradition No one whose work I know has done a clearer, fairer exposition of the atonement tradition in Christianity than D. M. Baillie. In response to “modern man’s [sic]” question, “Why speak of atonement at all?” Baillie sets out to persuade the modern reader that the good life is “bankrupt without the message of the forgiveness of sins” and that Excerpted from her new book, SAVING JESUS From Those Who Are Right (Fortress Press, 1999). Please read the book for the full context of these excerpts. Toward a Nonviolent Understanding of Atonement Carter Heyward this message of forgiveness “must rest on a doctrine of divine atonement.” I agree with both of these assumptions, but Baillie’s understanding of “divine atonement” is very different from mine. His position— a modern, neo-orthodox view— illustrates what I believe to be the root problem with how atonement has been presented in Christian tradition. I strongly agree with Baillie’s understanding of our need for God, not just better self-understanding. Except for his dismissive attitude toward emotional trauma as a root cause of human distress, I think he sees rather clearly the problem with our attempts to get on with our lives without coming to terms with our failures. We may be able to get on with our lives, but our spirits cannot soar. We are weighted down with guilt and shame from which there is no simply rational, psychological, or physical release. In the language of AA, we need “a spiritual awakening.” We need to know the Sacred Power in which we live and breathe and have our being. Forgiveness is our way to God (our power in mutual relation). Forgiveness is our way to god (verb). Forgiveness is spiritual liberation from the shackles of the past. It frees us to go forward, “not to shut the door on the past” (to quote the Big Book of Alcoholics Anonymous) and to know peace. Knowing ourselves forgiven by the Spirit of life itself— empowered to go forth, unstuck and able to live each new day with a sense of personal grounding in the Spirit— we ourselves become God-bearers, agents of forgiveness, to others. And that, of course, is atonement—making right relation with God. The problem therefore with the traditional and by far most widely held Christian understanding of atonement as a “substitutionary” and “sacrificial” act of God is that it drives a huge and misleading wedge between how we experience God’s love and suffering and how we experience our own love and suffering. Most of what we humans actually experience as healing and liberating— justice, compassion, children and family, human love and friendship, beauty of creation, meaningful work, enough to eat, a place to live, animal companions, self-confidence, erotic pleasure and joy, mutuality in relation to others— is assumed by most Christians to be human, not necessarily divine, experience. Whether God is actually present and active in our embodied lives, most Christians believe, depends on the quality of our faith in God through our faith in (the divinity of) His Son Jesus Christ. We doubt human experience as a reliable source of sacred meaning unless the particular experience is that of a faithful Christian. Our hesitancy to recognize ourselves and other humans and creatures— regardless of religious affiliations and creeds— as sources of God’s love, power, and beauty reinforces the God-over-and-against-us dualism that continues to haunt us and generates our alienation from ourselves, one another, other creatures, and God. It also allows us to imagine that God, since we experience Him as wholly other than ourselves, one “out there” beyond us, actually might be the author of blood sacrifice traditions, ancient and modern. Lament of Matthew Shepard Elaine Blanchard Based on Psalm 88, the only psalm that includes no praise or assurance—only lament. Elaine Blanchard wrote this as part of her study of the Psalms at Memphis Theological Seminary in the fall of 1998. She graduated this year and plans to serve in the United Church of Christ as an ordained minister. O Lord, God who baptized me, at St. Mark’s Episcopal here in Casper, Wyoming… it’s night and I’m crying out to you— strapped to a fence-post and beaten until my skull is crushed. I’ve been burned and I’m freezing in the cold— snow is falling on my wounds. Let my prayer come before you; incline your ear to my cry. For my soul is full of troubles, and my life draws near to Sheol. I am counted among those who go down to the Pit; I am like those who have no help, like those forsaken among the dead, like the slain that lie in the grave, like those whom you remember no more, for they are cut off from your hand. You have put me in the depths of the Pit, in the regions dark and deep. Your wrath lies heavy upon me, and you overwhelm me with all your waves. Your blessed christian preachers gather crowds to condemn me, to wave signs for my destruction— declaring you want me to die, forgotten and alone in the night— bleeding into Wyoming’s soil. I am shut in so that I cannot escape; my eye grows dim through sorrow and because the butt of the gun has blasted the bone of my forehead into splinters, piercing the orbit of my eye. Every day I call on you, O Lord; I spread out my hands to you. Will it be in death, in the grave, 6 Open Hands Baillie writes that it is not enough for us to love one another, yearn for right relation, and struggle to go with the Spirit in our daily affairs. This is fine, but for Baillie it is not the spiritual or moral equivalent of putting our faith in a God who loved us so much that he gave his only Son to be sacrificed for us— to undergo a death that we, not he, deserved (and deserve) as punishment for our sins (moral failures). Baillie and with him much of Christianity maintains that it is precisely God’s willingness to punish and be punished (for remember that Jesus is God in this story, both Father and Son)— as a surrogate, in our place— that reveals His relentless love for us sinners. For us to liberate human bodies and spirits through social movements and personal transformation, to redeem one another from bondage to past mistakes and violence, to temper judgment with compassion and solidarity—this forgiveness is not enough for most Christian teachers, preachers, and pastors. For brothers and sisters to reach out to us, offering gifts of their experience, strength, and hope, and for them to watch sorrowfully as we turn away into isolation and despair—this forgiveness is not enough for mainline Christians. For God to wait— simply to wait—with us in faith, hope and love—this forgiveness is not enough for Baillie’s “God.” God as a Spirit of “Revolutionary Patience” Very early in the shaping of Christology, the “fathers” (dominant theological forces) realized— rightly, I believe— that our human experiences of justice-making and love, of contrition and forgiveness, of vulnerability and compassion, of loss and grief will not make a perfect world, one without sin and evil. These theologians believed that the completion, or perfection, of creation requires more than the struggle for right relation, more than one another’s solidarity, more than our faith in the power of God with us to change the world, and more than the patience to wait with one another by the power of this same Spirit. The fathers believed that the more required to usher in the realm of God in its fullness is Jesus Christ, and that this Jesus must be more than merely a good (human) example or “moral influence” (Abelard). Thus, the fathers taught that Jesus was not simply a human brother ablaze with the spirit and love of God. He was God, and not just any god but one who, in the sacrificial tradition of Israel, offered Himself as a blood sacrifice “for the sins of the world.” But why was and is such carnage the will of a God who is love? Because, the fathers tell us, divine love is like that of a really good friend. When we betray a true friend, Baillie notes, we suffer for what we have done. We suffer because we realize that we have violated a significant relationship. Moreover, the one whom we have wounded suffers with us because those who love suffer with those whom they love. It is in the very nature of love— to suffer with others. This is true, of course. But what Baillie and most Christian theologians seem not to see is that such a truly beloved friend does not punish by humiliating or destroying those whom he or she loves. that you whisper a word of hope for me? Will it be in mourner’s clothes my parents will hear your word of justice? Look at them under umbrellas, standing under the snow and icy screams of hate from your righteous believers. Look at my mother’s face. Look at her, God. And look into the hearts of your preachers. Are your wonders made known in a fanciful world beyond the grave? Has justice deserted the earth? But I, O Lord, cry out to you; in the morning my prayer comes before you. Yet no ambulance has yet arrived for the pieces of my unconscious body. O Lord, why do you cast me off? Why do you hide your face from me? Wretched, outcast and abused by my peers from birth— I suffer the terror no mother’s child should endure. I suffer the terror known to all who are different… not dominant, not powerful or armed. I suffer the terror of being attacked for being who I am. Should I thank God for your work in me? Should I thank you for your righteous thugs who picked me out— pretended to appreciate and want me— Your devoted soldiers marching in war against me…even to my grave? Their assaults destroyed me. You no longer live if I no longer live. Hope has been abandoned. Hell is now my home. Summer 2000 7 8 Open Hands No true lover injures or kills the beloved as punishment for wrongdoing. We do not have to give up our deep sense of the need for forgiveness, a yearning that goes far beyond our capacities to reason or work it out by ourselves, to reject as morally bankrupt the church’s atonement tradition of humiliation and destruction. We need to say no to a tradition of violent punishment and to a God who would crucify us—much less an innocent brother in our place— rather than hang in with us, struggle with us, wait with us, and grieve for us—forever and eternally if need be. If God is our creative and liberating power, then this same God is a Spirit of “revolutionary patience,” as Dorothee Soelle entitled her 1977 book. After all, God’s creation is unfinished and imperfect. We humans are unfinished and in many ways raw and rough. In our ignorance and fear, often not knowing what we are doing morally or spiritually, we turn away from God and break rank with the sacred Spirit of mutuality. In this real life context, God’s healing power is Her presence as a deeply sorrowful God who can do nothing except continue to reach out to us through Her friends and other sacred resources, one day at a time. Continuing to reach out to us, steadfastly refusing to give up, relentlessly pursuing us generation to generation— this is God’s forgiveness. The deity we must reject is the one whose power over us is imagined to be His love, the god who morally can destroy us. Such a concept of deity is evil—a betrayal itself of our power in mutual relation— in a world being torn to pieces by violence done in the name of gods who demand blood sacrifice. Such god-images feed twisted psychospiritualities that normalize sadistic and masochistic dynamics, rape and intimate violence, abuse of children, relationships of domination and control, violence against people and all creatures, and wars justified as holy. Moreover, in the context of such distorted spiritualities, violence often is experienced as passionately erotic. This is because our erotic energy is at root a yearning for God as our power to make and sustain mutuality. When this yearning twists into a desire for domination or submission—which is what patriarchal relations do to our sacred erotic energies— the desire creates closets in which men (and sometimes women) experience our erotic yearnings for God as violent and often, for this reason, seek God in the convergence of sex and violence. The deep roots in Christianity of a psychosexual spirituality that links sex and violence are being cultivated to this day by a twisted understanding of atonement that is assumed by most Christians to be right and central to Christian faith. Most Christians do not realize that this central tenet of our religion is steeped in our collective fear of experiencing the power of mutuality—in truth, our fear of God’s love for us and of our love for God. We fear this primary experience of God’s incarnation— we fear living passionately. And we fear atonement, which is our liberation from the powers of evil through God’s passion working in our lives. We fear our power in mutual relation because if we go with it, we—like Jesus—will suffer, perhaps even die, at the hands of culture of violence that demands our worship; moreover, we will live. [The traditional understanding of atonement] reflects a god who is the quintessence of patriarchal logic rather than the wellspring of justice-love from which we draw strength, hope, and our experiences of forgiveness. This tradition, as we see, has been associated with the violence of bloodshed. In Western patriarchal monotheism, ruling class males have constructed theologies in which the shedding of innocent blood is assumed to be necessary to making right relation with God. This seems to me an amazing thing! The suggestion that, throughout human history and culture, men (I do not use this word inclusively in this context) have concluded that the only way to get right with the Source of love and justice in history is to offer Him the blood of innocent “victims.” Unfortunately, I am not embellishing one small problematic theme in an otherwise liberating theological heritage. Nor am I being too literal in suggesting that blood sacrifice has been established spiritually and politically as the way to God/ god in Christianity. Jesus Christ as Adversary Alongside images of Jesus Christ as authoritarian Lord and righteous moralist is another image often held sacred by those Christians who are right: Jesus Christ as adversary, fighter, and finally victor over his enemies, the evil ones who oppose God. The christological image of a divine man who casts opponents into hellfires diminishes our capacity as Christians to imagine, much less experience, the healing power generated not through shame and demolition but rather through forgiveness. But forgiveness is a badly misconceived notion—especially among those Christians who spiritualize and individualize it, reducing it to the level of a soft, morally vacuous, personal feeling. This is probably what most of us do at least some of the time. Those who go about piously “forgiving” others may be among the least forgiving when it comes to exacting revenge on those who hurt us personally. Moreover, “forgiveness” so often is pared down spiritually to petty self-righteousness (“See how good I am. See how I can forgive you!”). And Strange How bread In breaking Spreads Shares Itself divides Distributes crumbs All sundry Take care your Fair white linen Not confine The scattered seed To virgin soil Or all too narrow Furrow —J. Barrie Shepherd Summer 2000 9 in the larger picture, on the front lines of history, countless violent, brutal crusaders for what is right no doubt have experienced themselves as godly, forgiving people in relation to those whom they love. The point is not simply whether we individually can let go of our resentments toward those who have offended us; nor is it simply whether we can accept the pardon of those whom we ourselves have hurt. The larger question is whether together we can reconstruct the world around and within us on patterns of forgiveness rather than resentment, compassion rather than retribution, peace rather than violence. The future of our families and communities, cultures and societies, religions and nations is at stake here. The future of our love and work, of what we will do and of how we will do it, depends upon our shared commitment to learn forgiveness as a way of life. Indeed, the future of our species and of the earth itself rests more than anything on our capacity, as an earthpeople, to move morally beyond adversarial, hostile posturing in relation to those whom we hate or fear. Our salvation is not rooted in a Jesus who lords His righteousness over us or a God who will beat us into submission or cast us into a fiery furnace if we aren’t right. Whether we are right or wrong in the specifics of lives and deeds, we will be saved primarily by a capacity (that is innate to us all) and a willingness (that can be learned with each other’s help) to practice forgiveness precisely because, so often, we “know not what we do.” The Jesus we need is the one we have in learning how to forgive (for that’s where most of us are). We need him to be what he is— through faith, our brother and ally, teacher and friend, spiritual presence and ongoing resource of hope. Could it be that Jesus himself, like probably every one of us, had a hard time forgiving certain of his adversaries? When he said, from the cross, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing,” was he asking God to do something that he, Jesus, could not do in the particular moment, so anguished was he? (I am grateful to Diane Tingley for this question.) Or was he bearing witness to the possibility that only God, in God’s own mysterious ways, can forgive? That the Spirit has to work out, over time and through history, how to take away our sins and let the slate be wiped clean? I am suggesting that, because God is our power in the struggle for justice-love, we are indeed able to forgive, provided we realize how truly empowered we are in and through God. Compassion and Nonviolence: A Spiritual Path None of us, including Jesus, needs to be destroyed so that the rest of us can live holy lives. We are envisioning a spiritual path that leads us away from blood sacrifice as in any sense acceptable to the God whom Jesus loved. [We are faced with] several problems with the mainstream Christian atonement tradition: 1. It is steeped in the trivialization and deprecation of human experience as ungodly. 2. For this reason, it represents a more radically dualistic apprehension of the divine-human relation than most mainline theologians will admit. 3. It is built around an image of a deity whose “inexorable love” is experienced by human beings as punitive, shaming, cruel, and even sadistic in relation to people whose psychospiritualities have been shaped, to various degrees, by images of a god whose love is violent— toward others, toward His Son, and toward Himself. 4. It promotes blood sacrifice— that is to say, the sacralizing of violence against others and oneself—as a (or even the) way of spiritual liberation. 5. Finally, it reflects a deity made in the image of human impatience with one another, ourselves and our Sacred Source. In the best, most mutual relationships that have been broken— relationships not only between individuals but also supported by strong, respectful friends and community— those who have been violated and those who have done wrong often can find ways to restore what has been lost or at least some significant part of it. In relationships more like the one that most of us actually experience between ourselves and God—in which time and again we turn away from the vocation to love justice and show mercy in our relations—it is hard to imagine how we might restore a right relation with the Spirit of justice-love and compassion. Furthermore, it is not hard to understand why so many Christians, like Anselm, Baillie, and countless others, have 10 Open Hands imagined that surely God had to exact a harsh penalty for the terrible sins of the world. What these Christian believers have lacked is faith in God’s inexorable patience as a significant dimension of God’s love. To be sure, the evil among us is rampant, exacting tolls too high for many of us to pay or even imagine. And we humans must do everything in our power to protect one another, ourselves, and other creatures from the violence that invariably results from the fear-based betrayals of our Sacred Power in mutual relation. This means that, in this real world of ours, we will always be looking for better ways of protecting ourselves and one another from violent people and from others whose fear, greed, dishonesty, or rage threatens to harm us or disrupt the relative stabilities we are able sometimes to create as communities and cultures. But we must not confuse protecting ourselves and those we love with inflicting upon our enemies the same torture and brutality that they may have inflicted (or wished) upon us. Contrary to the prevailing religious, moral, and political sentiments on the Right today, might does not make right. Justice makes right relation. Justice-love is right relation. We do not need an “almighty” god, except insofar as God’s love— Her justice-love, Her compassion—is Her strength and Her power. Putting our faith in God’s patience with us in this imperfect, morally cluttered, and often evil world generates greater social and spiritual space for us to be honest, gentle people with ourselves and one another— space in which we are able to cultivate humility rather than fear as the basis of our life together and thereby become more deeply moral people. We need more images of a patient God who loves the world so much that She gives her people time and resources like history and culture, human friends and animal companions, work and play, mountains and water, food and music, memory and reason, imagination and talents, and prayer and worship, and as many chances as we in our fear may need to come to our senses. We need not sacrifice one more child to the bloody god who needs innocent victims, one more person or creature to a deity who must punish either us or himself in order to love the world. There is another way to god, in which compassion replaces honor and even self-respect as the highest good and in which nonviolence becomes a way of life, a liberating response to the ongoing savaging of ourselves and one another. [It is my belief] that these twin commitments—compassion and nonviolence— are living sacraments, outward and visible signs among us of an authentically liberative atonement tradition. Carter Heyward, Ph.D., is a professor of theology at the Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and also lives in a small community of justice-workers and writers in western North Carolina. She is the author of many books, including, Touching Our Strength—The Erotic as Power and the Love of God. Summer 2000 11 Influenced by literalist and decontextualized misinterpretations of the Book of Revelation, modern interpreters have often concluded that the New Testament portrays God as the author of violence and even models violent behavior for believers. William Klassen shows that this common misinterpretation rests on a literalist reading of the book’s symbolism and a failure to note the significance and centrality of the slain lamb (Revelation 5) for the book’s message (Klassen 1999: 393-410). More fundamental for proper interpretation of the Bible’s teaching on violence, however, is the much neglected doctoral dissertation of the late Jacques Pons (Pons 1975/81). In his perceptive pioneering work on the vocabulary for oppression in the Hebrew Bible, Pons’s starting point is the Hebrew term hamas (violence; noun 60x; verb 8x), which he demonstrates is fundamental to the entire Hebrew semantic field for oppression (some 20 words, occurring 555 times, by my later reckoning; Thomas Hanks 1983:40). Traditionally, theologians such as Augustine, Aquinas and Calvin have sought to distinguish between that which is legal (“force”) and that which is illegal (“violence”) and this distinction remains common in modern cultures and the media. However, as Pons has shown, in the Hebrew Bible the distinction is not between whatever may be legal or illegal (in oppressive empires and their colonies), but between force used to oppress (injustice) and force used to liberate from oppression (liberating or saving justice). Significantly, in the Hebrew Bible God is never said to be the author of violence: “Yahweh [the Liberator God of the Exodus] tests the just and the oppressor, and his soul hates the lover of violence,” (Psalm 11:5; see Proverbs 3:31). Rather, God’s power manifests itself in acts of liberating justice, while “violence” is attributed only to human oppressors (but compare Job’s rhetoric in 19:7, presumably a false accusation). The traditional distinction between legal force and illegal violence has been denied by some Christian scholars (Jacques Ellul, Giulio Girardi, Paul Tournier), but they neglect the possibility of the biblical distinction between unjust oppressive violence and the force of liberating justice. Violence in the Bible is one of many terms that illustrate how the same word can mean virtually opposite things. During the decades of turbulence in Latin America, the media commonly labeled any activities of guerillas and others who resorted to arms to overthrow dictators as “violence.” However, when dictators used such tactics, the media only labeled it “force”— even when Nicaragua’s Somoza bombed his own civilian population! The current Russian determination to label “freedom fighters” as “terrorists” reveals the same linguistic manipulation, echoing Ronald Reagan’s success in labeling his “terrorist” contras, who slaughtered innocent civilians in Nicaragua, as “freedom fighters.” Similarly, “justice” in the Bible reflects the cry of the oppressed poor for God’s liberating justice, while in the mouths of the oppressors it refers to a kind of “law and order” that bolsters their privileges and power. Another biblical example is the vocabulary for “authority”: in the mouths of the oppressors it refers to their authority to maintain a repressive regime, while the Bible mainly applies it to such figures as Moses, Jesus, and Paul, who represented the “subversive authority” that undermines oppressive regimes. To a large extent, the failure of the church to interpret Scripture properly stems from its failure to use the perspective of the oppressed as the appropriate “hermeneutical wedge” for interpreting biblical language. Elitist academics, theologians and philosophers tend to misinterpret the Bible as the discourse of oppressors, rather than hearing in it the subversive voice of the oppressed. Remarkably, although the New Testament centers on the violent act of crucifixion that Jesus suffered at the hands of imperial oppressors, explicit vocabulary for violence is difficult to pinpoint (see the Suffering Servant who “did no violence,” Isaiah 53:9b). Perhaps the clearest example is when John the Baptist forbids soldiers (of the oppressive occupation force) to “extort money by violence” (literally, shake violently, Greek diaseio, Luke 3:14). The “sword,” literally or as metaphor, may represent either legitimate “force” or oppressive “violence” in the New Testament (Rom 13:1-7; Luke 22:35-38, 49-51). Only when the context indicates the presence of injustice or oppression would “violence” be signified. Other Greek terms sometimes rendered violence (bia/biadzomai) actually have a broader significance, including legitimate “force” (Acts 2:2; 5:26; 21:25; 24:7; 27:41). In the New Testament’s most controverted text on the subject, Jesus refers to the Kingdom of God as “suffering violence” (biadzomai, probably with reference to persecution; Matthew 11:12 // Luke 16:16), although many have understood the term in a more positive sense of “entering forcibly” into the Kingdom (see NRSV vs. NIV, their notes and the commentaries). When Jesus cleansed the Temple (Mark 11:15-19 // Matthew 21:12-17 // Luke 19:45-46 // John 2:13-22) he employed physical force that was both legitimate (“my Father’s House”) and an expression of liberating justice (“den of thieves”). Commentaries and theologians, however, ignoring the biblical The Biblical Word on Violence Oppression vs. Liberating Justice Tom Hanks 12 Open Hands distinction between the violence of oppressors and forceful expressions of God’s liberating justice, often leap to the conclusion that Jesus resorted to “violence” in the Temple purification. When Moses killed the Egyptian taskmaster in order to save the life of an Israelite slave, the Bible avoids describing his act as one of “violence” and does not condemn Moses (Exodus 2:11- 15). That this distinction carries through in the New Testament is evident from Stephen’s speech in Acts: “And [Moses], seeing one suffering injustice (adikoúmenon) defended him and, striking the Egyptian, wrought liberating justice (ekdíkesin) for the one suffering oppression (kataponoumeno; compare 2 Peter 2:7). Moses thought that his brothers would understand that God was using him to liberate them, but they did not” (7:24-25). After Hebrews 11:23, some Greek manuscripts (chiefly Western) even add “By faith, Moses, when he was grown up, destroyed the Egyptian when he observed the humiliating oppression of his brethren.” While this is not the preferred reading, the textual variant makes clear how differently early Christians viewed Moses’ use of force. In contrast, commentators since the last century often suggest that God punished Moses with forty years of exile because he used “violence,” even though neither Exodus nor the New Testament indicate anything of the sort. Similarly, the book of Judges in the Hebrew Bible never condemns the charismatic liberators (“judges,” empowered by the Spirit) for killing foreign oppressors in order to liberate the oppressed, nor does it ever describe their actions as expressions of “violence.” And in Joshua 1-12, the bloody conquest of the promised land is never described as “violent” but as “holy war,” or more accurately “the war of Yahweh, the Liberator God.” In the late books of Chronicles (circa 400 BCE) David, who had fought as a guerrilla leader when Saul was still king, could declare himself “innocent...of any violence” (1 Chronicles 12:17). What the Hebrew Bible condemns frequently modern social scientists would describe as “institutional violence,” the violence employed by the powerful and the institutions that represent their interests, against the weak, poor and marginalized: “Thus says Yahweh, the Liberator God of the Exodus: Enough, O princes of Israel! Put away violence and oppression and do what is just and fair. Cease your evictions of my people, says the Liberator God” (Ezekiel 45:9; see also 7:23; 8:17; 2.16; Amos 6:3; Micah 3:1-3; 6:11-12; Jeremiah 6:7; 13:22; 20:8; Habakkuk 1:2-3,9; Isaiah 59:6; 60:18; Joel 3:19; Obadiah 10; Zephaniah 1:9; 3:4; Malachi 2:16; Psalm 73:6). In the text traditionally interpreted as messianic, Jacob prophetically condemns his sons Simeon and Levi (“weapons of violence are their swords”), but hopes for one to come who will exercise just authority (Genesis 49:5,8-10). In this tradition Psalm 72 portrays the ideal king whose basic task is to free the poor from the violence committed by oppressors: “For he shall rescue the needy when they call....From oppression and violence he redeems their life; and precious is their blood in his sight” (12, 14; see 140:2,5,12; 18:48). Recent New Testament studies remind us of the oppressive imperial context of Jesus’ and Paul’s teaching (Matthew 5:38-48; Luke 6:27-36; Romans 12:14-21), a context that rendered any resort to arms futile and necessitated a more subversive, creative confrontation with oppressors. Traditional efforts to elucidate an “ethic”— or even an “ethical absolute”—of non-violence or abstention from all military force fail on several counts. First, because “ethics” and “morals” are Greek universalist philosophical categories alien to biblical thought, which is ever grounded in history and reflecting specific historical contexts. Hence, we can seek and expect nothing more (or less!) from inspired texts than divine wisdom discerned as appropriate to our own historical context. Second, while the Hebrew Bible often denounced violence, the New Testament makes even clearer the need to counter the violence of oppressors (“enemies”) with the force of love and persuasion rather than physical force (however just). The New Testament does not call the weak and oppressed to passivity, but to a militant struggle of faith. Not just adult Jewish males, but persons of all ages, nations, sexual orientations, and genders are exhorted to “put on God’s armor,” exercise prophetic gifts (including denouncements of oppressors and their violence), proclaim the Good News of Jesus’ triumph, and create inclusive communities of solidarity amongst the weak and oppressed. The “followers of the Lamb” discern clear words of divine wisdom in the New Testament (Ephesians 6:10-20; 2 Corinthians 10:3-5), but recognize that this way also was anticipated in the Hebrew Bible (Exodus 14:13; Zeph. 4:6; Isa 30:1-7, 15- 17; 31:1-4; 53; Daniel ). Tom Hanks is the founder and executive director of Other Sheep, Multicultural Ministries with GLBT Persons, Their Families and Friends and the author of God So Loved The Third World—The Biblical Vocabulary of Oppression. BIBLIOGRAPHY Arendt, Hannah (1969). On Violence (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World). Brueggemann, Walter (1997). Theology of the Old Testament (Minneapolis: Fortress), 194-196. Barr, James (1999). The Concept of Biblical Theology: An Old Testament Perspective (Minneapolis: Fortress). Especially on “Genocide,” pp. 492-494. Ellul, Jacques (1970). Violence: Reflections from a Christian Perspective (London: SCM). Girard, René (1977). Violence and the Sacred (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University). (1986). The Scapegoat (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University). Girardi, Giulio (1971). Amor Cristiano y Lucha de Clases (Salamanca: Sígueme). Glaser, Chris (1998). Coming Out as Sacrament (Louisville: Westminster John Knox). Guinness, Os (1974). Violence, A Study of Contemporary Attitudes (Downers Grove: InterVarsity). Haag, H. (1980). “chamas” [violence], pp. 478-487 in Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, IV, G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren, eds. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans). Thomas D. Hanks (1983/2000). God So Loved the Third World: The Biblical Vocabulary of Oppression (Maryknoll: Orbis/ Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock). Klassen, William (1999). “The Ascetic Way: Reflections on Peace, Justice and Vengeance in the Apocalypse of John,” pp. 393-410 in Asceticism and the New Testament, Leif E. Waage and Vincent L. Wimbush, eds. (New York: Routledge). Mauser, Ulrich (1992). The Gospel of Peace: A Scriptural Message for Today’s World (Louisville: Westminster John Knox). Pons, Jacques (1975/81). L’Oppression dans L’Ancien Testament (Paris: Letouzey et Ané). Swartley, Willard M, ed (1992). The Love of Enemy and Nonretaliation in the New Testament (Louisville: Westminster John Knox). Tournier, Paul (1978). The Violence Inside (London: SCM). Winter, James G. The Bible, Violence and the Sacred: Liberation from the Myth of Sanctioned Violence (Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press International). Yoder, Perry B. and Swartley, Willard M., eds. (1992). The Meaning of Peace: Biblical Studies (Louisville: Westminster John Knox). Summer 2000 13 This has been one of the most exhausting and painful weeks of my life. I am in Chicago this evening, half way home to Minnesota from two weeks at the United Methodist Church’s General Conference in Cleveland [May, 2000]. For the past two days I have been trying to put words around my overwhelming feelings in response to what happened there on Wednesday and Thursday. For the most part, I am still at a loss for words. But I, along with many others, am beginning to sense that what happened there was a watershed event in this movement, and all Christians must open our eyes and look very carefully at every single event that occurred there, from the polity problems and lost legislative battles to the protests and their dramatic outcome. By now those of you who have followed the media coverage have learned that all of the legislative contests were lost, consistently by about 2/3rds of the vote. The remarkable thing is that the body didn’t even “throw us a bone” by passing one of those “don’t you dare ordain or marry them, but at least be nice to them in church on Sunday” sorts of petitions. In fact, the vote margins were slightly worse than they were four years ago. But the real story came in the very carefully planned, non-violent response to these votes. On Wednesday, as the committees wrapped up their work, Mel White’s Soulforce staged a protest, a symbolic “blocking of the entrance,” outside the convention center, which resulted in the arrest of 191 people. Those participating in the action, both as marchers and as those who stepped forward to be arrested, came from many different faith groups, from Protestant to Catholic to Jewish. We were able to identify four different anti-gay groups near us, including Fred Phelps and company. Sadly, his contingent was mild compared to one new group which shouted a constant string of obscenities at us for three straight hours barely stopping to take a breath. We arranged ourselves in circles of 15 to 20 people and sang loudly to cover them up, with varying degrees of success. Those arrested were people of all ages and races, including a United Methodist bishop, Gandhi’s grandson, Martin Luther King Jr.’s daughter, and the Rev. James Lawson, a United Methodist minister who learned non-violent methods from Gandhi himself and taught them to King. On Thursday, over 200 supporters wore stoles [from the Shower of Stoles Project— see author description] and sat in the balcony of the convention center. When the Faith and Order Committee (which handled business related to heterosexism) began its report, these 200+ people rose and began slowly walking in silence in a long single-file line around the middle aisle of the balcony. People began leaving their seats to join the line, until it stretched the entire length of this very large balcony. When the vote came, all stopped where they were and held hands. Polity wrangling ensued, along with “points of order” that turned into speeches, and we continued to stand. The vote was lost, and immediately 27 of our people marched to the front of the floor, in front of the podium, and turned to face the delegates. The Presiding Bishop (who did an AMAZING and grace-full job of being fair and “Just Kill Them,” one delegate shouted. maintaining order) requested that they leave, or face arrest. They refused to leave, and after some time the Bishop requested a 20 minute recess to talk with their two spokespeople. We in the balcony continued to stand, along with about a quarter of the delegates on the floor and 15 bishops. After the recess, they suspended business and had an orderly debate about the possibility of at least calling a moratorium on judicial proceedings. This failed, and the body adjourned for lunch. By now we in the balcony had stood silently in one place for almost 3 hours. After lunch, the 27 on the floor continued to stand their ground as well, eventually moving slowly and orderly to a place that blocked the podium. At this point they were finally arrested (including two bishops). The presiding bishop buried his face in his hands and said that he couldn’t watch the church do this to its people. It was a deeply painful thing to watch these arrests take place. All I can say is this: We may have lost the vote, but they will never forget that we were there. And they will never, ever be able to take us for granted again. I have thought about the effects of this for a long time. It has often disturbed me that many people of faith— particularly ministers—who would never have hesitated to join a civil rights march, find this sort of action to be inappropriate for the GLBT movement, or feel it necessary to put the unity of the church above our demands. I can’t help but think that if this had been about race instead of sexual orientation, thousands would have joined us, and the demands would have been uncompromising. At the end of the civil rights movement I worked for a short time with a civil rights group in Mississippi. One of They Know Not What They Do Martha Juillerat 14 Open Hands our acts of civil disobedience was to simply show up in church— one black person and one white person together— and sit in a pew, until we were asked to leave. We would then be forced to leave or face arrest. I saw no difference— felt no difference in my gut— on Thursday as I witnessed a church choosing to arrest its members rather than invite them in. In Mississippi I remember people shouting obscenities at us, and threatening us. When we did dialogues in the Presbyterian Church six years ago I remember one elder telling us that he would rather take us out into a field and shoot us than talk to us. And on Thursday we heard a delegate from Texas shout to the 27 protesters, “Just kill them.” I felt no difference in my gut among these various incidents. On the street Wednesday, people shouted at us, “Don’t pull that ‘civil rights’ stuff on us. Sex isn’t about civil rights.” But what more basic civil right is there than the right to companionship and to love another person? It is, indeed, the one thing that crosses all racial, cultural and economic boundaries. And perhaps that was the watershed. Perhaps now, thanks to the descendants of Gandhi and King, and thanks to an African-American judge who “got it,” reducing the charges and fines for all arrested and quietly telling each person to “keep up the good work”— perhaps now the church will begin to see this movement as more than just a “sex problem.” Perhaps now they—and we— will have to take this movement seriously, as the legitimate civil rights cause that it is. I know that I, for one, will never see this movement in the same light again. Martha Juillerat is cofounder with her partner, Tammy Lindahl, of the Shower of Stoles Project, an ingathering of ordination stoles from GLBT clergy and wouldbe clergy who have served and continue to serve the church with commitment and compassion. Joseph Lobdell was born Lucy Ann Lobdell in 1829. Dressing as a man, Joseph became a hunter, and married a woman. Lobdell served as a revivalist Methodist preacher in upstate New York. Declared insane and institutionalized until death, Lobdell was respectfully called “Reverend” in the published article of a psychiatrist who practiced in the asylum. Lobdell wrote an autobiography entitled, The Female Hunter of Delaware and Sullivan Counties. –Based on Lesbian Lists by Dell Richards (Boston: Alyson, 1990) pp. 188-189, and additional sources. Becoming Joseph If there had been a ritual, you would have had a right. You could have pointed to the Bible page hand-writing family history and joining it to scripture. Here the date when I was born, and christened: 1829. The preacher wrote the names Father Son and Holy Ghost and Lucy Ann in water on my forehead, but only Lucy Ann in black ink in the Bible. Honoring the old names with new bodies: further up the page the previous Lucy, there from another branch the earlier Ann. The biblical begats list strange half-lineages, sometimes a man, sometimes a woman, never the complete life story in the verses. One name seeds one name, not growing in a script flowering of family tree but in the holy wandering vine that explodes modestly into sweet close fruit. Joseph dreams his way awake and out of slavery, feeds others by saving himself. Midway down the blank page of the new book you are writing is black ink, your hand writing Joseph back into history, honoring old body with new name, re-baptizing: So, here is the date when, self-begotten, Lucy Ann is become Joseph, emerging into new air, taking the breath that remembers all life before as nearly drowning. —Thomas Kelson Lewis Summer 2000 15 I had just finished making an opening statement and the floor was open for comments and questions. The first man to speak— a Disciples minister, I am told— started out rather blandly. I was vaguely anticipating where his remarks might go when suddenly I heard him say, “After all, these people [meaning gay men and lesbians] are just worthless scum.” This is awful enough [I still hear the phrase rattling in my head]; but what really haunts me is that I let him speak. Indeed I never denounced him. Why? In part, I suppose, because I was caught off guard. At a deeper level, however, the question strikes at the heart of my identity and that of our churches. Like our churches, I am deeply committed to the ecumenical movement. My life’s work centers around reconciliation, an attempt to hold community together, to insist on hearing all voices. But isn’t there something fundamentally impoverished about an understanding of reconciliation that left me unprepared to respond immediately and forcefully to this man? “Welcome one another, as Christ has welcomed you, for the glory of God” (Romans 15:7) states succinctly the basic thesis of Paul’s letter. We are here at the heart of the gospel, and I know of no way to express it except by paradox. We are called to welcome those whom God, the universal creator, has welcomed; and, for precisely that reason, we are called to abhor those ways of acting, those attitudes of mind, that meanness of spirit which threatens or devalues those whom God has welcomed. To put it sharply, there is in the writing of Paul a principled basis for refusing to tolerate intolerance. Yes, given our sinfulness, this always risks betraying the very message we proclaim— as when we end up denouncing the ungenerous ungenerously. I am now convinced, however, that this is an unavoidable risk. The importance of all this is underscored by a second incident. I was met at the door of a church by a man, a Disciples licensed lay minister, who informed me that he was going “to pin back my ears”—whatever that might mean. I told him he was free to say whatever he wanted in the discussion, at which point he said, “The trouble with people like you is that you just don’t believe anything.” It would be malicious of me to present this man as a spokesperson for any wing of the church, but the assumption behind his remark is widely held: namely, that the newly public support for gay rights is a sign of moral relativism, the reflection of a culture of personal preference that must be opposed in the name of biblical truth. For too long now, our society has acted as if openness were a sign of weakness, as if those with firm convictions about the gospel will always want to draw firm boundaries to exclude those who are different. Thus, it is crucial that we understand as clearly as possible the good news proclaimed by our faith and take our stand explicitly on that. You see, what haunts me about the earlier episode is that my actions there did betray a certain kind of relativism. “All voices need to be heard. We need the witness of those who see things differently from ourselves.” Yes—unless the gospel of God’s gracious love for all persons is threatened. At that point, my response should have been: “Brother, sit down! Such talk (referring to sisters and brothers for whom Christ died as ‘scum’) has nothing to do with the good news we proclaim. Such talk has no place in a community of those who know that they are redeemed only by grace.” What lessons did I learn from these experiences? That one cannot stand above the fray in the name of a reconciling vision. That, while we are (in Paul’s words) “ambassadors of reconciliation,” we can speak the word of reconciliation too early or too easily. That in a dangerously narrow world, we dare not be caught off guard. That the church, by its very nature, must be an aggressive counterculture to every society bent on exclusion. That the bottom line of all that we do and are is grace. Michael Kinnamon lost his bid as General Minister and President of the Disciples General Assembly in 1991 because of his membership in GLAD Alliance and his support of lesbians and gay men. A professor of theology at Lexington Theological Seminary in Kentucky, he was recently appointed as General Secretary of the Consultation on Church Union (COCU), an ecumenical cooperative effort of nine denominations. This article is excerpted from the September 1993 issue of The Disciple. No Excuse for Abuse Michael Kinnamon 16 Open Hands Abe and Sara sat in the leather chairs in front of the doctor’s big desk. A thick carpet covered the floor; the heavy drapes were closed; plaques and certificates hung on the dark paneling, nearly covering one wall. It could have been a very relaxing room, but Abe surmised that it was designed to dampen the effects of bad news. Sara had just completed an examination and she and Abe waited, as they had done several times in recent months, to talk to Dr. Simon Hardy, her gynecologist and fertility consultant. Abe, who took seriously his responsibility for the well-being of his wife, always accompanied her to the doctor. Sara, his wife of fifteen years, accepted without question or qualification his conviction that the man served as the head of the household, and that the wife stood in subjection to him. A pale woman, she dressed very plainly, and wore no make up. Keeping house for only her husband did not require much of her time, but she spent her days mostly indoors, working on any number of church related projects, such as sewing, or preparing meals for shut-ins, or making posters for her husband. There was only one problem with their marriage: Sara remained barren. Dr. Hardy entered, and greeted Abe. “I’m sure Sara told you. There is still no success. I’m afraid that I have come to the end of the road. We have done all the simple things—not that they are all that simple. The only thing left to us is to consider the more exotic solutions, such as embryo implants.” “We’ve been praying for success, and my prayers led me to believe that we would be successful this time,” Abe said. “With all the advances of medicine in recent years, I thought that something could be done. I guess that was foolish.” “This is such a disappointment,” added Sara. “Yes, I understand your disappointment and frustration. Mr. Smith, you are right about this being a golden age of medicine. So many important advances have been made just in the past two years, effective treatment for some cancers, tremendous advances in genetics, the understanding of the carcinogenic effects of tobacco, a breakthrough in Alzheimer’s disease, and many other things. In fertility studies alone we are doing things that were not possible even last year, and without the threat of multiple births. In the case of Sara, however, I don’t know what to do, other than the more exotic treatments. You indicated earlier that this is not an option for you.” “No. I am convinced that God does not want us to use these artificial means of conceiving a child. It is not for us to interfere with God’s plan. Test tube babies are an abomination. Man’s foolishness. Perhaps God is trying to tell us that we should not have children.” “Perhaps so, Mr. Smith. There is no guarantee that the exotic methods would work, anyway. Sara’s condition being what it is, I don’t know that she can ever conceive in the normal sense. Even with a new breakthrough, I’m not certain that her uterus is able to function properly. Perhaps, if she were younger.... I think we have seen a uterine deterioration even since we began this program. I’m sorry that I can offer little hope.” It was with a heavy heart that Abe and Sara left the doctor’s office. “I am so ashamed,” said Sara as they drove back to their home. “What have I done, Abe? I wanted to be a good wife to you, to have your children. Why has God done this? Am I being punished for something? Are we being punished?” Abe was silent for a long time before speaking. “We have to follow God’s will. Our mistake was in going to all these doctors in the first place. We have to have faith. Doctors can help do certain things, but if we put our reliance upon them instead of on God, we sin. That was our problem. We’d better ask for forgiveness.” That evening, Abe and Sara prayed together. They asked for forgiveness for relying upon the wisdom of man, and asked for God’s hand to heal the condition that kept Sara from conceiving. Afterward, they were silent, as they listened for God to speak to them. Nothing was heard. The next evening Abe had a meeting at his house with the elders of his church. Twelve years ago, he and four other men had established a non-denominational congregation. In the original plan, the five men would share the preaching tasks, but as time progressed it became clear that Abe was the only one with the gift of exhortation. He had no formal training in theology, but he read the Bible, and he possessed the conviction that it was God’s Word, and that it should be followed exactly. In addition to maintaining a full-time job, Abe developed into the preacher and the leader of the small body. Obedience to the Law was central to his preaching. To Abe, obedience called one to action. He believed and preached each week that it was not enough to practice personal piety. God wanted us to be involved in the fight against evil in the community. There were many ways that his church could participate. Under Abe’s leadership, the membership slowly grew, until today the congregation of over 100 owned a small church building. As always, Abe led the meeting of the elders. “This is the month we planned to picket the School Board. We need twenty members, each with a poster that tells of the evils of teaching evolution.” Abe described some of his ideas for slogans to use on the placards. He gave assignments to his elders. “Then, in February it will be our turn to picket the abortion clinic on Fourth Street. I told the Right to Life Committee that we would take every Tuesday during the month. Robert, will you start a list for names of volunteers? Thank you. Mother’s Day comes in May. I suggest that we ask for special contributions to put an ad in the newspaper to attack the feminist movement as anti-family. Also that month, we will be involved in the petition drive to stop the Lesbian and Gay Parade that is scheduled for June. If the City Council does not support our petition, we will protest during the parade.” The Sacrifice A Short Story D.S. Carlstone Summer 2000 17 Upon completion of the planning, Abe closed the meeting with a request. “I have a sorrow to share. As you know, Sara and I have been unable to have children. This has been one of the great disappointments in my life and in Sara’s life. I must confess that we have visited a fertility doctor, who tells us now that there is nothing we can do. I confess our sin of relying on the ways of man. We should trust only in God. I ask you each to pray for us. Pray for our forgiveness, and pray that Sara will conceive.” That night a visitor came to Abe in the depth of his sleep. Abe was so excited that he almost woke Sara to tell her the good news, but he waited until morning. At the breakfast table he made his announcement. “Sara, an angel came to me last night. It was so wonderful. Sara, you are going to conceive. You have already conceived, if I understood it correctly. You are pregnant, Sara! Just believe! Just believe, and everything will be all right!” “Oh, Abe, can it really be? What did the angel say?” “The angel said ‘Abraham, fear not. The Lord has heard your prayer. Thy wife Sarah has conceived and shall bear a son, who shall be a blessing unto you.’ That’s the way I remember it.” “The angel called you Abraham, even though Abe is just a nickname? Why didn’t he call you by your real name, Albert?” “It doesn’t matter. Listen to the message.” “You are right. Oh, Abe, this is wonderful. I am so thrilled.” They said a prayer of thanksgiving together. “What did the angel look like?” Sara asked, as she cleaned up the breakfast dishes. “I don’t know. I didn’t really see the angel. He— or she— was just there. It was the announcement that I remember.” “Abe, I still need to see the doctor.” “Yes. We will allow Dr. Hardy to watch over the development of the child.” Six weeks later, Dr. Hardy confirmed Abe’s diagnosis. “How do you understand it, doctor?” asked Sara. “I really don’t understand it, Mrs. Smith. Things happen sometimes that I can’t explain.” “I say it’s a miracle, doctor. That’s all there is to it,” said Abe. “I suppose you are right,” said the physician. “However, we need to watch this pregnancy very carefully. There have been some amazing medical advances in the past year. By comparing Sara’s blood with the blood we took before she became pregnant, we can trace the development of the fetus. We can look for problems at various points along the way. Sara, remember, we took a sample of your blood at the very beginning of your fertility treatment. We split it into several samples, and froze them. Now we will take one sample of the original blood and compare with your blood profile each visit. From this, these new techniques allow us determine the health of your uterus— one of our big concerns right now—and we can look at the genetic profile of the fetus as well. All I need is your permission to use the frozen blood samples.” Sara looked at her husband, seeking theological guidance as she always did. An immediate decision was needed. Abe did not have time to pray about it and wait for an answer. “I think that will be all right,” he said. “There’s no reason not to run your tests, if it will make you feel better. This is God’s baby, so we know everything will be all right.” On their next visit, Sara again joined Abe in Dr. Hardy’s office. The doctor followed her a few minutes later. “We have mostly good news. It is a boy. Everything looks normal. I am pleased about how well the uterus is holding up.” He drifted into some technical talk that neither Abe nor Sara understood. “There is just one problem. One thing you should know. The blood comparisons show that the genetic composition of the child is consistent with homosexuality. In fact, there is a 99% probability that the child will develop some form of homosexuality.” He again gave an exposition on the reasons for that prediction, but neither Abe nor Sara heard him. Abe felt as though a sledgehammer had hit him in the chest. Sara sobbed beside him. Somehow, they made it out to the car, and drove home. There was a pall of gloom around the house. Abe could not speak about his feelings. Sara was not given permission to do so. The next few weeks were filled with agony. Abe and Sara felt that their world had come apart. They could not understand why God had let this happen to them. He had promised a child that would be a blessing, a fulfillment of their deepest desires. But, now, they were told, their child would be homosexual. That was impossible to understand. It was an obvious contradiction of everything they believed. A few days later, Abe had another vision. Again, he described it at the breakfast table. “Sara, the angel came back last night.” “Oh?” “Sara, the angel said ‘God demands a sacrifice.’” “What does that mean?” “I don’t know what it means. What do you think it means?” “I’m sure I don’t know,” said Sara. “I don’t know either. I shall have to pray about it.” The angel return again that night. At breakfast the following morning, Abe explained what had happened. “It was the same message: ‘God demands a sacrifice.’ Sara, do you think that God is asking us to sacrifice the child?” “Oh, no, Abe. How could he?” “I don’t know. I just don’t know. The angel was not very specific. It just seemed that he was talking about the child.” The third night, the angel reappeared. Abe woke with a start. Yes, he understood what the angel was saying. God demanded that the child be aborted. This time he did not mention the visit to Sara. It was still too frightening. How could God, after promising a child, turn around and take that child away? How could He expect Sara to abort the child? How could he himself turn away from the values that he lived by? It was too confusing. ‘Thy wife Sarah has conceived and shall bear a son, who shall be a blessing unto you.’ Abe slept very poorly the next few nights. As he dozed off, his subconscious would reawaken him with thoughts that he was trying to suppress. These kept him awake, usually, until the early hours of the morning. Just before dawn, several days later, Abe had his answer. He explained it to Sara after breakfast. “Sara, above all we must be obedient. God has demanded that we sacrifice our homosexual child. Homosexuality is such an abomination that it is better that the child be ripped out of the womb than that he grow up to practice a life of homosexual disobedience. That is the hard decision. That is our burden. Perhaps we are being tested. We must do it, Sara. I never thought that abortion was consistent with God’s will, but maybe it is in some cases. I don’t know how I will ever explain this to the congregation, but perhaps God will show me a way.” Sara rose silently and left the table. Abe heard her sobs coming from the bedroom. Abe called Dr. Hardy. They met with him later in the week. After a lengthy conference, a date was set for the abortion. Abe and Sara hardly spoke the next few days. It seemed that any talk, beyond the functional words of everyday living, was too painful. They were unable to comfort each other. The night before the abortion, the angel came again. “Look in the thicket, Abraham,” she said. Abe awoke, startled. It was 5:30 a.m. What did the angel mean this time? Suddenly, he understood. “Sara! Sara! Wake up!” “I’m awake, Abe. I’ve hardly slept all night.” “Sara, God does not want us to sacrifice the child. He wants me to sacrifice my attitude toward having a homosexual son. We must cancel the abortion. Thank God. Thank you, Lord. Fix breakfast, Sara. You eat, too. We must celebrate.” Abe called Dr. Hardy’s answering service, and left a message. Before long, the physician returned the call. “We are canceling the abortion, Dr. Hardy.” “I’m glad, Mr. Smith. God bless you.” Abe and Sara sat at the breakfast table for a long time, reflecting upon their experience. “Sara, as we sit and talk, it is becoming clear. God is leading me into a new way of thinking. A few days ago, I accepted the possibility of abortion— something I thought I could never do. Now I must learn to accept the possibility of homosexuality. I never thought I could do that. It will not be easy. Is there more to come? Where is God leading me? Perhaps God is telling me that I must look at the Law and at obedience in completely new ways. This is very frightening. How far am I expected to go? How far can I go? Can I share this with my congregation? Do I dare? Can I keep silent? Sarah, I think we must be prepared for some changes in our lives. We must set out on a new adventure. I don’t know where it might lead us.” “Yes, Abraham,” she said. And the angels sang. D. S. Carlstone of Oklahoma holds a Ph.D. in physics, and has recently retired after teaching his subject for 31 years. He has a longtime interest in the influence of science on philosophy and theology. Real Presence J. Barrie Shepherd Yes, a frilly pink tutu was, more or less—more less than more—all he wore, that and a tall pair of teetering stiletto heals and parasol—from tip to toe in matching lurid pink, strutting his jet-glow black and body-built stuff from side to side in flagrant full gay pride parading down Fifth Avenue. From giant urns outside our church we plied the passers-by with plastic cups “o’ kindness yet” on a hot June afternoon—“in Jesus’ Name.” Fully clothed, and more, dark clergy suit, black shirt and stiff white collar, I stood my ground, clutching a tray of cooling draughts to represent a welcome and a blessing— at the least—as a child of God. Beaming, he tripped across bestowing smiles, spectacular, on all and sundry, chiefly me. Daintily he took the cup I offered, leaned perilous close— those tipping heels!—and kissed me on one startled cheek, his bristles coarse, lips— generous smile notwithstanding—brushing deep, appalled revulsion through my gut, despite all my head was murmuring of tolerance and Christian love. “Oh Reverend,” laughed the lady from the sewing circle, “you should see the juicy kiss mark on your cheek.” And as we both collapsed in honest, healing mirth, first head, then heart took over from my gut and raised a prayer of thanks for grace’s all-too-often way of shoving me, still screaming, toward birth. J. Barrie Shepherd has served for the past eight years as minister of the First Presbyterian Church in the City of New York. The author of 13 books, his poetry has appeared in many publications, including The Christian Century and The New Republic. A Britisher by birth, he was reared in England and Scotland and, after service in the RAF, was educated at The University of Edinburgh and Yale. Shepherd serves on the national board of The Covenant Network, Presbyterian churches committed to removing antigay restrictions in the denomination’s Book of Order. Another of his poems appears on page 8. 18 Open Hands Summer 2000 19 I Speak I Speak I Speak A Poem for the Millennium March Delivered in Washington, D.C., April 30, 2000 Keith Boykin I Speak Because Barbara Jordan Langston Hughes, and The Reverend James Cleveland could not speak I Speak for myself, but I also speak for my uncle, a black gay man who could not be here because he was murdered in his own bedroom I Speak to stop the violence from Wyoming to Alabama and all points in between, and yes, in Texas and New York as well I Speak to tell George W. Bush and Rudy Giuliani not to pack your bags for Washington because you will not be living here next year I Speak knowing that the right-wing may vilify me, closeted gay men may deny me and religious demagogues may decry me I Speak to tell Jesse Helms, and Trent Lott, and Strom Thurmond, your days of division are numbered I Speak Because two homosexuals who share their lives together deserve at least the same rights as two heterosexual strangers who met last night on prime time TV I Speak Because James Baldwin Lorraine Hansberry Bayard Rustin Audre Lorde Glen Burke Simon Nkoli, and Bessie Smith could not be here I Speak as a member of the family because there are problems in the family that cannot be healed by sweeping them under the sterilized, sanitized rug of homogenized homosexuality I Speak Because Martin Luther King and Huey Newton would support my cause I Speak To Resist the commercialization and commodification of a mainstream “gay lifestyle” that enriches a privileged few and impoverishes the masses with a bankrupt culture of uniformity I Speak Because Alain Locke Joe Beam Essex Hemphill Mickey Fleming Greg Hutchings Assoto Saint Craig Harris, and Alvin Ailey could not be here I Speak Because two people sitting in a hotel room should not be able to dictate the entire lesbigaytrans agenda I Speak Because Sojourner Truth Harriet Tubman Malcolm X, and Frederick Douglass have taught me the value of struggle I Speak Because our community has a right to know how decisions are made, and a responsibility to hold our leaders accountable I Speak Because Patrick Kelly Willi Smith Joan Fountain Countee Cullen Josephine Baker Mel Boozer, and Marlon Riggs could not be here I Speak so that my silence will not be interpreted as complicity, my concerns not discarded dismissively, and my thoughts not represented simplistically I Speak Because Coretta Scott King Cornel West Jesse Jackson, and Nelson Mandela have uplifted me I Speak Because my sheroes and heroes and other good people of conscience have chosen not to speak I Speak to give voice to their concerns I Speak Because, like Fannie Lou Hamer, I’m sick and tired of being sick and tired I Speak to remind you, and myself, that I can hold my lover’s hand in Anacostia or Harlem or South Central or Oakland if I choose to, and I am not always found in Dupont Circle or Christopher Street or Santa Monica Boulevard or the Castro I Speak to Honor Me’Shell Ndege’Ocello Ruth Ellis Jewelle Gomez Ruth Waters Carl Bean E. Lynn Harris George Bellinger “When I dare to be powerful— to use my strength in the service of my vision— then it becomes less and less important whether I am afraid.” Audre Lorde I Speak Today As One Black Gay Man 20 Open Hands I Speak I Speak I Speak Marjorie Hill Carlene Cheatam Maurice Franklin Kofi Adoma, and Peter Gomes For Blazing A Path In which I could follow I Speak Because not all blacks are straight, and not all gays are white I Speak to Honor Mandy Carter Nadine Smith Cleo Manago Barbara Smith James Earl Hardy Phill Wilson Ron Simmons Alvin Quamina, and Kevin McGruder I Speak so that you will ask why these people are not on this stage I Speak to Honor RuPaul Sapphire Bill T. Jones Ken Reeves George C. Wolfe Alice Walker June Jordan and Phill Reed I Speak so that the presence of people of color will not be tokenized and the absence of people of color will not be trivialized I Speak to Honor Sabrina Sojourner Samuel Delany Angela Davis Jaye Davidson Cheryl Clarke, and Nona Hendryx I Speak to Enter These Names indelibly in the record books of this gathering I Speak Because Audre Lorde warns that my silence will not protect me any more from the anti-gay forces than it will from the anti-black forces I Speak to stand up for the millions of brothas and sistahs whose area codes do not begin with 202, 212, 213, or 415 I Speak Because AIDS is not over, in America or Africa, despite what the privileged elite may write, that people of color are at greater risk than ever, and that now is not the time to turn our backs on this disease I Speak so that black gays and lesbians can create our own organizations to support our own needs without having to answer the tired old question why are we “separating ourselves?” I Speak Because your priorities are not always our priorities, but all of our priorities are important and should not be casually dismissed I Speak Because affirmative action and racial profiling are part of my agenda I Speak so that a black family can get a home loan and a black man can simply get home, alone, without getting arrested I Speak Because I cannot stand the word “queer” and feel excluded from the word “gay” I Speak so that black leaders will not forget us and gay leaders will finally learn to work with us I Speak so that white gays and straight blacks will no longer make decisions that affect us without including us I Speak in a culture that devalues our love to say that the act of self-love is an act of revolution in itself I Speak to declare that black men loving black men is no longer a revolutionary act but an everyday thing I Speak to tell you that I refuse to be the only black person in any meeting, at any time, at any point ever again I Speak so I can get a taxicab not just when I leave this stage, but when I leave the White House or leave your house, after a fabulous affair, or any house on any street, that I will not be judged by the color of my skin I speak Because Alice Walker reminds me that no person is your friend who demands your silence or denies your right to grow I Speak Because nobody else can speak for me but me I Speak to help repair the breach that has divided us black from white straight from gay male from female I Speak to help repair the breach that has excluded the voices of youth and seniors, the poor and middle class, bisexuals, and transgendered people, people with disabilities, and all people of color I Speak with hope because Dr. King reminds me that only when it is dark enough can you see the stars I Speak so that Dennis Rodman can wear a wedding dress, that Carl Lewis can pose in track shorts and high heels, and that Little Richard can simply be himself I Speak so that the famous rappers and runners and writers and Hip Hop heroes on the DL may one day decide to speak as well I Speak so that all black lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered teenagers will one day be allowed to live peaceably in their own family homes I Speak Summer 2000 21 I Speak I Speak I Speak I Speak Because we must broaden the movement to see the intersection of race, gender, class, religion, sexuality, and ethnicity I Speak not to get my place at the table but to demand a whole new table arrangement that welcomes all those who have been excluded I Speak not to gain privilege but to challenge the whole concept of privilege itself I Speak to Invoke the Lessons of Rodney King, Abner Louima, Amadou Diallo James Byrd, and Patrick Dorismond lest they be forgotten or thought to pertain strictly to some other march I Speak Because we cannot prevail against the Prop 22s if we do not also fight the Prop 187s and Prop 209s I Speak Because June Jordan tells me that freedom is indivisible or it is nothing at all besides sloganeer-ing and temporary, short-sighted, and short-lived advancement for a few I Speak to Say, unequivocally, once and for all, that blacks and gays are not the same, that racism is not the same as homophobia, and that the civil rights struggles are not identical I Speak Because it matters not which group is most oppressed, or which was first oppressed, or whether they are identically oppressed. What matters is that no group or class of people should be oppressed I Speak to Pray for Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell that they may learn the true meaning of unconditional love I Speak so that one more black gay man or woman may find the courage to rise up in church today and challenge a minister who spews out the vicious bile of religious-based homophobia I Speak so that Angie and Debbie and Alveda and Reggie may one day understand that God is love and love is for everyone I Speak Because I have no power to make these dreams happen unless someone, somewhere hears these words as her own and decides to act I Speak as a proud African-American same-gender-loving Christian-identified man unashamed of who I am unwilling to be divided into identity camps, and unbowed by the demons of hatred that would incite me to fear instead of love. I Speak Because Audre Lorde tells me, “When I dare to be powerful, to use my strength in the service of my vision, then it becomes less and less important whether I am afraid.” I Speak Today As One Proud Black Gay Man Copyright ©2000 by Keith Boykin. All Rights Reserved. Keith Boykin is the author of Respecting the Soul: Daily Reflections for Black Lesbians and Gays, and One More River to Cross: Black and Gay in America. A Harvard-educated lawyer, he is an adjunct professor of government at American University and former special assistant to President Clinton. Thanks to former Open Hands advisory committee member Allen Harris for alerting us to this speech, and thanks to Keith Boykin for giving us permission to print it. I Speak I Speak to remind you that this march will soon be forgotten if we do not take action in our own lives in our own communities I Speak in the hope that this gathering will not become just another circuit party and that real people may learn real lessons here I Speak to shine the light in Internet chat rooms, online clubs, glbpoc listserves, and lgbt email chains I Speak Because the personal is political every time we are not ashamed, to go beyond our boundaries, to express our love, to come out, to volunteer, to make a donation, to write a letter, to forward an email, to register to vote, or simply to speak Finally, I Speak to offer a choice between fear and love I Speak Because fear is negativity, scarcity, and falsity I Speak Because love is positivity, abundance, and truth I Speak Because fear is unnatural and learned and love is natural and innate I Speak so that my faith may be used as a tool for love, and not a weapon of hate I Speak Because I refuse to worship at the altar of religious bigotry and self-righteous piety 22 MINISTRIES Open Hands But I grieve more for those who are being rejected, oppressed and persecuted by the United Methodist Church because of who they are and because of whom they love. The ordination that has been taken from me is one that the United Methodist Church has routinely denied and withdrawn from gay people long before it was officially required to do so in 1984. Many gifted persons called by God have been denied ordination because of their sexual orientation. Others have been denied fellowship, if not membership in the UMC. Many have been spiritually and psychologically abused by vicious judgment and condemnation. I am only a casualty of the church’s bigotry against bisexual, lesbian, gay and transgender persons. They are the true victims and martyrs. I have been punished only for what I’ve done. They are punished for who they are and whom they love. The difference is profound. My loss and pain is trifling in comparison. I also grieve for the United Methodist Church. It has wounded and crippled itself with bigotry, legalism and fear. Until these impediments are purged from its soul, the United Methodist Church cannot speak authentically of God’s love in Jesus Christ. Every act and testimony toward that end will be smudged with the evil of its prejudice and persecution of gay people. We may be witnessing its death, at least the death of the church we have loved and served. We can mourn the church that dies; but, we cannot hold on to it and keep it alive if its soul is dead. Instead, we must look for the new reality of God’s presence in the world, the new expression and experience of Christ’s body. I believe it is important to understand my trial, along with Greg [Dell]’s trial [See the Spring 1999 issue, Vol. 14, No. 4.] and the judicial process against the Sacramento 68 in the California- Nevada Annual Conference [Since dropped; see Winter 1999 issue, Vol. 14, No. 3.], as resistance within our denomination to the movement of God toward Jesus’ vision of an inclusive and just community. The trial resisted but did not end the movement. Rather, it helped to bring clarity and definition to it. It was not axial, but only another movement in the redemptive process of God. It could be seen as a defeat, the UMC’s further fall from grace, or it can be seen as a painful event that opens up new possibilities for change toward the new thing God is doing. I believe it is the latter. I believe there is no way that God’s movement toward justice, freedom, dignity and community can be successfully resisted and denied. I don’t feel defeated. I am now among the laity of the United Methodist Church, called to the same ministry I’ve always been called to honor, called to “resist evil, injustice, and oppression in whatever forms they present themselves.” Called “according to the grace given to [me, to] remain [a] faithful member of Christ’s holy church and serve as Christ’s representative in the world.” It makes no sense to me to leave one habitation of the Christian church for another, just so I can have the institutional favor and privilege of ordination. When I was ordained, it was my privilege to serve the laity. It is now my honor to serve with the laity. In practical terms, I intend to become a member of a local United Methodist Church. I intend to complete the book I’ve started. It will include the 2000 General Conference, so I have MARRIAGE A Letter from Jimmy Creech On November 17, 1999, in Grand Island, Nebraska, a jury in a church trial convicted Jimmy Creech of “disobedience to the Order and Discipline of the United Methodist Church” for coofficiating a holy union for two men on April 24, 1999. The penalty imposed by the jury was the withdrawal of his credentials as an ordained elder in the United Methodist Church. Attending in solidarity with Jimmy were representatives of the Methodist Federation for Social Action, the Reconciling Congregation Program, Affirmation, and In All Things Charity. In addition, 120 members of Soulforce, an interfaith coalition, were present to make a strong witness that the trial was an act of spiritual violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons. This letter was written two weeks later. While I still need time to assess the significance and consequences of the guilty verdict and the penalty, both for me personally and for the movement toward justice and community of which all of us are a part, there are a few things I am clear about and want to share with you now. First, I am immensely grateful for the support you gave to me and for the witness that you made in various ways around the country on behalf of justice and to affirm the dignity of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons. I wish I had some adequate and personal way to say to each of you, “Thank you!” Your support strengthened and empowered me. I never felt alone. I was always clear that I was only one small part of a larger faithful community journeying together in this movement of God in history. You are for me the sign of our Easter faith, confirming our hope that justice, compassion and truth will prevail over bigotry, injustice and death. The trial brought to an end a twenty-nine year relationship that I have had with the United Methodist Church as an ordained minister. The ordination that was taken from me by the jury was given to me by the United Methodist Church. It belonged to the church and the church had a right to take it back. It was not mine to claim; it is not an entitlement. That is the basic meaning of ordained ministry. However, the ordination that preceded it and cannot be reclaimed by the United Methodist Church is the one that came with my baptism, and the one confirmed by my call to ministry. These belong to me still, and no institution, jury or person has the authority or power to take them away. I will continue to honor and live out this ordination in all that I do. This is not to say that what the church revoked was unimportant to me. There is nothing I love more than being a pastor of a congregation. I know that I cannot be a United Methodist pastor now. I will not dwell on it, but be assured that I grieve what has been taken from me. Summer 2000 MINISTRIES 23 at least another year of work on it ahead of me. I will continue to accept speaking invitations. And, I intend to support the work of Soulforce, the Coalition (MFSA, RCP, IATC and Affirmation) in its effort to affect change at the General Conference, and to support the Reconciling United Methodists in North Carolina. And as time passes, I know God will call me to other ministries I’ve not imagined. God bless you! The journey continues, and we continue together! Jimmy Creech was an ordained United Methodist minister for twenty-nine years, serving churches in North Carolina and Nebraska. Readers may contact him at 412 South Boylan Ave., Raleigh, NC 27603-1910; telephone: 919- 755-3558; fax: 919-835-2182. Reflections on the Second Jimmy Creech Trial Marilyn Alexander “...For his eye is on the sparrow and I know he watches me...I sing because I’m happy, I sing because I’m free, for his eye is on the sparrow and I know he watches me.” To say that the guilty verdict and the final penalty in the trial of Jimmy Creech came as a surprise is not quite accurate. Nor is it descriptive to say that we were prepared because we could have almost certainly guessed the outcome. With all our knowledge of the worst case scenarios, we are still a people of hope and faith, both in God and in the essence of who we are as a church. So when the verdict was spoken and especially when the punishment was rendered, it was a shock to the heart and soul. We live with a veneer of trust that we are moving towards a more just and loving church. If we did not have this faith, we would not still be here. It is times like these though, when the reality of the ignorance and bigotry of the church is so stark, that we feel the blow throughout our body and soul. The naked truth rocks us to the core. The trial moved beyond a mere assessment of whether or not Jimmy disobeyed the church law (though certainly that was the nuts and bolts of it). It wasn’t even about the institution of marriage (though truly the wedding of two men was the catalyst). As we moved through the day, starting from our arrival at Trinity UMC around 8:15 a.m., huddling in the cool morning air outside while we waited for the completion of the jury selection going on inside the church, we were reminded that this trial was sending a message to the world about the integrity of the church’s message to seek love and justice. Already the Soulforce group had held their peaceful, nonviolent protest, had been arrested, and was returning with the powerful feelings of their action. As one retired United Methodist clergyman told me, “When the bishops stood in front of us and told us to move, I could feel everyone pull even closer together. It was an amazing feeling.” They wanted the trial participants to know the lengths that they would go to object to the trial, to the point of literally standing in the way of their brothers and sisters in the faith and to say, “No more.” Fred Phelps and his bunch from Kansas were on hand with the usual “cheerful” placards but they were kept outside the main perimeter so they were merely background noise. The same few protesters from the night before were closer. There was something ironic about the sign that one held in her left hand that said something about homosexuality being an abomination while she smoked a cigarette with her right hand. In addition, there was a large media presence. At one point I looked down the sidewalk to see the Visitor Parking signs surrounded by numerous camera tripods temporarily abandoned (and parked there) by news teams. Each of these images were reminders that the church was also on trial, whether it be in the court of public opinion or in the hearts and minds of the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community. The trial itself moved very rapidly. We were seated in the sanctuary by 10:00 a.m. and dismissed just after 11:30 with instruction we would not hear back from the jury before 1:15 p.m. By nearly 1:30 we had heard the verdict. It then took until just before 4:00 before the penalty was announced. During that last stretch of time, we sat in the sanctuary and wondered, waited and weighed. Finally someone had the good sense to start leading us in singing hymns. The words tumbled over me, preoccupied my mind for a time but did not stick. What did catch my attention (and that of all those around) was the flight of a small sparrow. Into the lofty ceiling, down by the organ pipes, across to the other side and out towards the back— fast and furiously it flew. Just for a moment the bird caught our imagination— even our hunger for a sign of what was to come. Very soon after that, the jury returned, the penalty was announced, a visibly grieving bishop said a word of prayer, and we followed Jimmy out into the Nebraska sunshine and the gaze of a crowd of cameras and microphones. All along the way, Jimmy spoke eloquently, with passion and compassion. He kept the focus on the church’s choice of whether or not to embrace its calling to show God’s love and to treat each person as one of sacred worth. To the very end, he also kept the spiritual, emotional and physical pain of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people and their families at the forefront. On the altar table inside the sanctuary lay a commonly seen autumn harvest spread of a miniature hay bale, corn husks and tiny gourds and pumpkins. The table was barely visible behind the trial setting where the bishop presided, the jury was seated, and the witness stand located, but it was still there. It kept me wondering what the church would glean from this trial, what we will reap from the seeds sown here in Grand Island, Nebraska. In the short term, I see only rotten fruit growing out of today’s seeds of ignorance and arrogance, but I have to believe that this day did not bring the last word in the struggle for an inclusive church. In the (oh so long) long run, we must dig up today’s seeds of hope and faith and replant them in fertile soil. We must use them in such a way as to grow new life into the church. We must let our anger and ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ 24 MINISTRIES Open Hands sadness fuel our future actions. Yes, we must grieve, but we must also keep moving down the row—planting, watering, weeding, even fertilizing. And we can sing, in low and high voices, “I sing because I’m happy, I sing because I’m free, for his eye is on the sparrow and I know he watches me.” Marilyn Alexander is the interim Coordinator of the Reconciling Congregation Program and interim Executive Publisher of Open Hands. With James Preston, she authored We Were Baptized Too—Claiming God’s Grace for Lesbians and Gays (Westminster John Knox Press, 1996). Law vs. Truth David Cooper I keep finding myself returning to it, the printed on green, security-clad— Not valid unless machine numbered and signed with multicolor ribbon on the reverse side—symbol of your passing. CERTIFICATE OF DEATH, Issued by Marion County Health Department, Indiana State Department of Health—it states. Looks official. Must be legal. Having lived with you four and a half years, I look for facts. The name is correct as is sex, time of death, date of death, social security number, age: 34—so young! Date of birth— yes, correct; birthplace: Columbus, Indiana— correct, but fails to mention “Athens of the Midwest”— oh well, we can let that pass. Skip to box 16: Marital Status (Specify): Single. Lie! I have made so many journeys to hospitals, mopped the sweat from your head when you were delirious, scrubbed you in the shower at home when your arm had to be encased in plastic to protect the ganciclovir IV. How dare they state “Single?” Isn’t legality about truth? Was it not my ear that shared your innermost secrets and confessions? Didn’t you first tell me the things you couldn’t even tell your father or mother? Weren’t those my arms that cradled you when you were ill and embraced you with joyous love during the good days? Isn’t it the heart of your spouse that now lies shattered and in ruins as it aches for simple recognition? What were those rings we exchanged and solemn vows? Death parted us, but not nearly as much as the State of Indiana or the Marion County Health Department. Shreds of truth are to be found on this official waste of paper. “White.” Yes, your skin was white, especially on the day that you transcended this small planet. White it was also, the day the oncologist announced “liver tumor” and “cancerous” and “small chance.” It doesn’t document your bravery, though. True enough, you, the “decedent,” were not a U.S. Veteran. You killed no one, but you did bleed many times. How you dreaded the constant blood tests required to keep an HIV-ridden body going. Even with macular degeneration of the eyes, you saw the grim object poised to strike your vein. Brave, too, you were when you decided upon intensive chemotherapy in order to preserve a slim chance of our continuing life together. Immediate cause of death: respiratory failure. Approximate interval between onset and death: 2 weeks. Both of these statements may be true (I did not count the days), but my God, what a long two weeks. Two weeks of wearing latex gloves and gowns and masks (except when understanding nurses were on duty) as I sat in the chair beside your bed, holding your hand, assuring you that what we had nothing could destroy or telling you of how sincerely I believed that we would be together again, but in a more benevolent world. A world without prejudice— what a thing for which to dream! Running down hospital back corridors with you in the bed, being transported in the night from coronary intensive care back to oncology, helping with your oxygen because the nurses and orderlies couldn’t possibly do all things at once, I never dreamed that some day I would be left with this green, legal lie. Or maybe I should be generous and call it a half-truth since there is some fact? If your husband or wife dies (it will happen some day), how would you feel to read in the official record that your only role was to be identified in box 20: Informant’s name (type/print)? How would you feel the next time you sing patriotic words like “home of the brave and the land of the free” when your love, bravery, and freedom was denied in that “home”? Imagine for one moment how it feels to want to write for your church newsletter your thanks to all of those who were so kind during the final illness and passing of your _______. What is the word that fills in that blank? You are only the “informant”according to that legal document. Feel the sting as well-intentioned people tell you they are sorry about the passing of your “friend”! Yes, he was my best friend, but oh, what a half-truth! How much more a spouse he was than the woman a legal document said I was married to for nineteen years! How much more a soulmate than the person who bore those two wonderful products of our genetic material. Why is it so necessary and just to pass laws in defense of marriage? I have never wished to deny two people the right to marry. Are there only a limited number of legal certificates waiting to be filled out granting legal sanction to what God has joined together? Will the gays and lesbians be the first in line and take all existing blank certificates and thereby deny to heterosexual persons the right to make legal what their hearts tell them is the truth? If you don’t want to allow us the dignity of being married, for God’s sake invent something. Call it what you will. Allow it not to offend or threaten your sensibilities, but give us some legality. A female nurse came to me one night in the hospital. She said “I want to say ‘thank you.’ I have never seen a husband or wife as devoted to the other as you have been to him.” I said, “Thank you.”As the tears rolled down my cheek, I had an inkling that some day I would merely be an “informant.” Do something, please. Don’t do it for me. Do it for you. Whenever any of us is treated as less than fully human, we are all dehumanized. Don’t let there be another Matthew Shepard (or the other hundreds whom you cannot name). Don’t cause ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Summer 2000 MINISTRIES 25 kids to commit suicide because you can’t fully accept them. Please don’t leave another soul staring at a green sheet of legally wasted paper realizing that he or she is merely an informant. David L. Cooper (l.) describes himself as “a United Methodist of many years,” a member of Broadway United Methodist Church in Indianapolis. He and Steve (r.) were united in a marriage ceremony celebrated by the Rev. Howard Warren on Dave’s 51st birthday, less than a week before Steve died in 1999. Copyright ©1999 by David L. Cooper. Let Us Be Impatient With Prejudice William Sloane Coffin Previously published January 20, 2000, in the Rutland Herald of Rutland, Vermont. Printed here with the Herald’s permission. An old adage reads, “Good things come in small packages.” Vermont is clear proof. Ever since the Vermont Supreme Court decision of December 20, the eyes of the nation are upon our state. Many Americans consider the court’s decision a legal milestone and a cultural turning point. But also, not surprisingly, Montpelier is being flooded with thousands of out-ofstate letters filled with inflammatory rhetoric and spurious homophobic assertions, many of them written by Christians who use the Bible much as a drunk does a lamppost—more for support than for illumination. I am reminded of the wise conclusion of William Penn: “To be ferocious in religion is to be ferociously irreligious.” Readers will remember the court ruled that the common benefits and protection that flow from marriages under Vermont law must be extended to same-sex couples but left it to the Legislature to craft a remedy for the discrimination the court had deemed unconstitutional. On the day following the ruling, an editorial in the Rutland Herald suggested that “the two obvious remedies are to broaden the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples, or to create another form of legally sanctioned domestic partnership that guarantees the same benefits.” It occurs to me that all Vermonters should take time out from the clamor of life to become for a while as reflective as possible. Thoughtful conversations need to take place in every family, in every church, temple and mosque, in every field, factory and office. Our representatives in Montpelier must hear from us, but only the most carefully thought out reasons for our positions. To be avoided at all costs is the solace of opinion without the pain of thought. For example, many letters sent our legislators enjoin them to remember “the sanctity of traditional marriage.” Yet few traditions have changed more over the years than marital ones. For centuries, parents knew best— marriages were arranged. For an even longer period of time, husbands had all property rights including their wives and daughters themselves. Until very recently interracial marriages often were forbidden, and Bible readers should recall that the early biblical practice of polygamy, although later abandoned, is nowhere in the Bible explicitly forbidden. In short, with so many traditions, we need both to recover and to recover from them. All of which is not to take away from the sanctity of marriage, for few things are more sacred than an avowed commitment between two people to an intimate, lifelong relationship. People who say “same-sex marriage makes me uncomfortable” should probably remind themselves that comfort has nothing to do with the issue and that, often as not, change is discomforting. I think those of us who are straight people really need to sit down quietly and compare our own discomfort with the discomfort of gays and lesbians who for years have been excluded, isolated, silenced, abused and even killed. The argument that gays threaten to destroy heterosexual marriage is an assertion only, not an argument. If anyone destroys marriage, it’s married people, not gays. Finally, I think we need to examine carefully the position shared by many thoughtful folk who are anxious that whatever the legislators in Montpelier do “it must be everything as good as marriage.” In 1896 in Plessy vs. Ferguson, the U.S. Supreme Court found “separate but equal” to be constitutional in educating black and white children. But in 1954 the court ruled that “separate” inevitably meant unequal. Would not the same inequality prove true were civil marriage reserved for straight couples only while gay and lesbian unions were designated otherwise? Further, if for all of us marriage is a profound symbol, and for some of us a sacred one, what right have straight people to deny it to gays and lesbians for whom it is altogether as meaningful? I think gays are right in insisting that marriage by any other name just isn’t marriage. And isn’t it ironic that Vermont law today recognizes gay and lesbian families, but has yet to legalize the marriages which generally precede the formation of families? By recalling “our common humanity” the state’s Supreme Court reminded us that all human relationships be judged by their inner worth, not by their outward appearance. That being the case, I believe the state should not hesitate to offer gays and lesbians the same civil marriage available to straight couples. Certainly the legal matter of extending rights would be vastly simplified if the marriage language were uniform. As a male I consider myself at best a recovering chauvinist. As a white person I am a recovering racist, and as a straight person a recovering heterosexist. To women, African-Americans, gays and lesbians, I am deeply grateful for stretching my mind, deepening my heart, and convincing me that no human being should ever be patient with prejudice at the expense of its victims. William Sloane Coffin is a resident of Strafford, Vermont. An author and activist, he has served as chaplain of Yale University and pastor of Riverside Church in New York City. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ 26 MINISTRIES Open Hands The facilitators ask participants to put aside their urges to persuade and to use the time together to ask questions about which they are truly curious. The group accepts guidelines about confidentiality, not interrupting, and using considerate language. The first question posed by the facilitators focuses on drawing out personal stories, allowing participants to hear human emotion and pain and connect on a deeper level. An exercise sometimes used is to ask participants to list on newsprint the negative stereotypes they think others hold about them. This gets at the stereotypes without either side feeling like they are being attacked by the people present. The group who created the list identifies which stereotypes are most inaccurate, which are inaccurate but understandable, and which are the most painful. Later questions by the facilitators ask participants to share their basic core beliefs on the issue and then their uncertainties or dilemmas. After this foundation of trust has been established, participants can ask questions of each other, keeping in mind the guideline about curiosity not persuasion. Any participant can decline to answer a question. This establishes a non-coercive atmosphere where people can ask questions without anyone feeling put on the spot. “Participants have direct exchanges with one another only after they have had the opportunity to be heard, without fear of rebuttal, attack or interruption.” The session ends with questions posed by the facilitators to help people reflect and learn positive lessons from the dialogue. Public Conversations Project has used variations of this model in two dialogues about GLBT inclusion in the church. The first began with leaders of the Massachusetts chapter of Episcopalians United and a local bishop. The group of eight people was balanced in terms of sexual orientation, clergy/ lay, and gender, and was racially diverse. The dialogue was highly structured at first, placed a premium on asking questions that would surface new information, and created patterns of interaction that fostered receptive listening and intentional/ thoughtful speaking. As a part of the dialogue process the participants decided that they needed to better understand each other’s approaches to scripture. Specific passages were selected by the participants and one whole session was spent on understanding each other’s interpretations. After four sessions, including a day-long meeting, the group produced a consensus statement and a resource book that outlines the dialogue process in detail. Both can be obtained by contacting the Public Conversations Project, 46 Kondazian St, Watertown, MA 02472 or 617-923-1216 or asubak@publicconversations.org. Recently Public Conversations also facilitated a four-day dialogue for ten Anglican bishops at the Holy Cross Monastery in West Park, NY. This conversation was convened by the Archbishop of Canterbury and organized by Bishop Frank Griswold. A variation of Public Conversations’ original model was used by the Portland, Oregon group People of Faith Against Bigotry with a small group formed after Measure 9, the statewide ballot measure designed to restrict civil rights of GLBT people. After participation in several sessions with this group, one of the participants from a fundamentalist Christian church WELCOMING PROCESS Conflict Resolution DeEtte Beghtol The structured conversation model developed by the Public Conversations Project at the Family Institute of Cambridge, Massachusetts was originally developed for discussing abortion. But more recently it has been used for dialogue around GLBT folks. The developers of the model were skilled in working with families in crisis. They adapted what they had learned from helping families talk about difficult personal issues to conversations on divisive public issues. They recognized that on highly charged issues, “Each side considers its own position to be so vital, and that of the adversary to be so dangerous, that neither seems mindful of the costs of the battle.” Does this sound familiar? Public Conversations Project’s basic premise is that people on opposite sides of an emotionally charged issue need a highly structured setting in order to really listen to each other. Where people are “stuck” in old patterns of talking about an issue, the facilitators seek to bring understanding by introducing new ways of talking to “the other side.” The facilitators of the conversation groups carefully select participants for small groups of 4 to 8 people, evenly divided between “pros” and “cons.” Most of the groups have been composed of participants who are not the “headliners,” the leaders who have a lot at stake in remaining true to their public positions. People less concerned with saving face can be more open to express doubts and consider the validity of an opposing idea. The facilitators do much pre-meeting contact: individual interviews with each participant, phone calls, a confirming letter, careful communications to establish trust in the facilitators. The goals of the facilitators are to provide a safe context in which people with different views can explore the values and concerns underlying the public debate. In the communications to participants, facilitators emphasize their interest in each person’s unique personal views and invite her/ him to consider their uncertainties as well as their certainties. Participants are invited to consider what they would genuinely like to learn from those who do not share their ideas and beliefs. The original model began with sharing a meal together at which the hot topic is off limits. Participants are asked not to reveal what their “party line” is, thus allowed to see each other first as human beings. After dinner participants are seated in a circle alternating a “pro person” and a “con person,” so that each person is physically located next to an opponent, not opposite. It’s easier to see the humanity of your “enemy” if you are sitting next to him/her without a barrier of a table between you. It’s easier to express your own vulnerability when the person next to you is also vulnerable. Summer 2000 MINISTRIES 27 issues with congregations, denominations, and the general public; develop curricula to prepare seminary students to provide leadership on these issues in their faith communities; and coordinate its efforts with existing gay and lesbian denominational caucuses. The center will encourage the formation of partnerships with other schools offering studies in gay and lesbian issues and with gay and lesbian caucuses within the American Academy of Religion and the Society of Biblical Literature. Calling the center “an integral part of the educational mission of PSR,” the school’s president, William McKinney, said, “It will witness to the Christian belief in justice for all people and challenge the injustice of institutional homophobia and the prejudice surrounding different sexual orientations.” Dr. Mary A. Tolbert, PSR’s George H. Atkinson Professor of Biblical Studies, will be director of the new center. “Through the generous support of the Carpenter Foundation,” Tolbert says, “we have a unique opportunity to bring the resources of contemporary theological education and scholarship to bear on the present intolerant and even inhumane treatment afforded to lesbians and gay men in both church and state. From ballot initiatives to potential splits in major Protestant denominations, the inclusion or exclusion of lesbians and gay men from full civic or ecclesiastical participation has become a touchstone for defining the political and religious identity of many people worldwide. “While these debates are often full of passion and drama, they are just as often lacking in information, accuracy, careful theological reflection, or the visible representation of persons from the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender communities. The overall mission of the new Center is to intervene forcefully and positively in these debates by providing up-to-date information, thoughtful research, effective education for leadership, and a voice of advocacy for those who have been silenced or made invisible simply because of who God created them to be.” Pacific School of Religion is a multi-denominational seminary of the United Church of Christ with strong ties to the United Methodist Church, the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) and the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches. From its origins in 1866, PSR has educated ministers for the changing needs of Christian churches in a diverse world, informed by a commitment to inclusivity and justice. PSR is also part of an ecumenical academic consortium, the Graduate Theological Union (GTU). The school has had a long-standing commitment to justice for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people. It graduated its first openly gay student in 1971, opened its married student housing to same-sex couples in the early 1980’s, and provides domestic partner benefits to gay and lesbian faculty and staff. Openly gay faculty, students, staff and Board of Trustee members make significant and distinctive contributions to all levels of the community. Jane Austin is the Communications Director of the Pacific School of Religion. For more information, contact the center at clgs@psr.edu or 510/849 8206. told the group that she had been asked to gather signatures on petitions for another similar anti-gay ballot measure. She refused to do it because she had come to know and respect the gay and lesbian people in the group. Dialogues may not change the core beliefs of participants, but they certainly make mutual respect and tolerance more likely. A structure that encourages telling personal stories and speaking from the heart in a confidential atmosphere is basic to such dialogue. Participants need to see their opponents first as human beings—as children of God— and not primarily as proponents of ideas or positions. Thus the dialogue becomes multi-faceted, reflecting the complex bundle of ideas and feelings we are. The result is that after the experience, participants, even those who risk little, see the issues and their own positions in less simplistic ways. To use a Quaker phrase, “that of God” in each of us responds to our brother or sister no matter how much we may disagree on an issue. If there is hope for reconciliation or mutual acceptance of differences between us, it needs to begin with such dialogue. DeEtte Wald Beghtol, a former Presbyterian, is bidenominational: a member of both a UCC and a United Methodist congregation. She is a mediator and trainer in private practice and works for a community mediation service. She thanks Laura Chasin, from Public Conversations Project, for information for this article. CAMPUS Pacific School of Religion Opens Center for Lesbian and Gay Studies Jane Austin Pacific School of Religion (PSR) in Berkeley, California, has announced the establishment of the PSR Center for Lesbian and Gay Studies in Religion and Ministry, a new Center offering educational resources, advocacy, and a progressive public voice on issues of sexual orientation and religion. Supported by a generous grant of $950,000 from the E. Rhodes and Leona B. Carpenter Foundation, the Center will open its doors in July 2000. The center will undertake research and scholarship which explores the theological, ethical, spiritual, biblical, psychological, social, and historical dimensions of sexual orientation; develop and share resources and information on these 28 Open Hands DiversityDiversity Sustaining the Spirit & # 8 6 Chorus oe . oe oe oe oe oe G Each of us in our di - oe j oe oe . C ver - si - ty, oe oe oe oe oe oe Amin Brings to the cho - rus a & # oe . j oe oe . D har - mo - ny, oe . oe oe oe oe oe G You bring us in where we’re oe j oe . j oe Emin meant to be, & # oe oe oe oe . oe oe C blend- ing at last in the oe j oe oe . D sym - pho- ny, oe oe oe oe . oe oe G G/B You make the mu - sic and & # oe oe oe oe . C D we sing a - long, oe . oe oe oe oe oe G C ma - ny the sing - ers but 3rd time to CODA oe oe oe oe . D G one is the song. & # Verse oe . oe oe oe oe oe G 1.
Trum - 2.
Warm pets mothof er sol - earth stice with that her oe j oe oe . D G change lul - our la - days, by, oe . oe oe oe oe oe C tim - full pais ni the o - moon cean in that the & # oe oe oe oe . D crash - or - es ches - and tra plays, sky, oe oe oe oe oe oe G G/F# Sweet Great vi - spi - o - rit lins wind in crosthe ses oe j oe oe . Emin G/D wil - harp low’s and sigh, lyre, Diversity Marsha Stevens Summer 2000 29 & # oe . oe oe oe oe oe C Pic - you co - have lo com - sound posed of in the this oe j oe oe . D birds glow - that ing fly, fire, oe . oe oe oe oe oe G Fierce Stur - is dy our of Mothbod - er’s y de - or & # oe j oe oe . Emin fense frail a - of bove, limb, . oe oe oe oe J oe C safe each is smile the a touch note of in oe oe oe oe . D this cre - Fath - a - er’s tion’s love, hymn, & # oe . oe oe oe oe oe G G/F# Chant Great of the the cresag - cen - ed do and of oe j oe oe . Emin chil - col - dren’s or’s rhyme, verse, oe . oe oe oe . oe oe C G/B ten - no der one the is heartbet - beat ter that’s and & # .. oe oe oe oe . Amin D keep - no ing one is time. worse. CODA fi oe oe oe oe . oe oe G G/B You make the mu - sic and oe oe oe oe . C D we sing a - long, & # .. .. oe . oe oe oe oe oe G C ma - ny the sing - ers oe . oe oe oe oe oe G C ma - ny the sing- ers but oe oe oe oe . D G one is the song! Marsha Stevens is the author of the folk hymn, “For Those Tears I Died.” Christian Century magazine has called her, “Conservative Christianity’s worst nightmare—a Biblebelieving, God-fearing, Jesus-loving lesbian Christian.” She has given permission for OpenHands readers to copy this song in its entirety (please include title and author with every copy) and all of her songs may be copied under CCLI guidelines. Order from her website (www.BalmMinistries.com) or on amazon.com, CDnow.com, or by mail at P.O. Box 1981, Costa Mesa, CA 92628 (714)641-8968. Free downloads from each album available at MP3.com Booking information: contact Beth Coombs at (425)775-9579 (Pacific Time). 30 Open Hands Welcoming Communities OPEN AND AFFIRMING Christ Congregation, UCC Princeton, New Jersey The 100 members of this dually affiliated (UCC and American Baptist) church are a mixture of people who find unity in their desire to hear and express the good news of the gospel. The congregation has welcomed numerous young families with children, which means an expanding Sunday School! Outreach includes a Prison Visitation and Support program to federal prisoners and a recent party for kids from “Rainbow House” which provides housing for mothers with HIV/AIDS and their children. The congregation declares its ONA commitment in its bulletin each Sunday, is sponsoring an “out” seminary student for ordination, and continues to discuss other ways to keep ONA a part of the church’s witness. Rincon Congregational Church, UCC Tucson, Arizona Again in 1999, this 585-member city church lived out its commitment to compassion and hospitality through its annual Mardi Gras festival, which celebrates both the light and shadow sides of spirituality. Monies raised by the event were divided between the LGBT Center (especially its domestic violence program) and Casa de los Niños which provides care for children in abusive situations. Church members participate in “Outober Fest,” the area gay pride celebration (held in October when it’s not so hot!), and “Rainbow Services,” Saturday night worship done in cooperation with other welcoming congregations. The church’s youth program focuses on music and culture, and this season’s holiday presentation was a “Celtic Christmas.” RECONCILING IN CHRIST Mount Olive Lutheran Church Minneapolis, Minnesota Mount Olive is an urban congregation of 470 members, and the October vote to become RIC was unanimous, due to a strong community of gay and lesbian people which has been growing over the last 15 years. “Every Sunday someone is here because of it,” said Rev. Bill Heisley, senior pastor. The church will continue to advertise in the local press in order to reach out to the GLBT community. St. Stephen’s Lutheran Church Tallahassee, Florida With 200 active members, St. Stephen’s is the only integrated Lutheran church in the area. Church members became interested in the Reconciling in Christ program through their involvement with a local organization which cares for people with HIV/AIDS. The church has had at least one family join the congregation since its November vote to become RIC, and plans to continue its outreach into the gay and lesbian community. AFFIRMING CONGREGATION PROGRAMME Southminster-Steinhauer United Church Edmonton, Alberta A 200-member congregation located in southwest Edmonton, this congregation became the first officially Affirming Congregation in the province of Alberta in January 1999. Founded in the 1960s, Southminster-Steinhauer has always placed social justice at the heart of its ministry. For decades, the church worshiped in school gyms and held meetings in members’ homes in order to dedicate money to mission rather than a building. Recently, in an effort to be more visible and vital in the community, the congregation voted both to embark on a $1.4 million building campaign and become an Affirming congregation! Both efforts have been successful, and the church looks forward to expanding its witness for peace and justice when it moves into a permanent home in November 2000. OPEN & AFFIRMING MINISTRIES Chalice Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) San Mateo, CA Named after the symbol of the denomination, Chalice Christian Church emphasizes the importance of Communion in the congregation’s life and the radical yet reconciling nature of Christ’s table. A newly recognized congregation in the Northern California-Nevada Region, this community came into existence as a result of a church split related to the use of inclusive language in worship. Such commitments led the congregation to decide to publicly proclaim itself “Open and Affirming.” This three-year-old congregation is committed to active witness and service in the wider community through community organizing as well as hands-on service projects. First Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) Boulder, Colorado Established in 1878, First Christian Church has always valued independent thinking and encouraged its members to participate in activities which would bring justice to the larger community. When the present building was erected, one of its first ministries was the creation of a low income senior adult facility nearby. On November 8, 1998 the congregation voted to identify itself as an Open & Affirming congregation. Pastor Terry Zimmerman affirms, “Our decision to become ‘officially’ O&A brings new opportunities and challenges to our members, but if our future is anything like our past, we have many wonderful, creative, fulfilling and purposeful days ahead of us!” As leaders of the Open & Affirming Task Force, the Rev. Glenn Johnson, a retired pastor, and his wife, Louise, were a strong impetus behind this wonderful achievement. Summer 2000 31 Movement News Southern Lutherans Become Reconciling; Milwaukee Lutherans Affirm Gay Blessings, and a New Resource of Welcome Meeting in Nashville for an annual assembly Memorial Day weekend, the Southeastern Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America passed a historic statement of welcome to gay and lesbian people and their families. The statement, which passed by an estimated 2/3 majority, makes the Lutherans the first Protestant denomination in the South to pass such a statement at the regional level. On the same weekend the Southwest Texas Synod of the ELCA passed a similar statement. Synod assemblies are composed of pastors and lay representatives of every congregation in that synod. They represent the highest legislative authority at the synod level. The “Resolution of Welcome” acknowledges that some gay and lesbian Christians and their families have left the church because they have not felt welcome in the past. It also states that other gay and lesbian people have been active and faithful members of the Lutheran church since the beginning of the synod itself. The Southeastern Synod is composed of ELCA congregations in Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi and Tennessee. Southwest Texas includes San Antonio and the area south to the Mexican border. Bob Gibeling of Atlanta, Program Executive for Lutherans Concerned/North America, served as floor leader for the resolution effort at the Southeastern Synod Assembly. Earlier, on May 5, a synod of the ELCA approved the blessing of same-gender relationships by pastors in that synod, a historic first in the United States. By a vote of 141–103, the Greater Milwaukee Synod passed a resolution which “ recognizes and affirms the blessing of such committed same-gender relationships by pastors of this synod after counseling of the couple seeking such a blessing.” The Greater Milwaukee Synod has been designated as Reconciling in Christ for several years. The vote on recognition of gay and lesbian relationships came after rejecting a move to study the issue further. More than 400 clergy and lay delegates make up the synod’s annual assembly, which is its highest legislative body. There are 141 congregations and 100,000 members in the Greater Milwaukee Synod. Southeast Michigan Synod of the ELCA passed an almost identical resolution by a clear majority on May 20. Lutherans Concerned leaders are recommending use of a landmark new gay and lesbian ministry resource written and produced by the ELCA. The 40-page document, called “Congregational Hospitality to Gay and Lesbian People,” is now available from the Division for Outreach, which wrote and produced it. Its contents include helpful ideas for congregations who want to be more welcoming to gay and lesbian people. The hospitality resource is being distributed by the ELCA to all congregations which relate to the Division for Outreach. These are primarily new congregations and congregations undergoing a renewal of their mission and ministry. Copies are available for a $3 mailing cost donation from the Division for Outreach, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, 8765 West Higgins Road, Chicago, IL 60631. For more information call 800-638-3522, ext. 2614. RCP Disappointed But Not Defeated The refusal of the United Methodist Church General Conference (meeting May 2-12 in Cleveland) to change its polices on gays and lesbians will not deter the Reconciling Congregation Program, its board members have declared. [See also “They Know Not What They Do” on page 13.] More than 4000 letters favoring the goals of the reconciling movement were written to the gathering; 16,500 Reconciling United Methodists have been enrolled; 600 volunteers lobbied for change; more than 200 persons of color signed a new statement of support; 125 parents registered as part of the Parent’s Network; more than 200 stoles were collected for the Shower of Stoles Project; more than 900 attended a Saturday rally; 800 gathered for worship on Sunday; 2000 participated in multi-cultural Communion services; and 220 persons were arrested in a Soulforce demonstration led by the Rev. Mel White and a separate action of those who protested the vote that retained the language in the UMC Discipline that calls homosexuality “incompatible” with Christian faith. RCP interim executive director Marilyn Alexander, among those arrested in the second action, said, “It has become increasingly clear that the system has been seized by those whose hearts are hardened against us. We kept faith with the system, trusted the process—but business as usual could not continue—the system has failed us and failed the larger church.” Rev. Dr. Gayle Felton, RCP board chair, acknowledged that, despite the setback, those who participated in the RCP presence at General Conference “were blessed with rich experiences of God’s grace” and urged “Don’t allow yourself to be pushed out by those who would be happy to see you go!” Presbyterian “Supreme Court” Rules Favorably Meeting in Baltimore Maryland May 19-22, the Permanent Judicial Commission of the Presbyterian Church U.S. ruled that Presbyterian ministers may perform same-sex union services as long as they are not treated as marriages, because nothing in the church constitution specifically forbids it. In a separate case, the court ruled that a church session may accept a gay man as a candidate for ministry, even while a ban on ordination of openly gay ministers, elders, and deacons remains in place. A third case of a congregation in Burlington, Vermont, welcoming lesbians and gays as full church members, including opportunity for ordination as elders and deacons, was deferred until July. All three cases came from the Synod of the Northeast, and are the first to challenge a controversial 1997 amendment that allows ordination only of married heterosexuals or celibate singles. 32 Open Hands THE EROTIC CONTEMPLATIVE by Michael B. Kelly Order Today! 24 - Hour Order Line 1-800-581-3303 “ The Erotic Contemplative is the most powerful and insightful study of Gay spirituality that I know of.” —John J. McNeill, PhD, author of The Church and the Homosexual “In my theology classes, both Gay and straight seminarians benefit from Kelly’s integration of sexuality with Christian mysticism.” —Robert Goss, PhD, author of Jesus Acted-Up “What a welcome addition to the ever growing resources available to the Gay/ Lesbian person seeking to understand and integrate his/her sexuality!” —Dooley Hitch, Presbyterian Minister “Ideally viewed as the basis of a discussion group, it is nourishment badly needed for spiritually starving Gay men and Lesbian women.” —Joseph Stack, More Light Update “The Erotic Contemplative video and audio course has helped Gay men and Lesbians who grew up as Christians move toward healing the wounds of the past.” —Joseph Kramer M.Div., Erospirit Research Institute A six-volume course for spiritual guides and pastoral counselors on the spiritual journey of the Gay/Lesbian Christian The six-volume set, available in audio or video tape contains the following sections: 1. The Truth of Our Experience (75 min) 2. Revisioning Sexuality (80 min) 3. Exodus and Awakening (75 min) 4. The Desert and the Dark (88 min) 5. Liberation (84 min) 6. The Road from Emmaus (63 min) Six audio tapes plus study guide ............ $49.00 Six video tapes plus study guide ............ $99.00 California residents add 7.5% sales tax. U.S. shipping charges: $5.00. International shipping charges: U.S. postage. Send check or credit card information to: EroSpirit Research Institute P. O. Box 3893 Oakland, CA 94609 Or call our 24-hour order line today. 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 Open Hands Vol 16 No 1 - The gOD of Violence https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/af3461f195459bb4b6a8fea808897d5e.pdf ea83bf8e279916d13eba23249a86c1df Issue An issue of a recurring publication. Volume Number The volume number of the issue 16 Issue Number The number of the issue (within a volume) 2 Publication Year The year the issue was published 2000 Publication Date The date the issue was published Fall Text Any textual data included in the document 2 Open Hands Vol. 16 No. 2 Fall 2000 Shaping an Inclusive Church Affirming Congregation Programme More Light Presbyterians Open & Affirming Ministries Open and Affirming Program Reconciling Congregation Program Reconciling in Christ Program Welcoming & Affirming Baptists Interim Executive Publisher Marilyn Alexander Editor Chris Glaser Designer In Print—Jan Graves Marketing Manager Jacki Belile Editorial Advisory Committee Bill Capel, MLP Ann Marie Coleman, ONA Chris Copeland, W&A Bobbi Hargleroad, MLP Tom Harshman, O&A Alyson Huntly, ACP Bonnie Kelly, ACP Susan Laurie, RCP Samuel E. Loliger, ONA Ruth Moerdyk, SCN Caroline Presnell, RCP Paul Santillán, RCP Julie Sevig, RIC Kelly Sprinkle, W&A Kathy Stayton, W&A Margarita Suaréz, ONA Judith Hoch Wray, O&A Stuart Wright, RIC and Program Coordinators Open Hands is the quarterly magazine of the welcoming movement, a consortium of programs that support individuals and congregations in efforts to welcome lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, and transgenders in all areas of church life. Open Hands was founded and is published by the Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (United Methodist), in cooperation with the six ecumenical partners listed above. Each program is a national network of local congregations and ministries that publicly affirm their welcome of LGBT people, their families and friends. These seven programs, along with Supportive Congregations (Brethren/Mennonite [www.webcom. com/bmc], Oasis Congregations (Episcopal), Welcoming Congregations (Unitarian Universalist), and INCLUSIVE Congregations (United Kingdom)—offer hope that the church can be a more inclusive community. Subscription is $20 for four issues ($25 outside the U.S.). Single copies and back issues are $6; quantities of 10 or more, $4 each. Subscriptions, requests for advertising rates, and other business correspondence should be sent to: Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 openhands@rcp.org www.rcp.org/openhands/index.html Member, The Associated Church Press © 2000 Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. Open Hands is a registered trademark. ISSN 0888-8833 Printed on recycled paper. NEXT ISSUE: WHAT ABOUT US KIDS? OUR HEALING TOUCH Lachrymal of Healing 4 SUSAN QUINN BRYAN Tears—anointing an ally and redeeming the church. Healing Communities of Faith 6 JORETTA L. MARSHALL Healing your congregation despite denominational divisions. Pious Injustice 8 Reflections on the Presbyterian General Assembly DONN CRAIL An “orgy of niceness” can still produce injustice. Healing from the Heart 11 KATHLYN JAMES The transforming power of our lives and our stories. Suf fer the Little Children… 12 DONALD R. PURKEY Last issue’s “god of Violence” vs. this issue’s God of healing. Keeping the Church Together in a Pluralistic World 14 DOUGLAS JOHN HALL Remembering our tradition can re-member the church. Restless Church 16 ANN FREEMAN PRICE A poem about the recent United Methodist General Conference. Do You Want to be Healed? 18 Not Getting Stuck in Our Woundedness IRENE MONROE As the gay faith healer says, “Get over it, Mary!” SUSTAINING THE SPIRIT Our Organist 20 A SHORT STORY BY MICHAEL LINDVALL Fall 2000 3 Publisher Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (UMC) Marilyn Alexander, Interim Coordinator 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 773/736-5526 www.rcp.org Ecumenical Partners Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada) Ron Coughlin, Coordinator P.O. Box 333, Station Q, Toronto, Ontario CANADA M4T 2M5 416/466-1489 acpucc@aol.com More Light Presbyterians (PCUSA) Michael J. Adee, Coordinator 369 Montezuma Ave. PMB #447 Santa Fe, NM 87501-2626 505/820-7082 www.mlp.org Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ) John Wade Payne, Interim Coordinator P.O. Box 44400, Indianapolis, IN 46244 941/728-8833 www.sacredplaces.com/glad Open and Affirming Program (UCC) Ann B. Day, Coordinator P.O. Box 403, Holden, MA 01520 508/856-9316 www.UCCcoalition.org Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran) Bob Gibeling, Coordinator 2466 Sharondale Drive, Atlanta, GA 30305 404/266-9615 www.lcna.org Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (ABC/USA) Brenda J. Moulton, Coordinator P.O. Box 2596, Attleboro Falls, MA 02763 508/226-1945 users.aol.com/wabaptists MINISTRIES CHILDREN Teaching Children About Healing 23 ALLEN V. HARRIS PARENTS When a Child “Comes Out” 25 RON GRIESSE WELCOMING A Long Journey into Welcome 26 RACHEL C. WILSON CONNECTIONS Not “Privileging” Our Oppression 28 ROBERT E. GOSS WOW 2000 1000 at WOW 2000 30 The Very Much Later Acts of the Apostles CHRIS GLASER MOVEMENT NEWS & NEW RESOURCES ........... 32 Call for articles and columns for Open Hands Summer 2001 YOU ARE THE BELOVED! Healing Self-Rejection Theme Section: Internalized homophobia and heterosexism continue to influence our view of ourselves, one another, and our community. We know the basic fear and self-loathing that kept many of us in closets. But what about the little doubts that plague our self-worth and sense of well being? And how do our doubts about our belovedness affect our view of the congregations that welcome us—like Groucho Marx, do we resist or doubt organizations that would have us as members? How does our faith make us whole? What spiritual disciplines, religious experiences, scriptures, books, and people have helped us better understand that we are God’s beloved? How do media and cultural stereotypes, LGBT community expectations, and denominational disapproval affect our sense of worth? Personal stories, anecdotes, prayers, poems, meditations, analytical articles—all are welcome for this issue. 1000-2500 words per article, photographs welcome. Ministries Section: Columns may include: Welcoming (the process of becoming welcoming), Connections (with other justice issues), Worship, Spirituality, Outreach, Leadership, Marriage, Health, Youth, Campus, Children, and Parents. These brief articles may or may not have to do with the theme of the issue. 750-1000 words. Contact with ideas by February 1, 2001 Manuscript deadline: April 1, 2001 Contact: Chris Glaser, Phone/Fax 404/622-4222 or e-mail at ChrsGlaser@aol.com 991 Berne St. SE, Atlanta, GA 30316-1859 USA www.ChrisGlaser.com 4 Open Hands The day that the church I pastor, A Community of the Servant- Savior, PCUSA, became the 100th More Light Presbyterian Church, was a powerful Pentecost Sunday, June 11, 2000. We had an intergenerational Sunday School, lunch on the breezeway, and the service was delayed until 2 pm, so that all of our friends from other churches could join us. The Rev. Janie Spahr preached, the music was heavenly, and there was so much joy in the hearts of everyone present! That evening, we would continue the celebration at Houston’s Interfaith Gay Pride Worship Service. And yet, I found myself near tears, and in spite of the joy, a deep feeling of grief began to overwhelm me. I decided to stay with the pain, and as I moved toward it, I found myself crawling deep in my past where I discovered a story that had been written on my heart years before. It was like finding cave drawings that helped me understand why this day was so very important to me— why I felt almost driven toward it. Almost twenty years ago, I lived in a smaller town here in Texas, and was a Director of Christian Education at the church. I had not been there long— about six months— when an older woman in the church asked to paint my portrait. I agreed (though I was mystified) and, during the sittings, it became clear to me that she was testing me in some way—feeling her way to a safe place to share something important. The minister I worked with counseled me to just be patient and let things unfold naturally. After many sittings, she finally opened up. She and her husband had three children, twin boys and a girl. Her husband was very excited about the little girl (we’ll call her S.), but as she grew, she was not the sweet, petite, little lacy girlygirl the dad had in mind. She was largeboned and athletic and a tomboy—and a disappointment. Dad and S. had a lot of conflicts. As she headed into junior high, high school and college, she found lots of things to help her avoid the pain: alcohol, tobacco, drugs. She had bouts of depression and suicidal tendencies. She was hospitalized over and over and given electric shock treatments. Finally, near the end of college, she had a breakthrough with a wonderful counselor: S. was a lesbian. The counselor did not treat this as a disease, but a difference. And S. began to thrive. AA helped with the alcohol and drugs. But the biggest thing was coming home to herself. The truth does set people free. She could live with this. She wasn’t alone. She found some other lesbians and discovered she wasn’t crazy— just different. She finished college. She was an artist, and her work moved from being dark and suicidal to being bright and vivid. A few years later, she met the love of her life. They committed their lives to one another. She decided to tell her parents. So they went home to visit. Dad went ballistic. Kicked them out of the house, and said he no longer had a daughter. Told his wife that as far as he was concerned, she was dead— and to never speak her name to him again. The mother arranged a weekly telephone call while the dad was at a meeting. But the relationship was strained. Over time, the mom grew in her understanding of her daughter and her love for K. The daugher, S., and her lover, K., moved out of state, and bought a house in the country. K. was teaching in the local elementary school, and they joined a local church. They worked with the youth. Everyone loved them— especially the youth, and the youth group grew. They were on committees and helped mow the church lawn, bake cookies, teach Sunday School. They were blissful. Then, one day, they were called into the pastor’s office, and, with a few elders, they were confronted: rumor had it that they weren’t just roommates, but lesbians, and even if that wasn’t true, they couldn’t work with the children anymore. And no one wanted them on their committees anymore, either. The pastor was sorry, but, well, we all know what the Bible says. And he was worried what people would think of the church. They drove home, realizing that if that rumor was going around the church, it was only a matter of time until K. lost her teaching job, and their steady income. S. couldn’t paint, if that was the case. They knew there was no place to run. A few days later, when the mother didn’t get her weekly phone call, she was worried. A few more days passed, and still no word. The mother began to panic and risked her husband’s ire by Lachrymal of Healing Susan Quinn Bryan Lachrymals were small vials in which women of ancient times stored their tears, often worn as an amulet or sacred charm. Fall 2000 5 calling her daughter herself—no answer. It was summer, the teacher wouldn’t be at school, and they never took a trip without telling her where they were going. The mom knew something was dreadfully wrong. The mother and one of the twins drove the thousand miles to the women’s home—to discover the bloated and rotting corpses of her beloved child and the woman she loved. In despair and desperation, they had written a letter and taken their own lives. As the mother told me this story, I was sobbing. She handed me a lace trimmed handkerchief, with which I mopped my wet face, wiping away tears, mascara, foundation, and blusher. She continued, telling me that she and the two boys had the bodies cremated and scattered them near a place special to the two women, as per their request. No minister officiated. Then she reached out her hand for the handkerchief. I demurred. “No, let me launder it, it’s soaking. I’ve made a terrible mess of it. Let me take it home and wash it and then I will give it back to you.” “These are the only tears shed by anyone in the church for my child.” “Please, don’t wash it,” she said, as she gently pried it from my fingers, and pressed it to her heart. “These are the only tears shed by anyone other than her brothers and me for my daughter. These are the only tears shed by anyone in the church for my child. I want to save this handkerchief. These tears mean the world to me. They mean God has heard my pain.” She could not tell her story in her own church because homosexuality was not discussed. The story, buried deep within me, had been the thing that had been motivating my activism all these years. Too traumatic to deal with on a conscious level, the injustice, the shame, the terror of this story had been moving me toward a different kind of church. A church not marked by shame, but by love and inclusion. Shame on the church. Shame on a church that condemns loving and tolerates violence and disfellowshipping and silence— murderous silence. “The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, and selfcontrol.” On Pentecost, we tasted the fruit of the Spirit as the dark bitter seed of prejudice and ignorance and exclusion had grown into something that would be life-giving, instead of lifethreatening. Susan Quinn Bryan is pastor of A Community of the Servant-Savior, PCUSA, in Houston, Texas, a church given the Inclusive Church Award by More Light Presbyterians at the June, 2000 General Assembly meeting in Long Beach, California, because its entire Session (Board of Elders) “self-accused” under a provision of the Presbyterian Book of Order that rejects behavior not sanctioned in The Book of Confessions, a provision that is being used against lesbian and gay people. She told this story in accepting the award on behalf of her congregation, ending with an apology for “not being there sooner.” 6 Open Hands How to Begin? The local church I grew up in is like many others. As a congregation it is well-intentioned and loving toward those who walk through its doors, especially those whom they have raised as children and young adults. Like many small churches in rural communities there is a common knowledge of the multiple generations of families who live in this place. It would be fair to say that this congregation of less than seventy- five members does not embody considerable cultural diversity. Yet, I know of at least two persons who grew up in that rural community during the 1960’s and who later moved to cities where they were able to live out their lives with significant gay and lesbian partners. Neither of these persons, nor their families, felt comfortable sharing with their church the fullness of their lives. Instead, there was hurt, sadness, pain and fear that the conversation about homosexuality in the church would create deep divisions within the community. Hence, the topic was rarely addressed. This small church has been on my mind during the past spring and summer as many denominations once again have debated and struggled to honor the gift of bisexuals, transgenders, lesbians, and gays in their congregations. The story of this church represents the many levels of brokenness present in our congregations and denominations. Church members fear that their relationships with one another will be damaged by the debate over homosexuality. As a result, they avoid entering the conversation, keeping secrecy and respectful silence alive. Those who have lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender children find themselves silent for fear that they will be judged by their friends when it comes to light that their children have been blessed with an orientation other than heterosexual. Those who are not sure what to think about all of the debates remain quiet, fearful that any conversation will disrupt the uneasy calm they have currently. Those who are impatient for the church to open its doors feel deeply disappointed and hurt. At the same time, this congregation embodies the potential for healing among its members and, ultimately, within the larger denomination and culture. What is sad is that this community’s possibility for healing, or for being an agent of healing, is overshadowed by contentious and uncompromising controversy. Denominational debates rarely equip congregations with the theological, spiritual, or pastoral tools to respond to the diversity that comes with those whom they love. As a result of the theological ambiguity of the denomination, they are left wondering how to begin the healing process. Dissatisfying Denominational Debates It is clear that in the clamor to be heard, most denominational debates leave people feeling dissatisfied. The religious right rarely feels heard by the liberal left, while the latter group assumes there is little reason for conversation when the right does not listen. The quality and level of our public debate leaves persons and communities with feelings of anger, hurt, distrust, depression, despair, and deep suspicion. We cannot always depend on our denominations to lead us toward healing. Given this ethos, what would it mean for the church to be healed as a community of faith? What would it mean for congregations to become agents of healing within the larger denominations or communities? What might healing look like for communities of faith where deep transgressions and sins have been committed in the name of healthy debate? What would healing require from those of us ready to embrace transgenders, bisexuals, lesbians and gays as blessings to the community? These are the questions with which many of us continue to struggle. At the same time, many of us are convinced that healing is one of the essential missions of the church. What Does Healing Look Like? Healing is multi-layered and more complex than we would imagine from the outset. Simply stated, healing acts are those that invite and encourage individuals, families, and communities to move away from brokenness in physical, spiritual, emotional, or relational terms. Seeking wholeness in the body, whether physical or metaphorical, healing can include such things as restoration of right relationships, reconciliation between enemies, or acts of justice. To participate in healing means to access and utilize the necessary tools, perspectives, and gifts that lead to greater wholeness with one another in the context of God’s love and grace. As individuals, families, congregations, Healing Communities of Faith Joretta L. Marshall Denominational debates rarely equip congregations with the theological, spiritual, or pastoral tools to respond to the diversity that comes with those whom they love. As a result of the theological ambiguity of the denomination, they are left wondering how to begin the healing process. Fall 2000 7 and other communities begin to heal they, in turn, become healing agents within the broader culture of the church and community. Relationships at individual and communal levels are essential to living a life of faith. Ultimately, the quality of our relationships as individuals, as families, and as communities will determine the way in which we participate either in perpetrating further damage to the souls of individuals and to the church or in nurturing healing. From our personal experiences we know that even the best relationships require tremendous work and hold the potential for eliciting deep feelings of joy as well as pain. The same is true for the church and those who are related through it. Healing is not simply for individuals or families or isolated congregations. The promise and hope of healing is available to the whole community of faith. In fact, without moving toward wholeness in the larger community, individual healing is more difficult. Genuine healing occurs when communities honor and respect all the children of God. The healing of individuals enhances the life of the community and brings it to greater fullness. Healing in the church depends upon mutual relationships where all persons are understood to be blessings of God and where individuals and families of all kinds feel significant support and sustenance within the community. Misconceptions About Healing At least two common misconceptions about healing run counter to movements toward wholeness. First, there is an assumption that agreement is the same as healing. Some contend that if we could find a place of common understanding about homosexuality, bisexuality, or transgender issues, we would also find healing. As a result, we attempt either to convince others about the rightness of our positions through the eloquence of our arguments, or we attempt to destroy others through the brutal force of our debate. In so doing, we often miss opportunities for healing. While agreement is not the ultimate goal, healing does require a willingness to be moved in one direction or another, away from the ultimate edges of a debate and toward some more reconciliatory stance. Since we live in a world of multiple truths no one perspective captures the entire reality of any issue. A second misconception suggests that tolerance is equivalent to healing. The result of this assumption is that we often settle for less honesty in our relationships and less clarity about God’s call to our community than is required in faithful living. While greater tolerance for diversity of opinion might lead to healing, it is not in and of itself the goal of healing. Indeed, tolerance may be a first step in the healing process for some individuals, families, or communities, but it should not be the last word in relating fully and faithfully. While there are many strategies that invite individuals, families, and communities into wholeness, I would like to suggest four specific avenues for healing. While these may seem self-evident, they are nonetheless essential if we are to move beyond the hurting and killing of one another’s spirit and, instead, move toward the healing of the soul of the church. Each strategy can be advanced in congregations through specific activities appropriate to that community of faith. Naming Theological Differences The first strategy is often overlooked, for it appears to be abstract and theoretical. However, one cannot dismiss the importance of recognizing and naming theological differences within families, congregations, and denominations. If we are to make progress toward wholeness we must begin to articulate clearly our theological claims. Every theological position carries consequences arising from its perspectives on God, human beings, and the nature of faithful living. Some theological positions support a God of grace and justice who is concerned about life-giving and life-sustaining, faithful behaviors. Other theological perspectives are based on a God concerned with the legal systems that control and monitor our existence. As we name our theological diversity we must also move beyond thinking that every theological expression is valid and equally appropriate for the church. We have struggled in the last decade to honor the multiple truths of our world, our culture, and our God. Now we must begin to articulate the meaning and consequence of various perspectives, creating clear criteria for considering a theological position to be faithful to the God whom we call upon to bless us. It is time for us to be clear about our theological convictions. Delwin Brown, theologian and the former Dean of Iliff School of Theology, recently delivered a powerful and provocative message to the Iliff community. He reminded us that it is important to know and understand the theological position of the “other side” if one is going to engage honestly and faithfully in conversation and dialogue. Without a commitment to know the other side it is easy to attack the simplistic side of theological arguments, missing the richness that might be discovered in the conversation. Hanging on to the rigid edges of our theological diversity keeps us from discovering theologies that are potentially healing and transformative. It is a rare gift when theological convictions are heard in order to understand them rather than to convince others of the rightness of our perspective. Recognizing the Pain A second strategy is one with which many of us are comfortable, while others are not. Recognizing and claiming the pain and devastation that many within the LGBT community, friends, and families experience as a result of the church’s inability to affirm and bless them is essential if we are to find healing in our churches. Most of us recognize too well the pain of the women and men who live in silence and in fear, wondering how the church would respond if they really understood who they were. We also know the pain of wanting the church that raised us to affirm our choices and lives as faithful transgenders, bisexuals, lesbian women, or gay men. Many of us want meaningful relationships with our families, including with those who 8 Open Hands are not as certain about affirming our orientations and choices. Families carry pain as they struggle to find a language to talk about their feelings in a church that rarely discusses the issue of homosexuality without incredible emotion. The loss that families and churches sometimes experience when the children whom they love grow up and turn out differently than imagined is sometimes minimized by those of us who want to be affirmed. Many families live in churches that are as theologically mixed as the denominations they represent. As congregations struggle honestly to make their way through the controversies and debates, members recognize that some of their best friends in the church are on the opposite side of the debate. Often a congregation’s life seems to depend upon its ability to sustain relationships through pain, trauma, and disagreements. Whether my particular denomination affirms it or not, I am convinced that God has called us to live as a sexually diverse, responsible, and caring community of faith. But, because we live in community, we need to acknowledge the pain of others around us, including the pain of those with whom we most deeply disagree. Our community is being destroyed by our inability to reconcile not only our theological convictions, but by our insistence that there is a hierarchy of pain and oppression. Persons on all sides of the debate feel as if the soul of the church is at stake. We need the humble awareness that even those whom we believe to be on the wrong side of the debate love the church as much as we do. The pain belongs to the community, not only to individuals. Healing requires from those of us within the LGBT community, its allies, and advocates that we listen deeply and imagine the pain that is not voiced or is not heard. Recognizing the pain, fear and loss on the “other side” offers us the opportunity to engage in vigorous debate and conversation with a sense of honesty and respect. The mutual re- The annual legislative gathering of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) met in Long Beach in June. Due to a self-imposed moratorium, actions related to LGBT ordination were deferred till next year’s meeting in Louisville, but the assembly endorsed developing materials for ministry with LGBT people and “former” gays and lesbians(!). An attempt to amend the church constitution to add “sexual orientation” onto a list of those not to be excluded from membership was defeated in favor of an amendment that no one should be excluded on any basis other than profession of faith. The final evening, the assembly narrowly passed (51% to 49%) a prohibition of ministers and churches blessing same-gender relationships. Both amendments must be ratified by over 50% of the presbyteries during the coming year. A previous attempt to prohibit ministers from blessing gay relationships was not ratified by presbyteries. Rev. Crail offers an analysis of that final Friday evening debate. Friday night, the General Assembly was fairly wallowing in piety. Those who spoke in favor of the ban on holy unions almost always prefaced their comments with statements about how they love gay and lesbian people, how we are all sinners, how everyone is welcome, how we need to do this so people will seek healing for their “sexual brokenness,” etc. etc. We’ve heard it before—ad nauseam. There were prayers and hymns fore and aft of everything, and moments of silence— and I’m not against hymns and prayers and silence—but I do not like them as cover for the doing of injustice, or constant pleading for God to sustain the battered. There was a fair orgy of “niceness.” I was sick at my stomach. The Bible was constantly invoked— though not much quoted—as though its very mention would make it self-evident that homosexual unions are sin, and The Book of Confessions was very present in many speeches, mentioned not as the confessions of various Christians in various times, but as an updated book of Leviticus. Why? What burns in the hearts of those who go to the trenches so that the love between two men or two women will never be thought of in the beatific terms they reserve for their own relationships— and sexual activity— “sacred,” “holy,” “beautiful,” and “blessed.” Why will they struggle passionately so that the loves of others will be classified as disgusting; and so that families created by others of whom they do not approve will never be validated by society or the Church as “real” family? I think we need a far deeper analysis than we have of why they feel so deeply compelled to try and put boundaries around others that they would not tolerate being put around themselves. 51% is not a victory. 49% is not a defeat. And if it had gone the other way, 51% on “our” side would not be a victory, and 49% on “their” side would not be a defeat. This isn’t basketball, is it? This split— basically right down the middle of our denomination—on a fundamental issue of conscience, reveals a Pious Injustice Reflections on the Presbyterian General Assembly Donn Crail Fall 2000 9 denomination that sometimes seems held together by not much more than its exterior paint. Is that salvageable? It is not easy after so many years to believe that it is. Our model is not propping up a corpse, but new life coming into dry bones. Can these bones live again? Where are the sinews that connect us? the flesh of our common humanity? the breath of life? A 2% change this way or that will not constitute new life. That is too meager a hope, and is more lifedraining than lifegiving. There is a fundamental problem in the perception of many that this is a simple pro and con debate on particular issues. That is not what is going on. Some Christians are working diligently to impose their conscience on the conscience of others—yet the reverse is not true. We are not trying to force others to act according to our conscience on these issues. We are not trying to force others to bless same-sex unions that they believe are wrong. We are not even trying to require congregations to elect and ordain particular persons as elders and deacons. We maintain only that individuals in all churches should be allowed to vote and act according to their conscience. It is the idea that half of our denomination should be allowed to impose its conscience on the other half that is untenable and offensive. I am a lifelong and faithful Presbyterian but my conscience belongs to God, and if forced to choose between them I will not choose the PC(USA). As Luther said, “To go against conscience is neither right nor sane.” To give up our conscience is to give up our very selves. What persons and relationships I invoke God’s blessing on belongs to my conscience, not to the denomination. The denomination may have my gifts of ministry, my support, service, loyalty, and prayers. It may not have my conscience, which will not and cannot be subject to whatever majority makes up a particular General Assembly. We desperately need the affirmation of a general theological principle to deal with these issues. That principle is that within our denomination persons may differ in matters of conscience and no group of Presbyterians— because they are a majority— may impose their will on other Presbyterians in ways that would require them to forfeit their conscience. If our denomination cannot affirm that, then it must divide so that individuals may find that community wherein they can live their lives with integrity. I know that the issue would be raised that what is a matter of conscience for one is only a matter of the ordering of ministry for another. But what is a matter of conscience must be according to the person(s) who feel their conscience violated. Even our military makes provision for conscientious objectors. As for how existential this struggle is for “allies” of LGBT persons in the church…please, I hope we will not go there. There is enough pain in this struggle without our inflicting it on each other. If someone believes this struggle costs allies nothing except intellectual angst—then they have not been there— just as we have not been where you are. ▼ Donn Crail is the Director of The Lazarus Project, a ministry of reconciliation between the church and the LGBT community in Southern California. Donn spent over 30 years in pastoral ministry in the Presbyterian Church. He and his wife Helen live in Claremont, California. cognition of our common pain can invite us to new levels of healing and conversation. From a broader perspective, the question is not how does my story of pain affect the church, but how does the community’s pain assist us all in moving toward wholeness together? How does the pain of the “other” have an impact on God’s story as it is embodied in our communal life? Maintaining Hope Third, we are called not to abandon hope but to maintain hope in the midst of despair. Hoping is sometimes a difficult path when persons around us leave the community of faith, when families feel the oppression of denominational inconsistencies, when denominations appear to be moving away from redemptive possibilities. We are called to affirm individuals and families as they discern if, when, and how to stay or leave a local congregation or a denomination. For their own spiritual health, some persons need to stay while others need to leave particular communities. At the same time, some may need to take a sabbatical so that they may return later to continue the struggle toward justice. This ebb and flow can be part of our communal healing. As individuals seek greater wholeness, whether inside or outside of the context of the church, the soul of the community is enhanced. Hope is sustained as we imagine what God calls the church to become, not settling for what it currently has chosen to be. To keep hope alive we need one another; we need our allies and advocates to speak on our behalf when we have been silenced or are too tired to continue the journey; we need others to listen to our stories and our visions for the community of faith; we need places to grieve and to be cared for when the churches we would normally turn to for support abandon us or negate our being. Hope is a communal venture, not an individual goal. But, how can those of us who are lesbians, gay men, transgender or bi10 Open Hands sexual persons, advocates and allies continue to live faithfully in a church that is so divided and so destructive to those whom we love? How can we forgive the inadequacies and disappointments of families, of local churches, or of denominations? Herein lies the fourth strategy, that of forgiveness. Healing Requires Forgiveness Healing requires forgiveness because we are relational beings. There is little doubt that as we live in relationships with others we experience the pain of being disappointed, the hurt of being rejected, or the sadness of incredible loss. We get hurt in our community, for this is part and parcel of our relating to others. Forgiveness is not something we do simply to be nice to others; rather it is a gift that we give to ourselves and to our communities. Forgiveness, much like healing, is misunderstood at times. Some would suggest that forgiveness is a turning of the other cheek without taking account of the injury or hurt that has been inflicted. Instead, forgiveness is just the opposite as it functions as a structure of accountability, requiring individuals, families, and communities of faith to be honest about hurt and pain. Forgiveness offers persons the opportunity to name an experience of injury as well as to acknowledge one’s participation in the infliction of pain. As we remain steadfast to the forgiveness process, an often slow and long journey, we hold on to the hope for transformative and graceful ways of relating to one another. It would be easy, at this point, for us to talk simply about how we need to forgive the religious right for destroying our lives and the lives of people whom we love, and indeed this is part of the process. But, we must also talk at this point about how others need to forgive us for the arrogance we sometimes carry, for our infliction of pain in the midst of debates and controversies, or for our complicity and complacency at not demanding justice in appropriate and faithful ways. Forgiveness requires an honesty that sees fault not only in the other, but that also looks internally at places where we have fallen short of the call to be faithful. The question related to forgiveness is not how are we going to forget that hurt and pain occurred, nor is it how are we going to move beyond it. Rather the question is how are we going to use the forgiveness process to assist us in the healing of our individual lives, our relationships, and our communities? Bringing Healing Home Let me return to the small church I mentioned at the beginning of this article. What would it mean for that church, or churches like it, to begin to experience healing? What would it require of me or of the denomination of which I am a part? First, this congregation and others like it must continue to articulate its theological perspective. It should not allow others to name the core of its theological convictions. In the process of such theological conversation churches and congregations need to listen carefully. Ultimately, however, they need to take a stand of some kind. I am not certain how much longer we can wait for churches caught in the middle to make up their minds about what is central to their theological conviction. Second, healing requires a constant attentiveness to the levels of pain in myself and in others. There are times when it is easy for us to deny the pain of the debates in the church and its direct effect upon our souls. However, if we are to invite the church into healing we must be willing to find safe places to express our hurt and anger. At the same time, we need to assume that persons “on the other side” also experience some pain and hurt. Third, honest relationships within a community of faith require that we continue to hope. As I discern if and how to stay or leave the community of faith of which I am a part I must do so in the context of friends and community. For the moment I have decided to stay and to work for change from within. I do this not because I feel any sense of immediate hope, but because I am convinced that the church to which I belong, the United Methodist Church, deserves to do better than what we currently articulate as our theological claims. However, I am also aware that there are sisters and brothers around me who need to leave, or who need to take a sabbath rest from the activities of the church so that they may find their soul once again. I remain steadfast with them in their journey toward wholeness. Finally, healing requires of me the honest recognition that I have hurt others in this process, just as I have been hurt by the actions and theologies of others. I know that I cannot work the forgiveness process on my own, but I must engage the community of faith in its work. Communities of faith are potential places for healing. They can also become healing agents in the community around us. Joretta Marshall teaches pastoral care and counseling at Iliff School of Theology and is the author of Counseling Lesbian Partners. She and her partner live in Denver, Colorado. We must also talk about how others need to forgive us for the arrogance we sometimes carry, for our infliction of pain in the midst of debates and controversies, or for our complicity and complacency at not demanding justice in appropriate and faithful ways. Fall 2000 11 What is the best way to begin the conversation on homosexuality? It’s not by presenting a logical line of argument. That’s how you begin a debate, not a conversation! The best way to begin a conversation, in which you want others to feel free to speak their mind, and no perspective to be silenced, is simply speak from your heart, out of your own experiences. So let me set aside all my research and share with you my own journey. It really wasn’t until seminary, when I was thirty years old, that the issue of homosexuality acquired a human face for me. Her name was Sally. I was a commuting student at Vancouver School of Theology, with a job and a husband and three children in Seattle. I drove up to Vancouver on Mondays and came home on Wednesdays, so I needed a place to stay two nights a week. Sally had a studio apartment on campus that she was willing to share in return for pro-rated rent. Over the next three years, Sally and I became fast friends. I had never met anyone like Sally. For one thing, she was much more disciplined in her spiritual life than I was. She got up at 5:00 every morning, which I thought of as an ungodly hour, and left the apartment for a walk or a bike ride, during which she would pray. She bought all her clothes at Goodwill and had only five changes of clothing and two pairs of shoes in the closet. She spent several days a week volunteering in a soup kitchen downtown. She kept a prayer journal. Basically, she put me to shame. But the most appealing thing about Sally was that she loved God. She laughed easily, loved life, loved people, was funny and fun. One night, as we were going to bed— each of us in a single bed lined against the wall, our heads in the corners and our feet toward each other— she asked Healing from the Heart Kathlyn James if I wanted to pray. I had never prayed with another person before— at least, not like that, opening our inner lives before God, in each other’s presence— and at first I was halting and shy. But over time we made a habit of praying together, and it was in the course of those years of praying, of being honest as possible with ourselves in the presence of God, that Sally came out to herself as gay. It was no problem for me that Sally was discovering this— and I have to add here, that like most people, Sally discovered her sexual orientation; it wasn’t something she decided. Isn’t that true for you, that your sexual orientation is something that just seems “given”? It wasn’t as if Sally woke up one morning and thought, “All things being equal, I think I’d like to be a member of a despised minority.” It was more a process of discovering and owning the truth about her make-up as a human being. But I soon learned what a traumatic discovery that would be. Sally came out first to herself before God, then to her family, then to the seminary, then to the church. I accompanied her in that process. When the Presbyterian Church kicked her out of the ordination process, I was stricken; how could they say that Sally was not qualified to be a pastor? She was the best student in her class, and a better Christian than I ever expect to be. I knew that she had been gifted and called to the ministry. Then Sally was fired from her job as the Youth Director at the church, because someone sent the pastor a letter saying that she was gay. All I could think at the time was; this is absurd, this is evil. Sally is great with those kids; why would people assume she is not safe to work with them? Why did they think a heterosexual man or woman would be safer? Things came to a head for me one morning when I was standing in the kitchen, pouring a glass of orange juice, and listening to Sally cry her eyes out on the bed. She often did, in those days. Finally I went over to her, sat on the edge of the bed, and began to stroke her hair. I was filled with helpless rage at the world, and fierce tenderness for my friend. I heard myself saying, “Sally, I don’t know what being gay is. But if it’s part of who you are, and if God made you this way, I say I’m glad you are who you are, and I love who you are, and I wouldn’t want you to be any different.” As soon as those words were out of my mouth, I realized something. I had taken a stand. I knew where I stood on this issue. Sally did not deserve to be despised and rejected; it was the church which was wrong. After seminary I was appointed to serve Wallingford United Methodist Church in Seattle, which had decided some years earlier to become a Reconciling congregation, a congregation that publicly states it is open and affirming toward all people, regardless of sexual orientation. From that point on, my learning curve was steep! One of my first pastoral calls was to a young man who had just slit his wrists with a razor blade. He explained that he was a Christian and couldn’t deny it, that he was also gay and couldn’t deny that either, even though he had tried. He had been told he couldn’t be both. His father had called him “human garbage.” He was not fit to live. All I could do in response 12 Open Hands was to get down on my knees and ask for forgiveness for the church for communicating to this young man that he was beyond the reach of God’s love. In the five years that followed, I had many such experiences. I had young men with AIDS look up at me with hollow eyes and ask, “Do you think I am an abomination?” I sat with young men calling for their parents as they died, parents who never came. These experiences had a profound impact on me. I kept going back in my mind, again and again, to my earliest Christian training; the message that God loves everyone, and that Jesus said to love your neighbor as yourself. He didn’t say, “love your neighbor, unless he or she happens to be homosexual.” He never said one word about homosexuality at all. Jesus spent his whole life going to the poor, the marginalized, the persons who were called unclean by their society, and demonstrating that God’s love included them. He treated them with compassion. His own harshest words were for the Pharisees who believed that they were righteous in God’s eyes, that others were not, and that God’s judgments and opinions were identical to their own. When I was pastor at Wallingford, I put biblical and intellectual foundations under my “heart” experience of knowing Sally. In those years I also came to appreciate a community in which both gay and straight Christians could worship together, serve on the trustees, sing in the choir— simply be human together, trying to grow in the capacity to love God and neighbor without fear. Kathlyn James, Ph.D., is senior pastor of First United Methodist Church in Seattle. She has received the national church’s Circuit Rider Award for excellence, and recognition from the Church Council of Greater Seattle for her ministry with persons living with AIDS. Named “one of the five best preachers in Seattle” by The Seattle Times, she has preached on television and national radio. She is the mother of three children and the grandmother of two. Much of my childhood behavior was motivated by fear. I did things or refrained from doing things based on what I surmised would be my father’s visceral response. But there was no predicting. I could never be sure what would prompt his violent outbursts and result in a severe strapping, often with the buckle end of the belt. Then the cruelest blow of all would fall. The beating would persist until I stopped crying. Too early on I had to learn the hard lesson that “boys don’t cry.” But there were islands of respite in this sea of turmoil. One refuge came from my maternal grandfather, who was truly a gentle-man. In his affectionate embrace and sharing of stories and songs of the Appalachian hills, I felt secure and able to return his affection without the usual specter of fear. Another critical person in my development was my Sunday School teacher at the Hunt Avenue Pentecostal Church of God. Emily Bryant was just a bit taller than the children in her primary class. So deformed by osteoporosis that she was bent almost double, her gaze was persistently downcast. I suspect that her nickname, Tinsie, had been given in derision. To me, at the age of five, it was one of the most beautiful sounding names I could imagine. She taught me and the others who huddled around her each Sunday morning the value of children as she became an incarnational witness of Christ’s words, “Allow the children to come to me, for of such I am creating my realm.” She embodied the primary revelation in our memory verse, “God is love.” Thus, my image of God the Father was one that was seriously conflicted and compromised. If Father God were like my father, then one responded in fear. If God were like my grandfather and Tinsie then he could be trusted, trusted to love you eternally regardless of your persona or your behavior. Because of Tinsie’s teachings I did, as a child, often ignore the pulpit imprecations which focused on the wrath of God. It wasn’t until I was an adolescent that the full impact of the sermons on the violence of God struck. Pentecostal tradition held that children were saved by “saved” parents until they reach the “age of accountability.” This age was closely tied to puberty, when one was moving into full bloom as an adolescent and could do sinful sexual acts. This moment occurred for me just prior to my twelfth birthday. The summer of 1947 in southwest Ohio was marked by high temperatures and humidity. I was dragged to every revival in town. On a particularly muggy night I was taken to hear a 19- year-old evangelist from the hills and hollers of Kentucky. Like most of the evangelists, he preached on his favorite topic, hell. It wasn’t until much later that I realized just how clever he had been in delivering his destructive diatribe: If God were to send a bird to earth every million years and that lone bird were to remove one grain of sand and carry it to the farthermost part of the sky— when the whole earth had been removed, that will be your first split-second of burning in hell. This image was meant to “scare the hell” out of a person and it achieved its purpose in me. I became hysteric. Tears and sobs racked my body. Convinced Suffer the Little Children… Donald R. Purkey Fall 2000 13 that I had been convicted of my sins, those around me dragged me forward to the altar. I was thrown to the floor and around me and over me were hot sweaty bodies. I could feel persons’ hands on me and could not escape their loud prayerful pleadings that God save me from the flames of hell. I recall an increasing fear; but then a realization emerged that if God were really like the God who used fire and brimstone to eternally punish the sinner, I wanted nothing more to do with such a God. What happened that hot, humid evening was not that I was “saved,” but that I became an adolescent atheist. I could not believe in the God of my church anymore. I left the Pentecostal Church never to return. It wasn’t until I entered the university that the images of a God of love and grace re-emerged— an image reclaimed from the recesses of my memory of my grandfather and Tinsie— and I was able again to renew my faith struggle. On that journey I was accompanied by numerous persons who by their witness again helped me to believe that “absolutely nothing can separate us from the love of God.” I moved from being an atheist to an agnostic to a venture of faith which continues even now. It led me to seminary and then ministry in the United Presbyterian Church in 1961. And it led me to affirm that no one is outside the purview of God’s grace, and that God’s judgment finally is understood best in the “wideness of God’s mercy.” It was 25 years after my ordination that I had what I consider to be my only direct revelation from God. I was driving to the hospital to make a pastoral visit to a young man critically ill with HIV/AIDS. I was reflecting on televangelists proclaiming that this disease was a visitation of God’s wrath on abominable sinners who would burn forever in hell, when I heard a voice speaking clearly and succinctly, but with a tenderness fraught with healing love: I take no pleasure in punishing my children. I love them and I will welcome them home. If it were otherwise I would be the eternal child abuser. Donald R. Purkey has recently retired after 39 years of ministry in the Presbyterian Church. He served in a wide variety of ministries, the latest as interim pastor of Desert Palms Presbyterian Church in Sun City West, Arizona. He is co-moderator of the Grand Canyon chapter of More Light Presbyterians. He and his wife, Carol Ann, have long been involved in the struggle for justice for LGBT people. JOB POSTING Executive Director Reconciling Congregation Program Chicago RCP is seeking a leader to share from the heart and mind with those seeking justice. Lead this growing ministry working for full inclusion— especially of LGBT persons— in United Methodist Churches. Qualifications: • Committed to Christianity and knowledgeable of UMC mission and polity. • Passion for inclusiveness in Christ and ability to lead staff in collegial style. • Articulate in speech and writing. • Demonstrated fundraising skills. Send resume and cover letter to WDB First United Methodist Church Oneonta, NY 13820 Salary and full benefits, total commensurate with experience. 14 Open Hands Introduction Though it would be ludicrous for serious Christians to boast about the 20th Century, one of its few positive accomplishments, surely, has been a greater sensitivity towards “the other”— the racially, culturally, economically, sexually, and religiously “different.” It is a sensitivity that is far from complete, but those of us who are over fifty know, if we are honest enough to know that we know, that by comparison with the earlier decades of the century this consciousness of difference has grown and even, here and there, matured. Gradually, painfully it has inserted itself into the Christian mainstream and, as I do not have to say to you readers, it has created—predictably enough—a backlash, which, in turn (also predictably enough), has led to polarization and exaggeration. Like most of you, I surmise, my sympathies are with the Christian Left and not the Right (though I dislike this terminology rather intensely). I believe, however, that those of us who find ourselves in that camp have a responsibility that we have not yet adequately discharged: namely, to demonstrate that our disposition is based, not on purely personal liberality or the various ideologies of tolerance, but on theological grounds evoked by scripture and apostolic tradition. Since we have not repressed the awareness of the actual multi- Keeping the Church Together In a Pluralistic World Douglas John Hall cultural, pluralistic, patchwork-quilt character of our world, but have taken it with the utmost seriousness, we have the greater responsibility to address the question: How shall we be able to fashion our life as the community of Christ’s disciples (after all, our only raison d’être), and how shall we carry on as a missionary faith, in this kind of world? “One” We believe in one…church.” The unity that ought to characterize the Body of Christ is set over-against the militant and the subtle disunities, divisions, and alienations that characterize human life under the conditions of historical existence. The dividing walls of hostility are being broken down; forgiveness and mutuality are being learned; reconciliation and koinonia are being experienced as real possibilities and not mere ideals. We are speaking here of the most central things of this faith. But it is not for nothing, either, that every internal questioning of the Christian church, including the Reformation of the 16th century, has evoked in the powerful of Christendom the plea not to destroy the unity of Christ’s Body. There is, in short, a way of appropriating oneness that very effectively rules out any kind of diversity, dialectic, or even dialogue, and lends itself, for that purpose, especially to those persons and forces within the community whose power is great enough to sustain their own particular version of Christian unity. If the oneness of the church means that there is only one way of being the church, only one way of expressing Christian truth, only one way of living the Christian life, then this mark of the church must be considered one of the most oppressive of Christian teachings. Nothing could lend itself to totalitarian systems or authoritarian religions more readily than a unity-principle that permits of no plurality in its expression and realization. We know from Scripture and from the best doctrinal traditions of the faith, however, that the Nicene Creed’s affirmation of the church’s oneness could not legitimately be taken to endorse such an undialectical conception of Christian unity. Paul’s application of the unity principle to the church in his soma Christou metaphor not only necessitates the distinction between the Body and its Head, Christ, but also distinctions within the membership (the eye is not the hand, and so forth). Jesus’ dialogue with his disciples in the final chapter of John, where the risen Christ in effect tells the aggressive Peter, the Rock (!), to mind his own business, recognizes the marked differences among the disciples, their gifts and their vocations. And the doctrine of the Trinity, which Excerpted from an address, entitled, “The Church: Beyond the Christian Religion,” given to the November 1999 conference of the Covenant Network of Presbyterians, held in Atlanta, Georgia and is used by permission. The full text can be found on the Covenant network website, www.covenantnetwork.org. If the oneness of the church means that there is only one way of being the church, only one way of expressing Christian truth, only one way of living the Christian life, then this mark of the church must be considered one of the most oppressive of Christian teachings. “ “We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church…” —From the Nicene Creed Fall 2000 15 Luther did when he cried, “If you really examined a kernel of grain thoroughly, you would die of wonderment” (Works, Weimar Aufgabe. 19:46, 11.). But this mark of the church is also gravely subject to distortion [when it seems to end] by pitting the doctrine of salvation against the doctrine of creation, as if to be saved is to be saved out of creaturehood, not for it. I do not see how the biblical narrative, beginning with its strong affirmation of the goodness of creation and culminating in its testimony to the incarnation and crucifixion of the Word made flesh, can be caused to support any concept of holiness that, both in theory and in practice, militates against the astonishing world-orientation of this whole narrative. Yes: there is something wrong with the world, and with us—all of us! But the righting of the wrong is not accomplished, according to this story, through by-passing what is in favor of a new, spiritual realm in which wrong is programmed out. The salvation of the world, if we believe this gospel, implies the exceptional courage of some— beginning with “the Pioneer of our faith”— to enter even more completely into this world, to the very heart of its darkness, than ordinary human bravery makes possible. That is our holiness. And it is never, strictly speaking, ours. ture with creature. It is indeed the otherness of the other that makes such oneness necessary, but it is also the otherness of the other that makes such oneness possible. For the oneness desired by this gospel is the oneness of love, and love presupposes otherness even while it counters the alienation and estrangement that prevents love’s realization. “Holy” We believe in one holy…church.” Here we are on even more dangerous ground. It is not accidental that “holiness” had become, already in John Wesley’s England, a term of derision; for its misappropriation far outshines its legitimate use. To reclaim the latter, we should once again ask what this mark of the church is intended to negate. Speaking contextually, I should say that holiness is posited of the church because and insofar as it rejects the onedimensionality, secular flatness, and business-as-usual mentality of jaded worldliness. It does not, however, infer otherworldliness, but on the contrary bears witness to a new and grace-given affirmation of this world in all of its concreteness and physicality. It affirms the extraordinariness of the ordinary, the spirituality of matter, the mysteriousness of the natural and expected—as “ United Church of Canada theologian Douglas John Hall states, “Our disposition [toward being inclusive] is based, not on purely personal liberality or the various ideologies of tolerance, but on theological grounds evoked by scripture and apostolic tradition.” certainly wanted to affirm the monotheism of the parental faith, interpreted the unity of God through its exegesis of three distinctions. Oneness, in this tradition, is therefore not an ontic, static givenness but a dynamic mutuality that is glimpsed and struggled toward in the honest encounter of Creator with creature, and crea16 Open Hands we are the restless ghosts the past present God forbid—future some walk the balcony some seize the floor we wear the stoles that tell the stories of gifts postponed we wear the stoles of those now dead or living and hidden rejected by the church because of who they are created created gay born lesbian transgendered bisexual others stumble over the words as we walk the balcony pray and hold the floor movement stops as fingers push buttons the screen declares inclusion defeated again people beneath the stoles sigh and sing trade stoles of beauty for torn ones ripped from fabric as we are torn all of us body of Christ once more separated severed from a gentle weaving of hope now delayed we are the restless ones past present © Ann Freeman Price Restless Church Ann Freeman Price The poet reflects on our movement’s presence at the recent United Methodist General Conference in Cleveland. The stoles are from the Shower of Stoles, representing the ministries of LGBT people in the church. Ann Freeman Price is a laywoman from Saint Paul’s United Methodist Church in South Nyack, New York. She has worked for the Northern New Jersey Conference Board of Church and Society, and has been a member of the General Board of Church and Society. Her four children and eight grandchildren testify that she has always been a social activist. She was a volunteer at General Conference (her first) for the Methodist Federation for Social Action and AMAR, the coalition of Affirmation, Methodist Federation for Social Action, and the Reconciling Congregation Program. “Catholic” We believe in one holy catholic… church.” Clearly, the negative reality over which the Nicene ecclesiology sets the confession of the church’s “catholicity” is the tendency of all human communities, including religious as well as national, racial, sexual, and other communities, to build protective walls against “the outsider,” and so to become parochial, provincial, chauvinistic, narrow. Catholicity applied to the Christian Movement embodies the kind of boundary-lessness that is implied in the Johannine declaration of God’s love for “the cosmos” as the rationale of the cross; and it embodies, too, the transcendence of all natural and historical boundaries that, however real, entrenched, and even humanly necessary, stand in the way of the communication of that divine agape. “Catholic” is thus integrally related to both the previous marks of unity and holiness. To be concrete: I happen to belong to a denomination that has tackled the question [of gay and lesbian ordination] openly, carefully, prayerfully, and I even venture to say (though I would not say this of very many issues in my denomination) wisely. The United Church of Canada (an ecumenical Protestant merger of 1925) at its 32nd General Council in l988, after much study and years of hot debate, made the kind of decision in the face of this issue that ought at least to be considered by other ecclesial communities facing it. The decision was offensive to some, and a no-doubt significant minority (the current estimate is 3.5% of the total membership as of 1988) left the denomination, temporarily or permanently. But the question was in some real sense “settled,” and, while it is still “around,” it has (Deo gratia!) ceased being the tail that wagged the whole ecclesiastical dog! Since that time, while many internal divisions persist, the United Church of Canada has been able to get on with other things, including great global concerns of social justice that must have a certain priority over personal morality and church polity. The decision of 1988 is incorporated in a larger statement entitled “Member- “ Fall 2000 17 continuously given, continuously rejected, continuously renewed. As you may have gathered, I like nearly everything in your “Call to Covenant Community” manifesto; but most of all I appreciate [the Covenant Network’s] ecclesiastical statement, “The church we seek to strengthen is built upon the hospitality of Jesus.” In reclaiming this important biblical term, “hospitality,” and linking it with the content that it must have when it is associated with that Name, you have (in my view) correctly interpreted for our context the meaning of “apostolicity.” We are not “inclusive” in our own names, or in the name of the Christian religion, or in the name of some humanitarian ideology. We are to receive others, as we ourselves have been received: sola gratia, per Christum solum. Cleansed a little of our inhibitions and our clannishness, we are being sent out with the beginnings of a new openness and a new nonchalance about ourselves. One knows that when people in churches today resort to the buzz-word “inclusivity,” they are intending something right and good— especially when it is heard, as it must be, over-against the militant “exclusivity” that characterizes, not only so much historical Christianity, but the Christianity of our own North American context. Yet “inclusivity” is a terribly inadequate term, and one that begs a great many questions. It has perhaps the right intent, but it is poor in content—especially biblical and theological content. No serious reader of the gospels could deny that it is better to include than to exclude. But what is the basis of this inclusivity, and what its nature? To be included in a community that is inclusive tells one very little. And what of the people who resist this all-embracing “inclusivity” because they fear, often with reason, that it will end by swallowing them whole? To be included in a community that is inclusive tells one very little. And what of the people who resist this allembracing “inclusivity” because they fear, often with reason, that it will end by swallowing them whole? ship, Ministry and Human Sexuality.” It addresses the question of ministry and sexuality orientation in two consecutive clauses, whose division into two is crucial: (1) “That all persons, regardless of their sexual orientation, who profess Jesus Christ and obedience to Him, are welcome to be or become full members of the Church; (2) All members of the Church are eligible to be considered for ordered ministry.” In other words, to state it negatively [in my own words], membership in the church is not predicated on a person’s meeting of certain physical and psychological conditions extraneous to the foundational confession of faith; and no one is barred a priori from consideration for ordered ministry who is a member of the church. I do not say that every other denomination should follow suit, but I do think that the claim to ‘catholicity,’ if it is more than merely rhetorical, ought to mean that in our present context such decisions, undertaken by a part of the Body, together with the consequences and experiences surrounding them, ought to be examined knowledgeably by other parts of the church universal. “Apostolic” Finally, “We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church.” This, surely, points to the theological foundation that is presupposed by all the other “marks of the church.” It is a people that is sent, sent out into the world, and sent there with a message and a mission not of its own devising. Its unity, insofar as it manifests such, is not the result of its members’ genius for togetherness; its holiness, if it exists, is not the consequence of a superior spirituality; its catholicity, such as it is, has not come about because it has risen above narrow loyalties and achieved an enlightened global outlook. All of these, together with any other virtues that could be named, are gifts of the Sender, Hospitality— yes— presupposes a host; and hosts can be overwhelming, excessively directive, intrusive. But our Host, by whom we are all received, does not leave the definition of hospitality open to such misappropriation. And if we are sent by this Host to exercise his hospitality in the world, we are not at liberty to impose upon the church and its mission, patterns of hospitality that are the products of our racial, ethnic, class, gender, or other personal backgrounds— including our sexual orientation. The question for the church that knows itself to be “sent” is not, “What kind of community would we like to be?” but “What kind of community are we called to be?” The Truly Indispensable Mark of the Church To conclude: Luther—and in our own time several others, notably (I would say) Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Simone Weil—insisted that the truly indispensable mark of the church is (in Luther’s language) “the mark of the holy cross”: that is, that the disciple community must experience in real and concrete ways the suffering of the world that is the anthropological background of the gospel of the cross. If this is missing, then all the other marks are thrown into gravest doubt. This is not a masochistic teaching— unless it, too, is distorted (which of course it has often been). There is no special interest in suffering here. The only special interest, as Bonhoeffer insisted, is in discipleship. There is suffering in the world— perhaps the 21st Century will see its increase; certainly it will see its greater and more complex proliferation. Jesus Christ will be where there is suffering. The people who covenant with Him must be there too. Douglas John Hall is Emeritus Professor of Christian Theology at McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 18 Open Hands Jesus said, “I have come that you may all have life and have life abundantly” (John 10:10). Healing is about restoring life. Healing is about accepting all parts of yourself, not just the parts you like, but those parts you don’t like. Healing is also the process of eliminating old patterns, habits, thoughts and attitudes that you have been carrying around for a long time that have perhaps flung you into a state of dis-ease. We can also think of healing in terms of liberation— a liberation from our cultural addiction to woundedness. By cultural woundedness I mean the narcissistic aspects of despair that leave us broken as a society, hostile as a people, and alienated not only from each other but also from ourselves. The New Testament scriptures are replete with examples of healing. We have Jesus healing a man with leprosy, a quadriplegic, the blind. He makes the deaf hear and the mute speak. Jesus heals a man possessed with demons, Peter’s mother-in-law bedridden with fever, and a woman who hemorrhaged for twelve years. In all these stories Jesus restores these people to physical and spiritual health and soundness. He cleanses them of their sin, their grief, and their anxiety. However, these stories could lead you to believe that Jesus is the only healer, and that the wounded, the sick, and the shut-ins where not co-actors or agents in their own healing. Yet over and over Jesus tells those who find healing in his presence, “Your faith has made you whole.” It is in these simple but empowering words that we begin to understand the power we possess within ourselves to heal. Do we want to be healed? Toni Cade Bambara’s 1980 novel The Salt Eaters is a story about a community of African Americans in a fictional town in the South who search for the healing properties of salt and witness an event that changed their lives for ever. Some of them are healthy and therefore centered. Some are so off-balance they do not know they are ill. Some are frightened and thus are perpetually stuck in a state of denial, and some court danger to heal their fright. The novel depicts the narcissistic aspect of human brokenness and the tremendous personal responsibility that comes with physical, spiritual, and mental healing. The novel opens with these words: “Are you sure sweetheart, that you want to be healed?...I like to caution folks, that’s all. No sense us wasting each other’s time if you don’t want to be healed.” We are a wounded people. Our differences have been used to divide us instead of unite us, so consequently we reside in a society where human brokenness, human isolation, and human betrayal are played out everyday. Many people feel that their wounds define who they are as opposed to what they have experienced. They helplessly view every new encounter and every new experience— good or bad— through the lens of their wounds. In other words, all their past experiences distort their new encounters, and therefore it dims the possibility for their healing. They see a half of a glass of water as only half empty and not also as half full. There are even some people who think that if they do not have some type of woundedness they do not have any legitimacy to their lives. Our culture of woundedness has bound us in our brokenness. The sharing of words to describe and honor our pain has created a new language of intimacy, a bonding ritual for us to talk across and among our pains. The trust and understanding we cannot easily create in our wholeness as healed people we can easily do in our brokenness as wounded ones. The seductive power of our wounds has an accepted status and social currency in our culture in which healing is not the objective. What prevents us from healing? When we look for the answer we assume it is far-reaching and beyond our grasp, and that the answer is something mystical, mysterious, and unobtainable. However, the biggest obstacle to our healing is ourselves. We oftentimes fail to heal because many of us are more frightened of healing than we are of our familiar state of brokenness. Our fears Do You Want to be Healed? Not Getting Stuck in Our Woundedness —A Lesson Applicable to Individuals, the LGBT Community, and the Church Irene Monroe “Are you sure sweetheart, that you want to be healed?…I like to caution folks, that’s all. No sense us wasting each other’s time if you don’t want to be healed.” We are a wounded people. Our differences have been used to divide us… Many people feel that their wounds define who they are as opposed to what they have experienced. Fall 2000 19 SShaapiing SSaanccttuaarryy Proclaiming God’s Grace in an Inclusive Church A collection of essays, sermons, liturgies, and hymns from the Welcoming movement. Valuing Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender persons as an integral part of the Body of Christ. Exploring themes of embodiment theology, integrating spirituality and sexuality, and inclusive worship. Includes an eight-week group study guide. $14.00 cause us to deny or to delay the changes we need to make. However, for healing to take place change must happen. Most of us do not like change, and most of us do not like to change. As human beings we are creatures of habit. We like everything to remain fixed and familiar, even in difficult and dysfunctional situations. We need three things in order to make change an easy process. First, we need our rational mind to help us along the journey. When we leave our panic and frenzy behind, our rational mind helps us recognize the beauty in change. We come to realize that change allows us to experience life more abundantly. We affirm that we do indeed have the power to heal ourselves and to choose the thoughts and actions that create our future. Second, we need flexibility. We must understand that God gives us the ability to change and to flow with the vicissitudes of life. We need to realize that we can bend and stretch, always knowing that we will come back to our center standing on our feet. However, we must choose the thoughts and actions that will strengthen our ability to be supple and malleable with the seasons of life. The third thing we need is the strength to let go. In letting go we can joyfully release all irritation, criticism, and condemnation from others or ourselves. Our consciousness is then cleansed and healed. Everything in our life is in Divine Right Order, and it is only in letting go we come to understand that what happens in our life is for our highest good and greatest joy. In letting go life then agrees with us. We can easily take in each new moment of every day and trust life to feed us what we need. A friend of mind was ill for a long time. Her medicine and doctors could not help her any longer. She spent most of her sick time running to a new doctor or chasing a new cure. After running out of both energy and money she was forced to be still for awhile. I am delighted to report that my friend is better now. I asked her one day while we were walking our dogs what cured her. She said she discovered the doctor within herself, and in discovering the doctor within her every morning she would find a quiet space in her house and say this prayer: Dear God, In this space I am at peace. In this space I am light. In this space I am joy. In this space I am loved. In this space I am a divine idea in the mind of God sharing the peace, light, joy, and love of God. In this space I will heal. Dis-ease and woundedness often make us be still with ourselves. It is only then we discover our innate power to heal ourselves. In his novel Farewell to Arms, Ernest Hemingway wrote that the world breaks us all, but some of us grow strong in those broken places. God wants us to grow strong in our broken places because they hold lessons for us to learn. Our walk with God is designed to heal our broken places, to become whole and have abundant life. This is God’s will for us, embodied in the healing ministry of Jesus. However, we must remember that healing requires that we take personal responsibility for the process. Responsibility helps us to rediscover and to deepen the spiritual part of ourselves. With God’s help, our faith will make us whole. Irene Monroe, M.Div., is the head teaching fellow of the Rev. Peter Gomes and a doctoral cnadidate at Harvard Divinity School. A Ford Foundation Fellow, she views her life’s work as public theologian, and writes a biweekly column called “The Religion Thang” for In Newsweekly, the LGBT newspaper circulated widely in New England. ISBN # 0-9701568-0-4 Order from your denominational Welcoming organization or from www.rcp.org Don’t miss this opportunity to “help the rest of the church rediscover its soul.” —from book review by James B. Nelson 20 Open Hands When the Minnesota State Road map was published this year, the town of Carthage Lake was not there. Nobody from the State Highway Department wrote to tell the dozen folks who fancied they lived in Carthage Lake, Minnesota that there was—officially speaking—no longer going to be such a place. North Haven may be withering year by year as are so many of the little towns on the plains, but even our town dwarfs Carthage Lake, which has withered bone dry: seven weathered frame houses, only five of them inhabited, plus the church. First Presbyterian of Carthage Lake was named, I suppose, in the fond but unfounded hopes of the settlers of the last century that the place would be great enough one day to afford a second. There is no post office, no gas station; there never was a bar. The last minister left Carthage Lake in 1939. He blew away with the dust bowl and the depression, and with him went most of the town— but not all. A faithful remnant—fewer and fewer every year, but the more tenacious for their smaller numbers— have saved it from the dread fate of so many country churches— becoming an antique shop, a warehouse of memories for sale, an old church full of rusty saws and wood-planes, Admiral radios from the fifties that don’t work, stacks of old National Geographics. Saddest of all in such places are the old family photos and Bibles. Around here they are often in Swedish or German with the births and deaths noted between the Testaments. They were left behind when the farm was sold and the last grand-niece moved to Mankato and didn’t think to take them with her. Come every summer these relics are casually venerated, touched, examined and sometimes purchased by pilgrims from the Cities, good people from places like Brooklyn Park whose children sit impatiently on the front steps and yell, “mom!” into the musty dimness of the old church. The father, also inside, picks up an old glossy black-and-white photo of some big-eyed baby in a sun-bonnet staring soberly out of 1921. He touches his wife’s arm to show her the photo of the baby. They smile, and he puts the photo back in the box. It’s not their child, after all, and the frame has a chip in the corner. Sustaining the Spirit Our Organist A Short Story Michael Lindvall It is a stalwart few who hold this fate at bay and keep First Presbyterian of Carthage Lake still a church with pews where people worship the living God on a Sunday, but not every Sunday anymore. It’s only one Sunday a month, and soon I would guess, it will be every other month, and then after a few funerals, the pews and the two stained-glass windows will be auctioned off, and maybe an antique dealer will buy the building for his shop. But for a while yet, a visiting minister comes once a month, usually a visiting minister who has already preached his sermon that morning to his own congregation and has been cajoled by Lloyd Larson to preach it again at noon in Carthage Lake to the eleven souls who will always be there barring bad colds or worse than usual rheumatism. Lloyd has been the Clerk of Session for the last 31 years and when he calls, he always says, “Yep, dere ain’t so many of us no more, but you’ll have 100% attendance, preacher.” I was invited to preach at Carthage Lake this last Sunday, my second invitation in the last ten years. I had turned the first one down because Annie’s family was in town for the week. And North Haven is a good fifty miles from Carthage Lake, a fast dash on Minnesota back roads in the hour between our service and theirs. It was Tuesday morning early when Lloyd called looking for a preacher for the Sunday coming, the Day of Pentecost. A whisper of desperation leaked from his practiced bonhomie. He offered his routine confession and promise as: a small group, but a faithful one. And he promised me an organist, the same organist Carthage Lake had been promising guest preachers for the last 60 years: Lloyd’s sister-in-law, Agnes Rigstad. I said I’d be pleased to preach in Carthage Lake, but cautioned him that I might be a little late arriving. Lloyd said late was fine; they’d wait church on me. Next morning I called back to give him the title of the sermon and the hymns for Agnes. No answer and no answering machine; octogenarians by some shared wisdom never seem to have answering machines. I asked Maureen, our volunteer church secretary to try again later, or maybe just drop him a note with the hymns and the sermon title. Come Sunday, I arrived late, five minutes after noon, that being the odd hour at which once-a-month church has been scheduled these last decades for the benefit of preachers doing second shift. The church was a white frame building, freshly painted with a truncated mock-Norman tower in one corner. On the walls to either side of the steeple were two large and sentimental stained-glass windows: one of Jesus the Good Shepherd, lamb in one arm, staff in the other. The second Exclusive to Open Hands from a forthcoming book, Leaving North Haven. Copyright © 2000 by Michael Lindvall. All rights reserved. “Welcome one another, therefore, as Christ has welcomed you.” Romans 15:7 Fall 2000 21 showed Jesus praying alone in the Garden of Gethsemane, his eyes lifted toward heaven. There were two cars and a pick-up in front of the church; I assumed that most of the eleven worshipers rumored to be present every Sunday had walked. Inside there were twelve people, all but Lloyd seated in the front two pews of the little Akron-style sanctuary. Lloyd, whom I recognized from the presbytery meetings he doggedly attended on behalf of “Carthage Lake First,” was standing beneath the pulpit in the far corner. At eighty years, he was perhaps the youngest of the congregation save one, a young man sitting at the end of the second pew. Lloyd was slowly reading the denomination’s adult education program leader’s guide to the others who were listening attentively as the old man worked to breathe life to didactic prose that outlined the development of Medieval, Reformation and modern theories of the atonement. He was just finishing reading through the discussion questions, all five straight through without a pause for response in between. This, clearly, was the adult Sunday School class. “Well, that’s that, then,” he said, closing the pamphlet, “Next week we do the Trinity. Hello, Reverend, perfect timing.” The class stood up slowly, all except the young man, and moved to what I assumed were their accustomed places for worship, stations to which they had habituated themselves decades ago when the sanctuary might have been half full. But now, numbers thinned by moves and death, they were oddly scattered about the room. One very old lady in what was obviously a wig slightly askew on her head, mounted the chancel steps and went to the organ bench to the right of the pulpit. She looked my way and presented me with a broad and surprisingly toothy smile. Lloyd pulled me over and offered the same soto voce instructions he had given a hundred visiting ministers before me: talk loud, there’s no mike and some folks don’t hear as well as they used to. As Lloyd whispered this instruction into my face with coffee breath, I could not but notice one elderly couple settling into the very back pew. “Doubtless the deafest of the lot.” I thought to myself, “They always sit in back.” Then Lloyd added: “And we don’t do a Sunday bulletin anymore; can’t get parts for the Gestetner, so you just gotta tell us when it’s time for a hymn.” With that Lloyd made a grand sweeping gesture to the heavy carved mahogany chair behind the pulpit with a padded seat of burgundy velvet. Then he went to the second pew and sat next to the young man. I prayed silently before I stood to speak the call to worship, prayed for dwindling flocks and their shepherds. Then I stood and said, “This is the day the Lord has made; let us rejoice and be glad in it.” Let us join together in singing hymn number 204. I glanced over to Agnes to make sure she had heard this last. She smiled back her gleaming smile and launched into the hymn. She had not played but a measure before I realized that she was not playing “Spirit of God, Descend Upon My Heart.” It took me another moment to recognize “What A Friend We Have in Jesus.” I furrowed my brow and stood up well after the little congregation had risen to sing. They sang well for eleven old people and one young man. He was the only one with a hymnal in his hand, the others were clearly singing from memory. “Maybe Agnes didn’t hear,” I whispered to myself. I read the New Testament lesson in a voice that was just an inch this side of a shout. The Pentecost text I had chosen was some of Jesus’ many words from John’s Gospel, words that he spoke to his little band of followers on the eve of his death. John records an extraordinary number of last words, about five chapters worth. They include his promise to send the Holy Spirit, the “Counselor,” that Pentecost protagonist. “I will not leave you desolate,” John’s Jesus promises them. I also read some of the words from the next chapter, Jesus’ injunction, spoken several times more as a fond wish, that his followers might love one another after he was gone: “This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you.” Not exactly Pentecost words, but they seemed fit words for Carthage Lake, a little band of disciples as beleaguered as that first one, alone in a place on the cusp of desolate. Nobody to love them but Jesus and each other. This is what I said in the sermon, more or less, a teachy sermon about the Johannine community for which the Gospel was written, a 22 Open Hands sermon about love and the power of the Spirit abiding among those who love each other. But as I preached I must confess that love was more on my lips than in my heart. After reading the scripture and before preaching the sermon, I had announced the middle hymn, “Love Divine, All Loves Excelling,” a hymn that I had carefully chosen for this sermon. I announced it very loudly and rather too pointedly, looking Agnes in the eyes. She smiled back before diving at the organ keys and launching into “I Love to Tell the Story.” After the sermon I prayed, prayed for the old and the sick especially, as well as the young and confused. I prayed for this bewildered world and I prayed for Carthage Lake. Having prayed some of this once before that day, I found my soul taking a detour from the prayer notes on my yellow legal pad. My detoured but unspoken prayer, floating above my leaden words was more of a cry than Presbyterians usually permit themselves: “Why, O God, why?” my heart wandered. “Week after week, we come to you with these same prayers, the same words plus or minus, again and again. We pray for peace and get another dose of war. We pray for health and greet death. We pray out our hopes and yet we wither. Why?” When it came time to announce the last hymn, I looked at Agnes and thought better of it. I took two steps over to the organ bench, bent down and whispered loudly in her ear, “Agnes, what are we going to sing?” She smiled her denture grin, said not a word, and began to play, “Just As I Am, Without One Plea.” After the service was over, I greeted at the door. Agnes smiled broadly as she pumped my hand, but said nothing beyond “Nice sermon, Reverend.” Lloyd and the young man were at the front of the church when I went back to gather up my notes. Lloyd gave me a sheepish look, the young man a knowing glance that recognized my chagrin. Lloyd spoke quickly to get the first word: “Forgot to tell you about Agnes,” he said. You don’t need to tell us what the hymn is, only when. Agnes only knows those three hymns, so we always sing ’em.” “How long has she been your organist?” I asked, my voice rising with the question. “Well,” Lloyd looked down at the worn carpet at the foot of the pulpit, “since ’37 when old Rev. Simmons left. Rev. Simmon’s wife, she played the organ for us back then, and when she was gone, there was nobody, so Agnes learned to play.” “Good God, Lloyd, you mean to tell me you’ve been singing the same three hymns every month for 60 years!” He was concentrating on the carpet more intently. “We like those hymns well enough, and we know ’em by heart.” And then he raised his eyes from the floor and met mine. He said, almost defiantly, “and she is our organist. You want some coffee, Reverend? I got a Thermos out in the truck.” He disappeared out the door and across the road to a rusty brown Ford pick-up. The young man advanced into my bewildered silence, and offered a hand and a deliberately strong grip. “My name is Neil Larson. I’m Lloyd’s grandson, I’ve been living with him for the last few months. Moved up here from Texas in March. You have to understand about Agnes. She’s my late grandmother’s little sister, Lloyd’s wife’s baby sister. Agnes has never been quite right. ‘Don’t have both oars in the water,’ is the way Lloyd puts it. She never says more than a few words, and usually the same words. But she learned to play those three hymns in one week 60 years ago. It was a moment of musical emergency. Anyway, she hasn’t been able to learn another one since. Playing the organ this one Sunday a month means the world to her. Sometimes I think it’s mostly for her that they keep the church open. Aunt Agnes lives for the first Sunday of the month.” We both watched as Neil played with the frayed carpet with the toe of his loafer. Lloyd was standing in the doorway of the church with a Thermos and some paper cups, letting Neil talk to me alone. “They asked me to play, of course. They had to ask. But Grandpa knew I’d say no when he asked. I remember how he sighed with relief when I said no, then he slapped me on the back.” “You’re an organist?” I asked. “Eastman, class of ’84. I’ve had some big church jobs, the last one down in Texas, big Baptist church in the Houston ’burbs. Brand new Cassavant— 102 ranks. Four services a Sunday. Then I got sick. I’ve been HIV-positive for six years, but it wasn’t till last fall that I got sick. The personnel committee of the church figured it out, the weight loss, all the sick days, not married. They told me it would be best if I were to move on, but not till after Christmas, of course. My parents live in St. Paul, but my father and I haven’t spoken since I was 19. I’m on the cocktail, not sick enough for the hospital, but I’m just too tired most of the time to work. I really had nowhere to go. My grandfather said I could move in with him and Agnes. To tell the truth I kinda feel right at home in a town of 80-yearolds.” He looked up from the carpet, held my eyes and said, “You know, pastor, that was a fine sermon, but I think that they got it a while ago. I think they’d heard already, I mean the ‘love one another’ part. And they have not been left desolate.” He paused and went on, “They keep Agnes, and they took me in. And since I moved up here, most every night either Lloyd or old man Engstrom from down the road opens up the church for me. If it’s cold they lay a fire in the wood stove. And then I play the organ. It’s a sweet little instrument, believe it or not. Lloyd’s kept it up. These last weeks, it’s been almost warm in the evenings, so they leave the doors and the windows of the church open and everybody sits out on their front porches and they listen to me play— Bach, Buxtehude, Widor, Ruger, all the stuff I love. And they clap from their porches, even Agnes claps. Michael Lindvall is pastor of the First Presbyterian Church of Ann Arbor, Michigan, on the edge of the University of Michigan campus. An adaptation of this story served as the sermon of a morning worship at the recent Presbyterian General Assembly. It is chapter 12 of Leaving North Haven, a soon-to-be-published sequel to The Good News from North Haven (Doubleday/Pocket Books). Fall 2000 MINISTRIES 23 Teaching Children About Healing Allen V. Harris The natural rhythm of childhood is a perfect place from which to draw examples and illustrations that can help to broaden a child’s understanding of healing. From everyday “boo-boo’s” to the playground taunts of classmates, children are routinely exposed to hurt as well as the possibility for healing. A time of reflection on the topic of healing can be planned to give children a fuller awareness of what healing is and might possibly be. It can serve as either the “children’s sermon” during worship or, if expanded, as a church school class session. The primary objective of such a time would be to help link a child’s experience of hurt and healing with the concept of healing as understood in a larger context, particularly within the church. A secondary objective would be to nurture an awareness in children that not everything which some people see as needing healing in fact does. Using their basic sense of what is fair and unfair, children can be encouraged to develop this idea in relation to competing perceptions persons have on a variety of human characteristics. This time with the children might begin with showing, or even handing out to each child, a sterile adhesive bandage. The teacher could engage the children in a discussion about why and how bandages are used and how they increase the likelihood and speed of healing. Share with the children how a scab is God’s/nature’s way of providing a “bandage.” Even so, by our cleaning a wound, putting antiseptic ointment on it, and then covering it with a bandage the natural healing processes are accelerated. Perhaps a child might be willing to show a bandage she or he has or tell about a recent wound which needed one. Explore with the children which injuries or physical characteristics need bandages and which do not. For example, most bruises don’t have broken skin and therefore are not aided by a bandage. Ask the children if moles, freckles, or skin blemishes need bandages. Ask the children if hair that is red, nappy, or curly needs a bandage, or a child who is from another country or has an accent needs a bandage. For older elementary children this could easily lead into a conversation about how some boys and girls are made to feel bad because something about them which doesn’t need healing is treated like it does. In particular, children have a difficult time relating to others with physical attributes which are unique or out of the ordinary, such as an exceptionally short person or someone with unusually large ears. Likewise, differences in economic class or family configuration are often points of ridicule for children. Ask the kids if they’ve ever experienced other children making fun of a child because of a quality or characteristic she or he exhibited. This creates a different kind of hurt, one that we oftentimes feel deep inside ourselves and certainly can’t be bandaged. This inner kind of hurt may also be caused by other circumstances, such as a friend moving away, a pet dying, or someone calling us a bad name. Sometimes, though, we don’t know the cause of our inner aches and pains. At this point a teacher could connect the physical healing that is aided by a bandage with the healing frequently talked about in church and the healing which Jesus offered. While much of the healing Jesus offered was for injuries and physical ailments (ex. Mark 7:31-37, Luke 13:10-17, Luke 18:35- 43), he offered even more healing for the kind of hurt that people feel deep inside themselves (ex. Matthew 19:13-15, Luke 10:29-37, Luke 19:1-10, John 41-42). While we don’t have the power to actually make hurt go away, either outside or inside, we can act like bandages and help to nurture people and speed up healing. We help people heal by caring for them in many ways. Children of all ages can grasp this basic thought, albeit with different nuances depending upon their age. Use a specific example of a person being taunted about something for which she or he could not be healed or did not need healing. Ask the children to share how they could be “bandages” helping such people to heal. What could they say? What might they do? Can you help someone by not saying a word or doing anything? In an extended session a teacher could invite the children to tell stories of how they may have helped to heal another person’s hurt. Suggest they act out the stories, individually or in groups— scenes of helping/healing for one another. Preschool children enjoy this dramatization as long as the scenes are extremely simple, such as returning a lost ball or sharing a game with a lonely classmate. Alternatively, the children could draw pictures of such scenes. If your congregation has regular services of healing, ask the children about their experiences of them. Describe the different parts of the service and what they mean, such as the anointing with oil and/or the laying on of hands. Read through the order of a healing liturgy and allow the children to ask questions about difficult words or concepts. If the parents approve, you may wish to take older children to a healing service. Make sure to prepare the pastor for your visit ahead of time. The teacher must be careful—some children, including children with disabilities, children who live in poverty, or children of single or same-gender parents, may have experienced a great deal of hurt. Do not push a child to share more than she or he wishes to. And do not assume a child is always cognizant of her or his difference! Be prepared for a child to show emotion. Respect a child’s need either to be silent or objectify an obviously personal situation as if it were someone else’s experience. End the session with a brief prayer for each of the children, for healing when they are in need, and for their ability to be a means of healing for others. Allen V. Harris is an ordained pastor in the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ). CHILDREN 24 MINISTRIES Open Hands When a Child “Comes Out” A Basic Primer on Care Ron Griesse This article uses the term care-receiver as the person needing pastoral care and caregiver as the person giving the pastoral care. A caregiver may be a pastor or a lay person. A carereceiver may be anyone who comes to a pastor or to a lay person regarding issues of faith, suffering, or other reasons. The Stephen Ministry is a lay training program for volunteer ministry in congregations, named for the Stephen of Acts, chapters 6 and 7. A woman who had learned her son is gay and was struggling with the related religious issues called the local Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) asking if she could talk to someone with a Christian point of view. She was very concerned about maintaining her anonymity. She had asked her pastor for assistance and when he proved unresponsive, she explained to him that surely there must be others in their church who had had a similar experience. The pastor claimed he was unaware of any, even though he had had discussions with two families within the past few years, one of which was accepting of the gay family member and one in which the gay person attempted transformation. This case illustrates the difficulty in finding pastoral care for someone of faith who has learned that a loved one, relative, or friend, is gay. In this particular case, the woman went to her pastor who was unable to help primarily because of the perceived conflict between the Bible or church dogma and her real life situation. The pastor was further unable to help because this is an emotional issue in which there does not appear to be much room for error. Had the son been sick, prayers would have been requested, a Stephen or lay minister would have been assigned, and visits by the pastor would have been expected. Yet if the pastor had properly provided her with pastoral care and conservative forces learned of this, his job may have been in jeopardy. Certainly it would be inappropriate for the pastor to relate another family’s experience without their permission. However, his statement indicates that there were none as opposed to offering to ask the families if he could relate their experience to others. The pastor’s own convictions and ignorance may well lead to a judgmental response as opposed to a compassionate, pastoral response. He may also be a compassionate person who feels strongly that in this case judgment is the correct response. It is unlikely that a lay minister would be assigned to this carereceiver because of the request of the care-receiver to be anonymous. The care-receiver was sensitive to others finding out about her family and enduring the associated public stigma. The purpose of pastoral care is to enable the person in need of care (care-receiver ) to find the grace and love of God in the situation in which they find themselves. Pastoral care is to be with a person who needs the comfort of one who is willing to walk in his/her shoes through the minefields of judgment, doubt, fear, ignorance, and paradox. In this particular case, the situation is one in which a close relative or dear friend has come out of the closet as gay or lesbian. The person providing pastoral care (caregiver) attempts to help the care-receiver through attentiveness, active listening, asking open-ended questions, and talking about feelings. The goal is not to lead the care-receiver, but to assist the care-receiver in finding his/her own way. It’s of course best if the caregiver were trained in pastoral care or the Stephen Ministry. But at least the following guidelines may prove helpful. Seeking Pastoral Care In most churches, homosexuality is rarely discussed and when it is discussed, it is most likely discussed in the most derogatory terms. The exceptions are of course the many welcoming churches which take a stand publicly supporting gay rights and providing pastoral care to all regardless of their sexual orientation. In my own situation, my own pastors, both of whom were very compassionate persons in the case of my recent, serious illness, were unable to move beyond their defense of their biblical understanding and the doctrinal position of the church when it came to homosexuality. Their defensiveness precluded effective pastoral care. Others have expressed to me that they have had similar responses from clergy. One person who was in need of pastoral care received the suggestion to start a ministry for AIDS, which is like asking a doctor in need of medical assistance to start a clinic. Another pastor told the friends of a homosexual person never to talk to him again. Others have been referred to a welcoming church, which if pastoral care is not available in their home churches, is an honest response to the need for pastoral care. Referral to other organizations which support homosexual persons, such as PFLAG (Parents, Friends, & Families of Lesbians & Gays), SMYAL (Sexual Minority Youth Assistance League), and others, is a practical response. The mainline denominations’ negative stands on homosexuality as well as a pastor’s negative opinion will prevent many people from seeking pastoral care from their church. However, church members may still believe their pastor capable of compassion and their congregation capable of rallying around them in their need. You may conclude that in those denominations that are more open to gay issues, a carereceiver would have a better chance. While that may be true, there is no guarantee as long as the denomination rejects homosexuality. The Care-Receiver’s Situation When the care-receiver is a parent, answers to the following questions are useful in responding to the felt needs. How did a parent learn her/his child was homosexual? Was it the result of learning that he had AIDS? Was it the result of learning that he/she was the victim of verbal or physical abuse at school? Was it suspected and then confirmed by the homosexual person? How long has the care-receiver known? PARENTS Fall 2000 MINISTRIES 25 Similarly what is the current situation? Is the homosexual person living at home? Is the homosexual person suicidal? Is he/she clinically depressed? Is the homosexual person completely out of the closet? Is he/she dependent on the family for college costs? Is he/she professionally independent and self supporting? Does he/she need or want family support? All of these situations will greatly affect the care-receiver. With more stressful situations, the care-receiver will require more frequent attention. In a situation where the gay person is independent, the urgency for pastoral care may be less. If the care-receiver has just learned that his/her beloved child is homosexual, surprise and disbelief may still be factors. For the family which has nurtured and loved their child or sibling, there may be real conflict which can only be reconciled with the command to love without reservation. Parents sometime feel guilty, believing they have done something wrong to cause their child to be homosexual. Of course, lesbian daughters and gay sons are born to both good and bad parents, in a variety of family systems with differing rules and expectations. The care receiver may be experiencing a sense of loss. Although the child is the same person as always, the life of the child will most likely be different from that anticipated by the parent. The anticipation of grandchildren or of the big wedding may seem remote or impossible. There is fear of the dangers of one’s child living in a hostile society (and church). Each time a parent or sibling hears of a case of physical or verbal attacks of gay people they may wonder, “Will it happen to my family member?” The Caregiver’s Approach The caregiver must be aware of the tendency to be judgmental. Judgment only reinforces the guilt that may be felt by the care-receiver. It takes a lot of effort and discipline for the caregiver to avoid judgment. Imagine telling the mother of a gay young man, who carried her baby for nine months, nurtured him as child, that her child is an abomination! Or telling the father of a lesbian daughter who held her on his knee, coached her in softball, helped her with her math, that his daughter is unfit for the kingdom of God! Central and vital to pastoral care is to love the care-receiver. We are commanded to love one another, as God has loved us. The caregiver must exemplify this by putting himself or herself in the position of the care-receiver. A caregiver must be aware of where he/she stands with regard to the homosexuality of one of his/her own family members. It is not for the caregiver to decide what the care-receiver should do. The caregiver’s role is to help the care-receiver find for him/herself the grace of God on whichever path the care-receiver or their gay relative proceeds. There is going to be enough conflict for the care-receiver between knowledge of the gay person and the opposing doctrine of the church. The caregiver should ask the care-receiver about the life of the loved one who is lesbian or gay. This may encourage the care-receiver to reflect on the dissonance between their knowledge of their family member and the condemning church doctrine. For parents who have raised their children essentially the same way, why is one homosexual and the other not? Why would this person who has met all of the requirements of the church be homosexual? It’s not expected that these are questions to be answered, but only to give voice to the feelings of the care-receiver. Chances are likely that the caregiver has had little knowing exposure to homosexual persons, nor any specific knowledge of church doctrine or biblical understanding relating to homosexuality, except for the general understanding that it is believed wrong. Relatively few congregations have studied homosexuality and most are reluctant to acknowledge openly that there are gay and lesbian members, while other needs for pastoral care are dealt with publicly and may even be the topic of a Sunday School class or discussion from the pulpit. Churches that have dealt with the topic may have done so very negatively. I know of one case in which a woman worked very closely with a pastor but was unable to discuss with him that her son was gay until he was very near death from AIDS. Pastoral care was unavailable to her until the very end. Key information that a caregiver should know include these: 1. A person’s sexuality is not chosen. 2. The Bible is not literally interpreted, e.g. “slaves obey your master.” 3. The entire Bible applies to lesbians and gays, not just the parts that are said to address homosexual behavior. God’s promises and love are available to all. 4. Although there has been research, the etiology of any sexual orientation is inconclusive. It takes a lot of courage for a person to seek pastoral care after learning that a loved one is homosexual. The chances are that the results will be very negative. Yet a number of churches, while not endorsing full support for gay people, have emphasized the need for compassion. As more and more families and friends come out and stay active in the church, the situation will get better. Churches must take a stand and publicly support those who are gay and lesbian, as well as supportive family and friends. They must recognize their limitations and ask for outside help when required. God’s grace is available to all and we are to be the conduits of that grace to all who are in need. Ron Griesse, the parent of a gay son, has been a volunteer hospital chaplain, a Stephen leader, and is a graduate of the Art of Pastoral Care class of the Washington Pastoral Care and Counseling Centers. He is a member of St. Matthew’s United Methodist Church in Annandale, Virginia, where he was instrumental in establishing the Agape Ministry (Pastoral Care). 26 MINISTRIES Open Hands A Long Journey into Welcome Rachel C. Wilson It was in 1995 that I boldly voiced a prediction and a promise when I took a “one minute at the mike” privilege at the General Assembly of Christian Churches (Disciples of Christ) meeting in Pittsburgh. “Jerry Falwell’s hometown will one day have a church which is Open and Affirming: First Christian Church, Lynchburg, Virginia!” I knew our history around the issue. Our ministers, David and Kaye Edwards, had introduced the subject to our historic congregation. The approximately 400 members represent a cross section of Lynchburg’s population— professionals, blue collar, liberal, conservative—in theology and politics; cohesive family units worshiping in a beautiful sanctuary, involved in a strong education program, dedicated to outreach. The local newspaper covered the story of this beginning after learning that our ministers had invited Allen Harris, openly gay and associate minister at Park Avenue Christian Church in New York City, along with his partner, Craig Hoffman, to spend four days in dialogue with our congregation. At about the same time, the mother of a young child with AIDS, who had been denied access in one church, asked if she could enroll her daughter in our Vacation Church School. Kaye, as minister of education, called the parents together to make the decision, which was overwhelmingly in favor. The membership welcomed another person with HIV: Tim, who had also been cast out by his church. In a short time, we mourned the death of both of these precious people. Small group discussions and individual conversations kept the subject alive and there were some who had awakened to God’s tugging on their souls, and determined to persist. In the “in-between- time,” it seemed that we would not be called to make any decisions regarding the question, for our pastors were leaving us. We were focused on an interim ministry and the search for a new leader. But, in so doing, we were having to look at who we were and what we wanted our congregation to be, and surveys revealed that diversity was important to us. For about 12 years, a group of women have been gathering in the church parlor each Wednesday morning for Bible study as well as other reflective studies and prayer. These women have, from time to time, been an ecumenical group, representing various faiths in our city. In the last several years, however, the group has become one which reflects the membership of our church: young mothers as well as senior citizens. Eight or ten members of this group have maintained a concern for the church and homosexuality. Accordingly, we have read and debated Brian McNaught’s On Being Gay, kept a scrapbook of news stories, articles, resources from differing points of view, and made the book available through the library. It was when we elected to study the curriculum, Claiming the Promise, edited by Mary Jo Osterman, that things began to happen. We agreed and disagreed as we poured over the pages and its recommended scriptures. Preparing for the final session, I firmly resolved to call our church to a reckoning. The second question under “What Do You Think?” asked, “What is the next step you personally want to take in regard to the church and homosexuality? Explore not what you think you ought to do, but what you want and intend to do.” I shared my answer with the group. “Ask specifically the elders to study the issue and make recommendations.” Shortly thereafter, I wrote a letter to the elders, asking that they, as spiritual leaders of the congregation, study where we were, where we wanted to be, and requesting that they consider our becoming an Open &Affirming (O&A) congregation. They invited me to meet with them, to explain myself more fully. I presented my concerns, saying that we had waited long enough, and offered my services as to resources, both written and embodied in persons. Periodically, I was asked for assistance. When they seemingly slowed down, I sent prodding letters. And then, Mel White came to town. It was October, 1999 and Mel was seeking a host church for Soulforce. Our mayor at that time, Pete Warren, an ordained Disciples minister, just happened to greet Mel and suggest that our congregation might do this. The rest is history. Our church served as the group’s “sanctuary,” as Mel termed it, and other churches, synagogues and colleges, as well as other institutions, helped us provide housing, food, transportation, love, and support for the three days when some 200 gays, lesbians, transgenders, bisexuals, parents, and friends celebrated, remembered, learned what non-violence can mean and practiced the same. The “Lynchburg 200,” as Rodney Powell, a civil rights leader, labeled it, were amazed at what they experienced from this community. They could not thank us enough and we too felt inadequate as we tried to express our gratitude for the opportunity. Several of our church members were among the 200 that met with the same number of people from Falwell’s congregation to discuss the treatment of those of different sexual orientations. Sandy Knodel, our education director, declared that she now knew why she was led to our congregation when she moved from Buffalo. Minister Roger Zimmerman termed it a “life-changing event.” Eighteen months after I sent my original letter, the elders of First Christian Church of Lynchburg sent the letter on the opposite page to every household of the congregation, signed by all 12 elders. Our church has not yet completely arrived but I tell you, we are on our way! Rachel C. Wilson, is a widow, mother, and grandmother, retired public school teacher, lifelong member of the Christian Church (Disciples), and region coordinator for GLAD. Since retirement, she has published a book of fiction, as well as several poems, and is using her writing skills more frequently to address justice issues. WELCOMING Fall 2000 MMIINNIISSTTRRIIEESS 227 FIRST CHRISTIAN CHURCH Disciples of Christ Lynchburg, Virginia June 19, 2000 Dear Member and Friend of First Christian Church, As the elders reported to you earlier, more than a year ago we were approached by a member of our congregation with the request that we study the possibility of First Christian Church becoming an “Open and Affirming Congregation.” The elders determined that this was an issue needing to be examined, and so since that time, we have been engaged in a process of study of scripture and contemporary literature, prayer, and discussion in an effort to discern what God is calling us to do. We have struggled, both individually and as a group, with this difficult issue. We believe the time has come for us to share our thoughts with you. As a group, the Elders are not of one accord in the matter of the church adopting the GLAD terminology: Open and Affirming Congregation. We are, however, of one accord in the following beliefs: We believe that gay and lesbian persons, being created by God, are children of God and are loved by God. We believe that gay and lesbian persons are called to discipleship just as God calls to discipleship those persons who are not gay or lesbian. We believe that gay and lesbian disciples need the nurture and support of the community of faith and the fellowship of believers in precisely the same way as disciples who are not gay or lesbian. We believe that through the ages the church universal has not only sanctioned and supported, but indeed has often mandated attitudes of cruel rejection, bigotry, and hatred against homosexuals. We believe that such attitudes, having been blessed by the church universal, have contributed to and even caused much of the violence that has been perpetrated against homosexuals. We believe that violence and the attitudes that foster violence, rejection, bigotry and hatred are contrary to the gospel of Jesus Christ and offensive to the God who created us all. In light of the historical rejection and persecution of homosexuals by the church universal, we believe that God calls us to be specific in our welcome to gay and lesbian persons and to be intentional in our ministry to the gay and lesbian community who seek “to grow in faith, knowledge and love of God as revealed in Jesus Christ” and “who desire to join us on this journey.” The Elders have found that our study has contributed significantly to our own spiritual growth and to our understanding of what it means to be a disciple of Jesus Christ. Through our study, we have also come to believe that there are other ways we have failed to be welcoming as God welcomes us. For that reason we are proposing opportunities for learning, growth, and dialogue on the issues of welcoming and hospitality be available to all members of First Christian Church. We will work with others in the church to plan for a program of study entitled, “As God Welcomes, We Welcome” for the fall. We encourage all members of the congregation who desire to participate in this process of discernment to be a part of these study opportunities. If you would like to be a part of this planning process or have resources you would like to see studied, please let us know. As we study, pray and talk together, we must always keep before us this question: What is God calling us to be and to do as the body of Christ in the world? The Elders of First Christian Church Letter from Rachel Wilson’s church MINISTRIES 27 28 MINISTRIES Open Hands Not “Privileging” Our Oppression Robert E. Goss Lesbian theologian Sheila Briggs has noted, “Our sexuality embodies the injustice of society.” I take her comment to mean that social injustice is somehow reflected in our sexual practices and lives. What does it mean for us to understand sexuality as a justice issue? Too often LGBT Christians identify their struggles for sexual justice with fighting the radical right for our basic human rights. The radical right under the leadership of Pat Robertson, Ralph Reed, James Dobson, and others certainly target our sexuality for their hate campaigns in a litany of legislative initiatives from the Colorado Amendment to the Defense of Marriage Act. We easily understand homohatred as injustice as we struggle for rights to marry, have families, and equal rights in housing and employment. Oftentimes, we are too focused on our own oppression and exclusion, and that is understandable with the increased violence and demonization from religious conservatives. I remember when the LGBT community in St. Louis struggled against a ballot initiative similar to Colorado Amendment Two. There was a common expectation that the African-American community would naturally support our efforts when we had a need against the religious right. Such expectations were presumptuous, and I questioned where the white LGBT community was when the African-American community needed us on various public issues. We privilege our oppression at the expense of African-Americans. Why is our oppression more important than the racism suffered by African-Americans? We run the danger of privileging our oppression over the oppression of others unless we begin to widen our notions of sexuality and justice. Few understand the connections of the hate campaigns of the religious right that link abortion and homosexuality or how racism, sexism, and homophobia are interconnected. Homophobia (I include biphobia and transphobia as well) is a system of bias regarding sexual orientation which favors heterosexual people and is prejudiced against LGBT people. It is analogous to sexism, racism, and other “isms.” Such homophobia destroys all alternative possibilities of sexuality. Can we within the LGBT community expand our understanding of sexual fear and dread to envision the connections between homophobia and misogyny, the hatred of women? Patriarchal Christianity and late twentieth century capitalism have eroticized domination; they restrict sexuality to exchanges of domination and violence. Men are socialized to enjoy “lording over” women and less powerful men. Homophobia envisions all sexual deviancy from normative heterosexuality as violating gender codes: males become like females, and females become like men. Homophobia reinforces gender injustice by targeting gender transgressions and restricting gender blurrings. Homophobia is connected to the hatred and fear of women. It does not allow women to be equal and punishes those males who are “lesser” males and who sleep with other males like a woman. Can our social analysis comprehend how patriarchal culture has intertwined our sexuality with late capitalism? Late capitalism has commodified sexual bodies into objects that can be marketed and sold. In our consumerist society, sexual bodies have become disposable like many our commodities. Sexual disrespect characterizes our society but has a long history in the body and sexual negativity ingrained in Christianity. Our society devalues certain women’s bodies and values others. It values anorexic bodies over less than perfect bodies and muscled bodies over non-muscular bodies. It devalues HIV+ bodies, queer bodies, overweight bodies, old bodies, poor bodies, bodies of people of color, physically challenged bodies, and the body of the earth. Patriarchal sex diminishes our capacity for just, open, mutual, and loving relationships. Our sexual attitudes and practices are polluted by other interlocking forms of social oppression. Our sexuality is intertwined with racism, abilism, and environmental abuse. Let me give a few examples to illustrate. Stereotypes of women’s sexuality have been shaped by the mythic image of Eve. Eve represents a woman whose sexuality is out of control and who brings sin and death into the world. Christianity has long understood the story of Eve as justifying male control over women. It has feared women’s sexuality and reproductive freedom. All such stereotypes of immoral and independent women contribute to an ideology of male supremacy, and many stereotypes are extended to women of color who represent a primal connection to nature. How our society has treated women’s bodies has a direct correlation to how it treats the earth, which is identified as Mother Earth or Mother Nature. Just as social and physical violence is used to control women’s bodies, so our society rapes, exploits, and dominates the body of the earth. Environmental abuse has a direct link to the violence committed against women and how we perceive the earth as female. CONNECTIONS Fall 2000 MINISTRIES 29 African-American sexuality, likewise, is stereotyped as exotic, chaotic, primal, outside the power of white control. It is associated with the jungle and nature, requiring domination, enslavement, and control. The African-American cultural critic, Cornel West observes, “Americans are obsessed with sex and fearful of black sexuality.” White Americans have continuously stereotyped the sexuality of black bodies promoting racism. Our own community certainly has not remained immune from those cultural stereotypes of black sexuality. The stereotypes of black sexuality emerge from our racial fears. Abilism often desexualizes those who are physically and mentally challenged. I remember a man and woman who were physically challenged with cerebral palsy. They both were wheelchair bound and had speech impairments. They were mentally alert and in love. Family and state social workers desexualized and infantilized these two lovers. They were not allowed to be sexual; they were robbed of voice and power. The presumption was that sexuality was reserved for the ablebodied, not the disabled. The desexualization of physically challenged persons reflects our cultural obsession with perfect bodies. Our society does not want to imagine people who are weak, sick, old, gay or lesbian, bisexual, or transgendered having sex. Nor does it want to picture interracial sex. All those people who engage in so called non-normative sex have frequently internalized oppressions of compulsory heterosexuality. They receive cultural messages that they should not engage in sex or that no one should find them sexually attractive. How often we have heard that from homophobic televangelists! From these cursory reflections, we in the LGBT community must build on our sexual marginality not as a privilege but as a means to make connections with other oppressed groups. This means we need to engage in conversation with other oppressed peoples and even the earth’s oppression, listen to their narratives of struggles, and respond with a commitment to liberate them from violence, domination, and injustice. We need to place other marginalized peoples, including racial minorities and poor women and men, at the center of our Christian discipleship. We must develop an ethic of sexual justice that rules out all relationships in which persons and the environment are abused, devalued, exploited, dominated, and violated. Our just sexuality can empower us to just love and relocate ourselves in society in a more Christ-like fashion. Is this not Christ’s call to justice-love and the reign of God? Robert E. Goss, Ph.D., is Assistant Professor of Comparative Religion and Chair of the Department of Religious Studies at Webster University. He is also a UFMCC Clergy on staff at MCC of Greater St. Louis. He is the author of Jesus ACTED UP: A Gay & Lesbian Manifesto (1993), coeditor of Our Families, Our Values (1997) and Take Back the Word (Pilgrim Press, Fall 2000), an anthology of LGBT readings of the scriptures. He has numerous articles and book chapters on queer theology. QTY BACK ISSUES AVAILABLE ___ The god of Violence (Summer 2000) ___ For All the Saints (Spring 2000) ___ Liberating Word: Interpreting the Bible (Winter 2000) ___ Wholly Holy (Fall 1999) ___ Creative Chaos (Summer 1999) ___ Welcoming the World (Spring 1999) ___ Why Be Specific in Our Welcome? (Winter 1999) ___ A House Divided: Irreconcilable Differences? (Fall1998) ___ Bisexuality: Both/And Rather Than Either/Or (Summer 1998) ___ Treasure in Earthen Vessels—Sexual Ethics (Spring 1998) ___ We’re Welcoming, Now What? (Winter 1998) ___ From One Womb at One Table (Fall 1997) ___ Creating Sanctuary: All Youth Welcome Here! (Summer 1997) ___ Same-Sex Unions (Spring 1997) ___ Transgender Realities (Fall 1996) ___ Remembering…10th Anniversary (Summer 1995) ___ The God to Whom We Pray (Spring 1995) ___ Reclaiming Pride (Summer 1994) ___ Aging and Integrity (Fall 1992) ___ Our Spirituality: How Sexual Expression and Oppression Shape It (Summer 1992) ___ The Lesbian Spirit (Summer 1991) ___ Lesbian/Gay Reflections on Theology (Spring 1991) ___ The “Holy Union” Controversy (Fall 1990) ___ Journeys toward Recovery and Wholeness (Spring 1990) ___ Images of Family (Fall 1989) ___ The Closet Dilemma (Summer 1989) ___ Lesbian & Gay Men in the Religious Arts (Spring 1989) ___ Living and Loving with AIDS (Summer 1988) ___ Sexual Violence (Fall 1987) ___ Minorities within a Minority (Spring 1987) ___ Images of Healing (Fall 1986) ___ Our Churches’ Policies (Summer 1986) ❑ Please send me the back issues indicated ($6 each; 10+ @ $4). ❑ Send me Open Hands each quarter ($20/year; outside U.S.A. @ $25). ❑ Send the current issue to name(s) attached. ($6 each). ❑ Send Open Hands gift subscription(s) to name(s) attached. Enclosed is my payment of $ _______ OR Charge $ _____________ to my VISA MASTERCARD (Circle one) # __________________________________________ Expiration _____/_____. Name on Card ____________________________________________________ Signature ________________________________________________________ My Name ________________________________________________________ Address _________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip _____________________________________________________ Daytime Phone (______) _____________________ Local Church _____________________________________________________ Denomination _____________________________________________________ Send to: Open Hands, 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 Published by the Reconciling Congregation Program in conjunction with Affirming Congregation Programme, More Light Presbyterians, Open and Affirming Ministries, Open and Affirming Program, Reconciling in Christ, and Welcoming & Affirming Baptist programs. A Unique Resource on Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual Concerns in the Church for Christian Education • Personal Reading Research Projects • Worship Resources Ministry & Outreach 30 MINISTRIES Open Hands 1000 AT WOW 2000 Just over 1,000 Welcoming people of faith gathered on the sleepy campus of Northern Illinois University in the cornfields south of Chicago for the first-of-itskind Witness Our Welcome conference for Welcoming congregations in Canada and the United States. Meeting August 3-6, participants represented eight countries and 27 denominations and traditions. Featured preachers included the Rev. Drs. Carter Heyward, Michael Kinnamon, Joan Martin, Janie Spahr, and the Rt. Rev. Steven Charleston. Morning prayer and meditation using a variety of devotional practices began each day. The first 15 chapters of the Acts of the Apostles, which describe Pentecost and the early days of the Christian movement, served as the scriptural basis for the conference— discussed in early morning Bible studies led by a broad spectrum of biblical scholars and interpreted in worship through dance, song, sermon, and humor. The afternoons were devoted to workshops that ranged from practical tips for welcoming congregations to cultivating one’s spirituality and sense of justice. Evenings included an all-women’s concert on Friday night, late night coffee house performers, and a Saturday night dance. The organizing committee, ably chaired by Rev. Jacki Belile, drew together a wide racial and ethnic spectrum of plenary speakers, worship and workshop and Bible study leaders. Even so, the predominantly white gathering was criticized by several speakers for not adequately reaching out to racial minorities, encouraging their attendance. A few speakers blamed the white majority for failing to express solidarity with or sensitivity toward people of color; others viewed the need of multiracial participation as a mutual responsibility, shared by minorities and majority alike. Still others believed that LGBT issues are not yet a priority in racial minority congregations— thus work needs to be done at the grass roots. Despite disagreement as to the causes of the lack of participant racial parity, those gathered seemed united in the cause of encouraging such diversity if and when a similar conference is scheduled. Missing or under-represented among the presenters were political conservatives, Canadians (especially for a binational gathering), bisexual people, and straight women (strangely, since they are often our strongest allies). Lesbian preachers, plenary speakers, Bible study and workshop leaders were more plentiful than their gay male counterparts. One of two highlights in terms of participation was a parallel gathering held for LGBT and questioning youth and young adults and their allies which included a meeting with Welcoming program leaders, focusing on youth concerns. The other was the visible presence of open transgender persons, one of whom was plenary and workshop leader, the Rev. Dr. Erin Swenson, whose ministry was “sustained” by Greater Atlanta Presbytery (of the Presbyterian Church USA) after her transition from Eric to Erin. The closing worship included a blessing on another transgender person’s renewed call to ministry. Mark Bowman, conference coordinator, offered a brief history of the Welcoming movement during the Saturday evening banquet, describing it as the fastest growing lay movement in the church today, adding one to two congregations weekly. That evening’s offering for a future event netted $40,000 in contributions and pledges. Kelly Turney premiered an outstanding new worship resource she edited for the conference entitled, Shaping Sanctuary—Proclaiming God’s Grace in an Inclusive Church. Beautifully designed by Open Hands’ own Jan Graves with artwork by Jan Richardson, it is a 424-page collection of essays, sermons, liturgies, litanies, prayers, and hymns from the Welcoming movement. It may be ordered ($14.00 plus $3 shipping) through most of the welcoming programs listed on the Open Hands masthead, or by contacting the Reconciling Congregation Program at www.rcp.org. As might be expected, “doing a new thing” on so grand a scale had its rough edges in terms of organization, administration, and communication. But the spirit of the volunteers and staff as well as of the leaders and participants more than made up for any challenges— a Spirit that mirrored that of Pentecost, where everyone heard the Gospel in her or his own language and a new movement was born. When the days of the WOW 2000 Conference were come, all the Welcoming programs were together in one place. And suddenly from heaven there came a sound like the rush of nonviolent wind, and it filled the entire Holmes Student Center of Northern Illinois University where they were meeting. Fired up with diverse perspectives, opinions, and strategies, God’s glory rested on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit gave them ability. Now there were devout Christians from every denomination under heaven represented there. And at the sound the crowd gathered and was bewildered, because each one heard them speaking their language. Amazed and astonished, they asked, “Are not all these who are speaking lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and their straight allies? How is that we hear, each of us, in our own language?—Lutheran, United Methodist, Disciples, UCC, MCC, United Church of Canada, Brethren and Mennonite, Episcopalian, Roman Catholic, Orthodox, AME, Baptist, Presbyterian, Mormon, Reorganized Church of Latter Day Saints, Other Sheep, Unitarian Universalist, and more, and still others who are youth and even those who are unchurched. In our own words we hear them speaking of God’s glorious deeds, of God’s good news in Jesus Christ. Are they drunk or just nuts?” (Based on Acts 2:1-13) Fall 2000 MINISTRIES 31 Welcoming programs never stop saying things against the church and the law; for we have heard them say that Jesus will destroy the church and will change our customs.” And all who sat on these church courts and governing bodies looked intently at these Welcoming movements, and they saw the faces of angels. The next sabbath almost the whole city gathered to hear the word of the Sovereign. But when the nonwelcoming straight Christians saw the crowds of LGBT Christians and welcoming straight Christians, they were filled with jealousy; and blaspheming, they contradicted what was spoken by Joan Martin, Mary Hunt, Carter Heyward, Michael Kinnamon, Janie Spahr, and so many others. Then we all replied, “It was necessary that the word of God should be spoken first to you nonwelcoming straight people. Since you reject it and judge yourselves to be unworthy of the Gospel we have to share, we are now turning to lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, and the transgendered community. For so the Sovereign has commanded us saying, “I have set you to be more light for LGBT people, their families and friends, so that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth.” When LGBT people heard this, they were glad and praised the word of God; and many became believers. Thus the word of the Sovereign spread throughout the region. And the disciples were filled with joy and with the Holy Spirit. (This paragraph is based on Acts 13:44-52.) We have enjoyed revisiting the early mission of the church during the WOW conference, as described in the first fifteen chapters of Acts. Yet there is another mission field described in chapter 16. At the beginning of this I mentioned one of two scriptures from Acts that I used when I first preached on the inclusion of gay people in the church. The second is the story of Paul and Silas in jail, when the earthquake comes and unfastens their chains. The jailer, thinking his prisoners have escaped, prepares to kill himself. But Paul shouts out in a loud voice, “Do not harm yourself, for we are all here.” I used the story to illustrate that, though LGBT people now may experience freedom, we still remain within the church. This may lead to the conversion of our jailers, our oppressors, as it does in the text. That’s a further step of our mission, our evangelism. We proclaim our Good News of God’s welcome not just to LGBT people, but to the whole church. For those of us who come from a Reformed heritage, personal salvation is not what we seek. Personal salvation or liberation may even be selfish. We seek salvation for the world, and in this case, the church. The commonwealth of God is in our midst. WOW! —Chris Glaser’s remarks from the closing plenary panel of the WOW 2000 Conference, August 6, 2000. Chris Glaser is the editor of Open Hands and the author of seven books, including The Word Is Out and Coming Out as Sacrament. Visit his website at www.ChrisGlaser.com. Acts 2:1-13 on which this “Very Much Later Acts of the Apostles” reading was based was one of two texts from Acts I used in the very first sermon I preached that included gay and lesbian people in 1972, twenty eight years ago. I was in college and working as a youth minister in a United Church of Christ, and I was describing my first visits to the Metropolitan Community Church of Los Angeles and Glide Memorial United Methodist Church in San Francisco. When I stretched my own and my listeners’ comfort in speaking from the threshold of my closet about something so near and dear to my heart, I never would have imagined an event such as this. Those who are discouraged by occasional and even continual setbacks in our movement must hold onto how far we have come! Tucked away in our conference text of Acts 1-15 but not highlighted is the story of the man born unable to walk, placed at the steps of the temple to beg, a text I have more recently used to explain the experience of LGBT people in the church. In Acts 3 the name of Christ gives him the ability to walk, thus enabling a person not welcome in the temple because he had a disability (and thus was “unclean”) to not only walk into the temple, but to leap and praise God— to dance his way into God’s sanctuary. And that’s the miracle of the Welcoming movement in the church—empowering formerly “poor beggars” like us outside the “Beautiful Gate” of the temple the opportunity to enter and praise God. But like that man, whose whining voice adjured passersby for alms, exploiting their guilt, it will take us awhile to lose the whining tone to our own pleadings of the church, and to speak firmly, unapologetically, God’s truth. This gathering was another step in that direction. Another reading from The Very Much Later Acts of the Apostles, in which echoes of Acts 6 and the ministry of deacons, especially that of Stephen, may be heard: Now during those homophobic days, when the disciples were barely keeping the church together, LGBT people and their allies complained against the largely straight church because their own ministries and their own marriages were being neglected in the daily distribution of good works. So the hierarchy decided, “It’s not right that we should neglect the Bible in order to serve these queers. So let ten Welcoming programs of good standing, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, do the work for us while we return to prayer.” Thus the word of God continued to spread; the number of the disciples increased greatly, especially in urban areas with large LGBT populations. Each of these Welcoming programs, full of grace and power, did great wonders and signs among the people. But some Christians, full of law and institutional power and privilege, argued with these Welcoming programs. But they could not withstand the wisdom and the Spirit with which the Welcoming programs spoke. Then they secretly instigated some people to say and report in reactionary denominational tabloids, “We have heard them speak blasphemous words against Jesus and God.” They stirred up the people and brought charges against them in church courts and governing bodies, saying, “These 32 Open Hands New Program Leaders The Brethren Mennonite Council Board of Directors has selected Amy Short as its new Executive Director, following interim Anna Dennis. As such, she will also lead BMC’s Supportive Congregations Network. For 18 months, Short has served as a full time volunteer, which included reaching out to youth, attending denominational conferences, and providing administrative support. Greg Lichti, former BMC Board President, has been contracted Development Consultant for the group. John Wade Payne, retired pastor of New York City’s Park Avenue Christian Church and longtime advocate for justice, is serving as Intentional Interim Open & Affirming Ministries Program Developer. O&A is the welcoming program of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ). During his 20-year tenure at Park Avenue, Payne oversaw the hiring of openly-gay Allen V. Harris (who was previously program leader) and sponsored him for ordination, as well as leading the congregation through the Open & Affirming process. Episcopalians Acknowledge Fidelity Outside Marriage Meeting in Denver, Colorado in July, the General Convention of the Episcopal Church in America stopped short of calling for the preparation of specialized rites but recognized that there are “couples in the Body of Christ and in this Church” who live in “life-long committed relationships” outside traditional marriage. The resolution adopted emphasized that the church expected such relationships to be “characterized by fidelity, monogamy, mutual affection and respect, careful, honest communication, and the holy love which enables those in such relationships to see in each other the image of God.” A study on the theology of human sexuality was endorsed. Stressing the importance of clergy and lay people working together on that study, Bishop Hays Rockwell of Missouri quoted Karl Barth describing theology as “taking trouble over mystery.” “Taking trouble over mystery is the work of the whole people of God,” he said. Solidarity Sunday October 8 The sixth annual interfaith Solidarity Sunday will be observed October 8, 2000. It is always held the Sunday before National Coming Out Day, October 11. Solidarity ribbons and prayer cards are distributed, and people of faith are encouraged to take the Solidarity Pledge to work for civil rights, end unkind language, speak out against violent language and violence against LGBT people. For information and materials for distribution, contact SolSunday@aol.com or www.dignity usa.org. Movement News First Black Reconciling Congregation Early this year, Union United Methodist Church of Boston became the first all-black congregation to adopt a Reconciling statement that welcomes gays and lesbians, including rights to be chosen for leadership. The decision followed four years of study and dialogue that began at the suggestion of Hilda Evans, a 50-year member of the congregation. Evans thought it was needed because gays had been active members in the past, and the church is in the South End, where many gay people live. In its discussion, the congregation welcomed local gays and lesbians to tell their stories. The resulting statement affirmed, “Given their particular invisibility within the African American community, we further affirm the full participation of all Black lesbians and gay men and all other homosexual persons who confess Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior in all aspects of our life together as a congregation.” Congregations in Conversation with the UCC As well as including new church starts, the ONA Program of The UCC Coalition for LGBT Concerns has begun listing Open and Affirming “Congregations in Conversation with the UCC” on its website (www.UCCcoalition.org).These are already existing faith communities, perhaps affiliated with other denominations, that are exploring a relationship to the United Church of Christ. For more information, visit the website or email program leader Ann B. Day at ONAABDAY@aol.com. NEW RESOURCES Blessed Bi Spirit: Bisexual People of Faith. The first such anthology in which 32 bisexual persons speak for themselves of their spirituality, reflecting a wide spectrum of religious traditions and spiritual paths. Edited by Deb Kolodny. For information and ordering, contact Continuum International, PO Box 605, Herndon, VA 20172, 800-561-7704, contin@tiac.net or visit the website http://www.continuum-books.com/. If mailing,enclose a check for $24.95 plus $4.00 for the first book for shipping and handling, and $1.50 postage for each additional book. Expanded Reconciling Congregation Program Online Bibliography. Latest resources and where to get them online and around the country. Website: http://www.rcp.org/papers/ bibindex.html. Congregations Coming Out! A Strategy for Outreach to Sexual Orientation Minorities. This one-year consultation for congregations reaching out to the LGBT community is provided by Jim Bailey, social marketing consultant and former editor and publisher of Second Stone, a national newspaper for LGBT Christians. For information contact him at 504/394-7470 or visit his website: http://home.earthlink.net/~jbailey777. New Video for Black Churches Seeking to be Inclusive. “All God’s Children,” produced by Woman Vision Productions, is an excellent 26-minute video featuring African-American pastors, leaders, lay people (including parents), and an interracial gay and lesbian gospel youth choir discussing the layers of acceptance and inclusion of LGBT people in congregations. $39.95 from Woman Vision, 3145 Geary Blvd. Box 421, San Francisco, CA 94118. Message only phone: 415/273-1145. 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 Open Hands Vol 16 No 2 - Our Healing Touch https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/08e753eec5cd5abaacbfa43ab1f58b30.pdf 753bf3965af14a1d494ef0d73b1519ab Issue An issue of a recurring publication. Volume Number The volume number of the issue 16 Issue Number The number of the issue (within a volume) 3 Publication Year The year the issue was published 2001 Publication Date The date the issue was published Winter Text Any textual data included in the document 2 Open Hands Vol. 16 No. 3 Winter 2001 Shaping an Inclusive Church Affirming Congregation Programme More Light Presbyterians Open & Affirming Ministries Open and Affirming Program Reconciling Ministries Network Reconciling in Christ Program Welcoming & Affirming Baptists Interim Executive Publisher Marilyn Alexander Editor Chris Glaser Designer In Print—Jan Graves Marketing Manager Jacki Belile Editorial Advisory Committee Vaughn Beckman, O&A Ann Marie Coleman, ONA Chris Copeland, W&A Bobbi Hargleroad, MLP Tom Harshman, O&A Alyson Huntly, ACP Bonnie Kelly, ACP Susan Laurie, RCP Samuel E. Loliger, ONA Ruth Moerdyk, SCN Caroline Presnell, RCP Paul Santillán, RCP Julie Sevig, RIC Kelly Sprinkle, W&A Kathy Stayton, W&A Margarita Suaréz, ONA Judith Hoch Wray, O&A Stuart Wright, RIC and Program Coordinators Open Hands is the quarterly magazine of the welcoming movement, a consortium of programs that support individuals and congregations in efforts to welcome lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, and transgenders in all areas of church life. Open Hands was founded and is published by the Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (United Methodist), in cooperation with the six ecumenical partners listed above. Each program is a national network of local congregations and ministries that publicly affirm their welcome of LGBT people, their families and friends. These seven programs, along with Supportive Congregations (Brethren/Mennonite [www.webcom. com/bmc], Oasis Congregations (Episcopal), Welcoming Congregations (Unitarian Universalist), and INCLUSIVE Congregations (United Kingdom)—offer hope that the church can be a more inclusive community. Subscription is $20 for four issues ($25 outside the U.S.). Single copies and back issues are $6; quantities of 10 or more, $4 each. Subscriptions, requests for advertising rates, and other business correspondence should be sent to: Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 openhands@rcp.org www.rcp.org/openhands/index.html Member, The Associated Church Press © 2000 Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. Open Hands is a registered trademark. ISSN 0888-8833 Printed on recycled paper. WHAT ABOUT US KIDS? Children & Youth Share Our Struggle The Girl Who Wanted Justice 4 LUCY SADTLER-TAYLOR A child’s quest for justice in her own words and artwork. Who’s Teaching Who? 5 A Parent and Child Teach Each Other About Homosexuality MARCIA BAILEY AND SARAH BAILEY “Families need to talk about this together,” Sarah, at 10, advises. “A Bouquet of Birds” 7 Revisioning Family SUSAN QUINN BRYAN A mother pays attention to her daughter’s dreams. Why Talk About This With Kids? 8 ANN THOMPSON COOK Your questions anticipated. Tell Us A Story! 9 A Trip to the Children’s Library VICTOR L. SCHILL A children’s librarian describes what’s available. The Pink Cup 21 Kairos Teaching Moments CHIP JAMES The children chided me, “How can you drink out of a pink cup?” Learning From Our Daughter 23 PATRICIA A. GROVES Seeing transgender people for who they are. Welcoming Transgender Children 24 ANN THOMPSON COOK Making the world safe for gender diversity. Cover: “Come In” invites the artwork of nine-year-old Jonas Motter of Fresno, California. “When I made this piece of art, I was thinking of someone hugging another,” explains the artist, “It also makes me think about people who have cancer or other diseases like AIDS. Even though they aren’t always included, they should be.” Jonas’s favorite hobbies are art and soccer. He attends Wesley United Methodist Church, a Reconciling congregation in Fresno. Winter 2001 3 Publisher Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (UMC) Reconciling Ministries Network Marilyn Alexander, Interim Coordinator 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 773/736-5526 www.rcp.org Ecumenical Partners Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada) Ron Coughlin, Coordinator P.O. Box 333, Station Q, Toronto, Ontario CANADA M4T 2M5 416/466-1489 www.affirmunited.org • acpucc@aol.com More Light Presbyterians (PCUSA) Michael J. Adee, Coordinator 369 Montezuma Ave. PMB #447 Santa Fe, NM 87501-2626 505/820-7082 www.mlp.org Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ) John Wade Payne, Interim Coordinator P.O. Box 44400, Indianapolis, IN 46244 941/728-8833 www.sacredplaces.com/glad Open and Affirming Program (UCC) Ann B. Day, Coordinator P.O. Box 403, Holden, MA 01520 508/856-9316 www.UCCcoalition.org Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran) Bob Gibeling, Coordinator 2466 Sharondale Drive, Atlanta, GA 30305 404/266-9615 www.lcna.org Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (ABC/USA) Brenda J. Moulton, Coordinator P.O. Box 2596, Attleboro Falls, MA 02763 508/226-1945 users.aol.com/wabaptists Coming Out Young 26 MATTHEW SEEDS, AMY HUFF, RYAN DEREK GONZALEZ Coming out as adolescents. Bill of Rights for LGBTQ Youth in the Church 28 TIMOTHY J. BROWN AND LEANN MCCALL TIGERT What youth should expect from our congregations. E-Mails to a Young “Q” 29 Assurance and Information for a Questioning or Queer Youth CHIP ALDRIDGE, JR. Accessing support as well as identity. SUSTAINING THE SPIRIT Prayers for Coming Out and for Affirming Congregations 6, 25, 27 LEANN MCCALL TIGERT AND TIMOTHY J. BROWN Call for articles and columns for Open Hands Fall 2001 OUR COAT OF MANY COLORS Creativity in the Face of Oppression Theme Section: We’re very creative!—one of the stereotypes of our community may be true. From the Shower of Stoles to the AIDS Quilt, we have transformed rejection and death to works of art. Through pen, palette, and performance, we have made ourselves and others laugh, cry, and love against all odds. How have you dealt artistically and creatively with being different or supportive of those who are LGBT? In libraries and art galleries, choir lofts and theaters, we have found balm for our troubled souls. What books, songs, scriptures, art, icons, quilts, music, plays, movies, ballets, operas, and artists (from comedians to theologians) have touched your soul in our struggle toward identity, community, and justice? For this issue, we want photos, artwork, poetry, quotes, scriptures, vignettes, short stories and plays, comedy routines—whatever you can think of! (Be creative!) What films, books, plays, and artwork have changed your life? Of course we want “stuff” of a spiritual bent, but please interpret “spiritual” broadly. But think too of specifically sacred and/or Christian art, music, liturgy, dance, architecture, etc. Short pieces welcome!!! 250 to 2500 words per article. Ministries Section: Columns may include: Welcoming (the process of becoming welcoming), Connections (with other justice issues), Worship, Spirituality, Outreach, Leadership, Marriage, Health, Youth, Campus, Children, and Parents. These brief articles may or may not have to do with the theme of the issue. 750-1000 words. Contact with ideas by June 1, 2001 Manuscript deadline: July 30, 2001 Chris Glaser, Phone/Fax 404/622-4222 or e-mail at ChrsGlaser@aol.com 991 Berne St. SE, Atlanta, GA 30316-1859 USA www.ChrisGlaser.com SPECIAL PULL-OUT SECTION! Annual Listing of Welcoming Congregations 13 4 Open Hands The Girl Who Wanted Justice By Lucy Sadtler-Taylor Lucy Sadtler-Taylor, 11 years old, is a 6th grade student at Inter-American Magnet School. She wrote this story last year when she was in 5th grade. Lucy studies piano, karate, and ballet, and sings in the Chicago Children’s Choir. She and her family belong to Broadway United Methodist Church. She lives with her two moms, her sister Gracie, her dog Bonnie, and her two cats, Big Boy and Brenda Starr. She is currently enrolled in the first year of a two year confirmation class at BMC. SHE ALWAYS COULD NOT GET TO SLEEP, BECAUSE SHE WAS WORRIED ABOUT PREJUDICE. SOMETIMES IN SCHOOL SHE WOULD FALL ASLEEP. THE TEACHER WOULD GET MAD AT HER BUT SHE DID NOT CARE. SHE KNEW THAT MEN AND WOMEN WERE GETTING KILLED FOR BEING BLACK, GAY, OR EVEN SUPPORTIVE OF GAYS OR BLACKS. HER TEACHER GOT MAD WHEN SHE WAS NOT PAYING ATTENTION IN SCHOOL AND SENT HOME A NOTE. HER MOM AND DAD WERE NOT HAPPY, BUT SHE DID NOT CARE. SHE KNEW SHE COULD NOT CHANGE THE WHOLE WORLD BUT THOUGHT ABOUT HER COMMUNITY. SHE WENT TO A PROTEST ON GAY PEOPLE. PEOPLE WERE NOT SURPRISED TO SEE A KID AT A PROTEST BECAUSE A LOT OF KIDS LIKE GAY PEOPLE. THE PEOPLE FOR THE GAY PEOPLE WERE MANY MORE THAN THE PEOPLE WHO HATED GAY PEOPLE. ON SUNDAY THE CHURCH WAS ABUZZ. THEY HAD THOUGHT THAT SHE HAD DONE THE RIGHT THING, ONLY A FEW PEOPLE WERE MAD. THE CHURCH GREW AND GREW WITH GAY PEOPLE AND PEOPLE WHO LIKE GAY PEOPLE TRYING TO FIND THE RIGHT CHURCH. THE GIRL HAD SHOWN THE COMMUNITY THE RIGHT THING. SHE HAD CHANGED ONE SMALL PART OF THE WORLD AND THAT TO HER WAS A BIG SUCCESS, AND THE WHOLE TOWN KNEW IT. THE END ONCE THERE WAS A GIRL NAMED JENNIFER WHO WANTED JUSTICE. SHE WAS TIRED OF HEARING ABOUT PREJUDICE. EVERY DAY SHE LOOKED AT THE NEWSPAPER AND THERE WAS ALMOST ALWAYS SOMETHING ABOUT PREJUDICE. Winter 2001 5 It was in the middle of a Sunday morning worship service, somewhere between the anthem and the offertory, when my then eight-yearold daughter leaned over and whispered urgently, “What’s this mean?”, jabbing her finger at the word “gay” in the book that lay open on her lap. Like nearly every parent I had gotten the message someplace along the line that I should be prepared to talk about sexuality with my children at whatever point they ask, but sitting in the front row during worship with the choir singing and the whole congregation seemingly looking our way did not feel like the ideal time for me! Not wanting to discourage the conversation but wondering what the heck she was reading, I suggested that we take the book home and talk about it later. I was off the hook for the moment, but not much longer! I grew up in a church and in a family where the topic of sexuality was left to the school nurse and a mother’s private conversations with her daughter just prior to the onset of menstruation. Heterosexism was assumed and although homosexuality wasn’t outwardly condemned, the lack of conversation and information concerning it left me with no vocabulary to describe, nor context to understand, the men and women, boys and girls in my life whom I knew intuitively were different from me. I had hoped that my husband and I, along with our church, would teach something different to our children. I want my children to learn what I continue to learn myself—that our sexuality is a gift from God, that God’s creation is so marvelously diverse that we dare not limit its expressions of love and grace, that tolerance is the least we can do and affirmation is the best we can do for each other, so that each one of us can learn and become and grow. I want to teach them caring respect, tender compassion. I want them to have a vision for justice and a passion for peace. I want them to be comfortable with the diversity of people around them and with themselves. It’s not difficult for me to see where I’d like to go, but it isn’t always easy to get there! The book Sarah was reading in worship (which she got from the church’s children’s library) was titled Uncle What-Is-It is Coming to Visit. As we read it together I discovered that it tells the story of two siblings whose unfamiliar Uncle Brett is coming to visit. They’re told he’s gay, but with no understanding of what that means, believe the misinformation given to them until they see and meet Uncle Brett themselves and discover that he’s just like anyone else. “So, let me get this right,” Sarah began. “A man that loves a man is called gay, right?” “Yeah!” I answered, relieved that we were off to an easy start. “So do some girls love girls?” she wanted to know. “Of course,” I answered. “Women who love women are called lesbians.” We went on to talk about the implications of various relationships, about how some relationships lead to life-long partnerships, about how some include children, and about how lack of understanding, tolerance, and acceptance of others can lead to pain, isolation and exclusion. Sarah was righteously angered! “Who says that they can’t love each other?” “Sometimes the church,” I was sad to reply. “Well, not my church! The same God made everybody. So what’s the big deal about all that?” was her wise and matter-of-fact reply. Wondering if maybe I should just leave it at that, I plowed on ahead anyhow and we began talking a little about why it was a big deal, about how lots of people mistreat gays and lesbians because of who they are, how fear and hatred and lack of understanding causes us to hurt one another. I was startled and impressed by the wisdom and clarity of my eight year old, challenged by her forthright questions, inspired by her passion for fairness. Somewhere in the midst of the dialogue she became the teacher and I the student. How had we adults made it all so complicated when in her eyes it was all so simple? “God made us different. Isn’t that a good thing?” she asked. It is a good thing, a very good thing, and I believe that our children can help us discover that as families and as a community of faith. It has been the birth of a number of children to families of all kinds in our congregation that has motivated parents to ask for Sunday morning classes on parenting and sexuality. Together we have wrestled with our own misunderstandings and growing places so that we can be teacher-learners alongside our children. Role playing conversations, dealing with “what if” scenarios, becoming more comfortable with our own sexuality (whatever that may be) has increased the confidence of and support for parents teaching children about human sexuality, all in the context of the love and wonder of God. “Families need to talk about this together,” Sarah, at 10, advises. “Read books together, like Uncle What-Is-It and Heather Has Two Mommies. Then every- Adam, Marcia, Thomas, and Sarah Bailey Who’s Teaching Who? A Parent and Child Teach Each Other About Homosexuality Marcia Bailey and Sarah Bailey one can talk about it and not learn the wrong things. Most kids get their information from other kids. It would be better if parents could talk to their kids. Maybe they could take classes together so they could all understand.” Sarah and her brothers, Adam, now nine, and Thomas, six, have found it helpful to talk about the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people that they know, the friends who have sat at our table, celebrated holidays with us, shared our joys and our tears. They have learned how to create a safe space, within their hearts and within our home, for anyone they meet. “Kids need to get to know gays and lesbians and find out they are just people like everybody else,” says Sarah. One of the gifts of a Welcoming and Affirming congregation is that this kind of interaction takes place all the time, in settings that are natural and nurturing. The young children in the preschool room don’t know that the man who holds them on his lap for story time or who builds with blocks at playtime is gay. The middle schoolers may or may not recognize that the youth group leader is bisexual. None of the kids think much about the fact that Ben and Isaac have two moms. But someday I want them all to notice! I want them to see and know and understand that these women and men who have loved and supported, nurtured and challenged them are wise and wonderful expressions of God among us. That diversity truly is a gift— a gift that these have so generously shared; a gift that I as a parent cherish. A lesbian couple has invited Sarah to spend the night at their home on several different occasions. Now there’s a gift! Together they drink orange tea and listen to music and talk. Every child should have an adult outside their family who values and cares about them. We have been grateful that this loving couple chose Sarah. We continue to be teacher-learners with our children. I celebrate a Welcoming and Affirming congregation where this is a shared task, where diversity is simply a description of who we are. It’s exciting to think that we are nurturing a whole generation of children who, when asked about homosexuality say, “What’s the big deal about that?!” Children whose vision of family includes two moms or two dads, whose expectation of biblical justice demands wholeness and safety and affirmation of all persons, regardless of sexual orientation, who picture a loving couple as two men holding hands and two women in an embrace, who value each other as the image of God no matter what makes us different or the same. “Mom,” came the voice of my then seven-year-old son, “We were rhyming words in spelling today and when someone said ‘gay,’ everyone laughed. I said I didn’t think it was very funny and that they shouldn’t laugh.” “Good for you, Adam!”, I replied. “What happened next?” “Well,” he continued, disappointed, “the teacher didn’t say any- Congregational Prayer Affirming Sexual and Gender Minority Youth & Young Adults Spirit of the Universe, Almighty One, this day we celebrate youth and young adults in our congregation. We celebrate the diverse gifts of a diverse people. We celebrate the lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, and transgender young people among us, and welcome them as part of the body of God, as part of this unique assembly of your people. We declare this a safe space for them, for we know there are places where young lesbians, young gay men, young bisexuals, and young transgender people do not feel safe or welcome. We ask your special blessing on them, since we know you love them unconditionally. We ask you to empower us to love them—to love all—unconditionally, by your great example. Amen. From Coming Out Young and Faithful by Leanne McCall Tigert and Timothy J. Brown (Pilgrim Press, Spring 2001, used by permission). thing at all. How come they didn’t know not to do that?” “I guess there’s more they need to learn, honey,” I answered hopefully. And with determination in his voice he responded, “Then I guess I’ll have to teach them.” Marcia Bailey, Sarah’s mother, serves on the Pastoral Team at Central Baptist Church of Wayne, Pennsylvania, a Welcoming and Affirming congregation. Sarah Bailey, Marcia’s daughter, is now 12 years old and is in the seventh grade. Reading Suggestions: Uncle What-Is-It Is Coming to Dinner by Michael Willhoite (Alyson Wonderland, Boston, MA). Heather Has Two Mommies by Leslea Newman (In Other Words Publishers, Northampton, MA). It’s Perfectly Normal by Robie H. Harris. (Candlewick Press, Cambridge, MA.) 6 Open Hands We lived in a small university town in the panhandle of Texas where my middle daughter, Julia, was attending a nursery school. At three, she was a very precocious little thing, already wearing bifocals and having an amazing vocabulary. One of her first sentences was uttered when, at the breakfast table, a flock of birds took off from the backyard. “Oh, Mommy, look!” she said, “A bouquet of birds!” I knew at that moment that I was raising a poet. Like all poets, she seemed to lack an outer crust, a shell, a wall of defense. She seemed exposed and vulnerable, and everyone that knew her wanted to protect her. She was winsome and endearing. One day she came home from nursery school with a drawing she had done, and a note from the teacher attached. The assignment had been to draw the family you wanted to have when you grew up. Julia had drawn a two-story house with a chimney, and standing in front were two grown-up women and three small girls. “Who is this?” I asked her. “That’s me, and my best friend, Katie, and our little girls,” she said brightly. The note attached said, “Please come see me,” and was signed by the teacher. The teacher was concerned that Julia was having problems with her father. I knew that not to be the case. The teacher pointed out to Julia that there was no daddy in the picture. To which Julia had responded, “I don’t want a Daddy.” The teacher asked if Julia disliked her own father. To which Julia had responded, “I like my daddy just fine. I love my Daddy. I just don’t want one when I grow up. I want Katie. I like Katie. We have fun together.” The teacher remained concerned, but I looked at Julia: bright, happy, welladjusted, and unique, and I knew there was nothing wrong with her. I knew that there had to be a place in the world for this special child. I suspected at that moment that I was raising a lesbian. And I wasn’t sure how to do that. And so I began my journey, reading and seeking positive role models for my daughter. I sought out lesbian friends— no easy task in some small Texas towns. I discovered women’s music and poetry. I played Meg Christian and Chris Williamson in our home. The strong women’s messages were good for my other two daughters, as well. And they were good for me. When Julia was seven, her father and I divorced. (It had not occurred to the teacher that Julia may have sensed the unhappiness in the relationship between her father and myself!) I never mentioned to Julia that I thought she might be gay. I had read enough to know that that was her journey, not mine. Julia “came out” in high school. She came home from school one day and wanted to talk. She looked very serious. We went into my room and closed the door. She began telling me that people could be different and still love one another. That folks could like different things and still be close…she went on and on…and I finally asked, “Julia, is there a bottom line to this?” To which she replied, “Mom, I am a lesbian.” “Thank God, for a minute there, I thought you were going to tell me you were a Republican!” We laughed together and then I hugged her and told her “Welcome home to yourself.” It was years later that I told her about the picture and my suspicions. And we remain close. I continue to stand in awe of the marvelous person she is, and so grateful to God for giving me the responsibility of stewardship during her youngest years. I learn so much from her. Susan Quinn Bryan is pastor of A Community of the Servant Savior, the 100th More Light Church in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), located in Houston, Texas. “A Bouquet of Birds” Revisioning Family Susan Quinn Bryan Julia Winter 2001 7 8 Open Hands Adapted with permission from the Viewing Guide for It’s Elementary: Talking about Gay Issues in School, a documentary film produced by Debra Chasnoff and Helen Cohen. When adults are encouraged to incorporate discussion about gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (GLBT) people and issues into Sunday School lessons, school classrooms, or even family time, questions inevitably arise about the appropriateness of those discussions with children. Here are frequently-asked questions and some sample responses. Q: Why is such talk necessary with young children? A: Negative language about GLBT people is swirling around children of all ages; it’s common on the playground, in school hallways and classrooms, on radio and television, and at church. Many children are adversely affected. For example, an estimated 6 to 11 percent of children have gay or lesbian parents or siblings, and another 5 to 9 percent will at some point figure out that they themselves are GLBT. They’re all being taught that either they or the people they love most are sick and perverted. Other children are affected as well—children who are being taunted for being different from other boys or girls, who have been sexually abused or are confused about sexuality, who are being teased about close friendships with children of the same sex, who have friends who might be gay, or who fear being called gay by classmates. All of these children will be helped by open discussion at home, at school, and at church about GLBT people. Q: Aren’t elementary and middle-school-age children too young to be introduced to this topic? Shouldn’t we wait until they’re older? A: In today’s world, it’s not really possible to introduce these topics. Negative name- calling begins as early as first grade. And long before they grasp the meaning of the words, children have heard or witnessed many negative images about being gay and GLBT people. What a family or church congregation can do is create a safe environment for children to ask questions, consider what they’re hearing and seeing, be given accurate information, and gradually explore the implications for their faith. Q: What about parents in our congregation (or school) who don’t want their children to learn about gay sex? A: Think about all the stories children read about mommies and daddies. Just as those stories aren’t about heterosexual sex, lessons about gay people aren’t about gay sex. The point is to incorporate ways to simply acknowledge that GLBT people are among us and to prevent harmful stereotypes and prejudices. Q: In our church, there are parents who believe that homosexuality is wrong. How can the church teach that it’s a normal lifestyle? Isn’t that going against the parents? A: All major churches teach some variation on the values of love, compassion, and justice. It’s entirely appropriate to teach these values to children, to ensure that everyone in our diverse community is treated with respect, and to provide a safe environment in which to grow. We may not all agree about homosexuality, but just as we would expect every person to be acknowledged and respected at church, the church is obliged to make sure that gay people and their family members are validated and shown respect. Q: Wouldn’t this take away from teaching the basics like the Scriptures and faith? A: In church education, these topics are a rich jumping-off point for consideration of who we are, what it means to be created in God’s image, and what is our responsibility as God’s people. Our faith and biblical teachings are applicable to every life experience, and a central Christian theme is that “outcasts” are welcome at Christ’s table. Q: Won’t teaching children about this encourage them to become gay or lesbian themselves? A: Providing children with information and a forum for discussion doesn’t make anyone gay. If it did, then most children who grow up with GLBT parents would turn out gay, but they don’t. Most turn out heterosexual, in about the same proportion as the general public. However, having a chance to learn about GLBT people might make a child less likely to insult someone she/he thinks is gay or to allow a friend to be ostracized for having a lesbian mom or gay dad. Q: I’m not anti-gay, but why should we single out this one subject? A: We all pay a high price for the invisibility of GLBT people and for our silence. Several studies document that as a direct result of the hatred and prejudice that surround GLBT youth, they are at significantly higher risk than other youth for alcohol and drug abuse, running away, dropping out of school, HIV/AIDS infection, family violence, and suicide. Moreover, unchecked hatred and ignorance about GLBT people are fueling an avalanche of violence. Attacks based on perceiving people to be gay or transgender are the fastest growing hate crime in the United States. Frequently, a gay-basher cites religious views to justify such violence. To prevent these tragedies, it’s critical for children’s role models— parents, educators, pastors— not to be silent in the face of words like “faggot,” “dyke,” or other harassment and violence. If they do remain silent, they appear to children to confirm that a certain group of people doesn’t deserve respect. Rather, we need to model acceptance and respect for all members of the community. Ann Thompson Cook is a sex and gender educator and has served on the board of the Reconciling Congregation Program. She wrote the viewing guide for It’s Elementary. Why Talk About This With Kids? Ann Thompson Cook Winter 2001 9 What about us kids? What about us kids who grow up in families with same-sex parents? Who have lesbian and gay siblings and relatives? Who grow up discovering our own lesbian or gay identity? Who grow up in straight families knowing lesbian and gay friends and families? What about us kids who need to read stories about samesex parented families? Who need stories about our types of families? Stories that help us feel good about ourselves and our families? Where are the stories that affirm and celebrate the lesbian and gay parented families who are an integral part of God’s diverse creation? Where are the books with these stories?—A powerful question indeed. Since the watershed of Stonewall, the publication of lesbian and gay fiction and nonfiction has grown, and some authors are published by mainstream publishers not solely associated with lesbian and gay concerns. However, the publication of lesbian and gay children’s picture books represents a minimal amount of this output. Compared to the number of books for children showing “traditional” types of families, the number of children’s books reflecting lesbian and gay parented families is few. Also, most of the relevant books were published in the period from 1989 to 1996, with almost no books published in the succeeding four years. Added to the fact of limited titles is that there appears to be no titles available that address the issue of bisexual and transgender parented families. Children of Same-Gender Parents With the publication of Heather Has Two Mommies in 1989, Leslea Newman rendered less invisible same-sex parents, giving them a long overdue place in children’s picture books. Recently revised and published in a Tenth Anniversary Edition, this pioneering work opened the way for other writers to create picture books with stories of same-sex parents and their children. Heather Has Two Mommies shows a loving family whose special quality lies not in the fact of being a lesbian parented family, but in the quality of being an ordinary family. Heather, Mama Kate, and Mama Jane live in a house with a yard of trees and grass, have a cat and a dog, take walks in the park, go on picnics, bake cookies, and love each other very much. And being a family who does ordinary and commonplace activities is the important point: lesbian and gay parented families are the same as “traditional” families. Children raised by same-sex parents are not different from children who are raised by parents who are not lesbian or gay. Families, like individuals, are the same but different. Published in the following year, Daddy’s Roommate (1990) was the first children’s picture book to show a child being raised by gay dads. In vibrant, full-color illustrations, Michael Willhoite tells a story about another ordinary family. Nick and his two dads, Daniel and Frank, engage in commonplace activities: they go shopping, go to the movies, work in the yard, play games, fight and make up, go to the beach, and have a healthy relationship with Nick’s mom. Nick and his two dads are just fine in being a family who love each other very much. Like families everywhere, Nick and his two dads are the same, but different. Although technically not a picture book, Zack’s Story: Growing Up with Same-Sex Parents (1996) by Keith Elliot Greenberg is a look at a real-life same-sex parented family. Using actual color photographs, Greenberg shares eleven-year-old Zack’s description of his life with his mother, Aimee, and her partner, Margie. Like Heather and her moms, and Nick and his dads, Zack and his moms do ordinary family activities: they go on picnics and sleigh rides, practice for Little League, watch sports on television, have birthday parties and family gatherings, cook, make a quilt, take care of their cat, go on vacations, and have a great relationship with Zack’s dad. Zack is proud of all his family and feels “lucky to have the home I have and the people there who care about me.” Why should the sexual identity of Zack’s moms be more important than being raised in a loving, healthy home environment? As Johnny Valentine and Judith Vigna remind us in their respective books, being in a family that loves and respects each other is a truer measure of value than the sexual identity of the parents. In Two Moms, the Zark, and Me (1993), Johnny Valentine creates a story in rhyme about a young boy and his two moms who are visiting the zoo (must be a queer thing, don’t you think?). There, he runs afoul of the McFinks who try to convince him that it is a sin not to have a “true” family of a mom and a dad. But, as he tells the McFinks, “Life is just not that simple,” and that real families come in all types. Other Types of Real Families And, indeed they do. Lesbian and gay families need not be limited to a same-sex parent structure. Judith Vigna’s My Two Uncles (1995) is a story about a young girl, Elly, who is being raised by a mom and a dad, but whose sense of family includes her two favorite uncles— Uncle Ned (her dad’s brother) Tell Us a Story! A Trip to the Children’s Library Victor L. Schill 10 Open Hands and his partner, Uncle Phil. Elly’s grandfather does not understand Ned and Phil’s relationship and refuses to have Phil come to an anniversary celebration. Her grandfather’s unloving denial of Ned and Phil’s loving relationship saddens Elly because both Ned and Phil are a vital part of her life and whom she considers her family. Her two uncles love for each other is only different from the love of her parents and grandparents in being a loving relationship between two men. The same but different. If a same-sex parent structure is not necessary to a lesbian and gay family, is it necessary for same-sex parents to have a child? Joseph Kennedy thinks not. In the delightful and bouncy Lucy Goes to the Country (1998), Kennedy shows that the bond between same-sex couples and their pets is just another variation of family. Lucy just happens to be a cat whose relationship with her “two Big Guys” gives a new and wonderful perspective on how diverse loving relationships can be. And a respect for diversity is a core value that we should practice as well as teach to children. Both Belinda’s Bouquet (1991) and One Dad Two Dads Brown Dad Blue Dads (1994) celebrate differences in people and family structure as natural. Leslea Newman’s Belinda’s Bouquet is the story of Belinda who is distressed that her body shape does not conform with what some people think of as “normal.” With the help of her friend Daniel and his two moms, Belinda learns that people, just like flowers, are all different sizes and shapes. She learns to accept her body shape as a natural difference which is part of the beauty that is her. The lesbian parented family is not the focus of this book, but the concept of natural differences. If natural differences in body shape are commonplace, then why not natural differences in family structure? Johnny Valentine’s One Dad Two Dads Brown Dad Blue Dads is a lighthearted but effective story of two children who discover that being a dad has nothing to do with skin color or sexual orientation. Dads do not stop being dads because they are gay. Gay dads do what other dads do: work, play, cook, eat cookies, sing, and love their kids. And as to why some dads are gay? Well, it’s just the same as why some dads are blue—because—they just are! Gay Weddings, Divorce, and Death If many of the stories discussed above highlight the ordinary and commonplace activities of same-sex parented families, what is a more commonplace family occurrence than a wedding? It appears that the only children’s picture book to celebrate same-sex marriages is Michael Willhoite’s Daddy’s Wedding (1996). This wonderfully endearing story answers the question— “Can men get married to each other?”—with a resounding “Indeed they can!” As is customary at traditional weddings, the wedding of Nick’s two dads includes an exchange of vows and rings, a reception complete with a wedding cake, and a kiss at the end of the ceremony. Probably the only children’s picture book with a full-page color illustration of two men kissing each other, Daddy’s Wedding joyously affirms that love is what makes a family. Just as families experience weddings, they sometimes experience divorce. In Saturday is Pattyday (1993), Leslea Newman boldly explores the Children’s Books Described in This Article Greenberg, Keith Elliot, Zack’s Story: Growing Up with Same- Sex Parents (Lerner Publications Company, 1996). Jordan, MaryKate, Losing Uncle Tim (Albert Whitman & Company, 1989). Kennedy, Joseph, Lucy Goes to the Country (Alyson Publications, 1998). Newman, Leslea, Belinda’s Bouquet (Alyson Publications, 1991). Newman, Leslea, Heather Has Two Mommies (Alyson Wonderland, 2000). Newman, Leslea, Too Far Away to Touch (Clarion Books, 1995). Pollack, Eileen, Whisper Whisper Jesse Whisper Whisper Josh: A Story About AIDS (Advantage/Aurora Publications, 1992). Valentine, Johnny, One Dad Two Dads Brown Dad Blue Dads (Alyson Publications, 1994). Valentine, Johnny, Two Moms, the Zark, and Me (Alyson Publications, 1993). Vigna, Judith, My Two Uncles (Albert Whitman & Company, 1995). Willhoite, Michael, Daddy’s Roommate (Alyson Publications, 1990). Willhoite, Michael, Daddy’s Wedding (Alyson Publications, 1996). Winter 2001 11 topic of the divorce of same-sex parents. Frankie used to live with his mom, Allie, and her partner, Patty. But Allie and Patty are divorced, and Frankie now lives with his mom, but visits his other mom, Patty, every Saturday. Patty still is very much a part of Frankie’s life. This is an honest but compassionate and nonjudgmental story about what sometimes happens in any family. Same-sex parented families and “traditional” families are really alike in so many ways, aren’t they? And all families are alike in the experience of the death of a family member. Several of the picture books published in the period 1989 to 1996 are compassionate stories of a child coping with the loss of a loved one to AIDS. Losing Uncle Tim (1989) by MaryKate Jordan, Whisper Whisper Jesse Whisper Whisper Josh: A Story About AIDS (1992) by Eileen Pollack, and Too Far Away to Touch (1995) by Leslea Newman, are eloquent and moving stories that help readers recognize that all types of families are touched by death, and whose grief and sorrow bind them together in the common family of our Creator. The reason for our losses may be different, but our healing comes from the same source—Love. And in the true measure of things, isn’t that what a family is really about—loving each other? The common thread present in lesbian and gay parented families and “traditional” families is not sexual identity. The common thread is Love. Stories about loving families. Stories about ordinary families. Stories about families that are unique but alike in so many ways. The stories about the families in the books included in this discussion do not represent the complete published output of relevant titles, but the fact of the gap between what is available and what should be available still remains. Why are not more picture books about lesbian and gay parented families being written and published? Where are the books about bisexual and transgendered families? Where are the books that show our families as a natural part of the background of families kids can see in the world around them? Where indeed? Victor L. Schill is a member of Grace Lutheran Church (ELCA) in Houston, and a member of Lutherans Concerned/North America. He is Assistant Branch Librarian/Children’s Librarian for the Fairbanks Branch Library of the Harris County Public Library system. Videos by Debra Chasnoff and Helen Cohen, available from Women’s Educational Media, 2180 Bryant Street, Suite 203, San Francisco, CA 94110; phone 415/641-4616; fax 415/641-4632; E-mail: wemfilms@womedia.org, Website: www.womedia.org. It’s Elementary: Talking About Gay Issues in School This award-winning video is an excellent example of how conversation with children and youth on the topic of homosexuality can bring about new understanding and increased tolerance and acceptance. Children from first grade through high school are encouraged to participate in age-appropriate conversation about respecting all persons regardless of sexual orientation. That’s A Family! A video “starring” children who are being raised in an array of family structures, including single parent, multiracial, divorced, guardian, adoptive, and gay and lesbian-headed households. Entertaining and engaging way for children to learn from other children about family diversity. Shapiing Sancttuarry Proclaiming God’s Grace in an Inclusive Church A collection of essays, sermons, liturgies, and hymns from the Welcoming movement. Valuing Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender persons as an integral part of the Body of Christ. Exploring themes of embodiment theology, integrating spirituality and sexuality, and inclusive worship. Includes an eight-week group study guide. ISBN # 0-9701568-0-4 Order from your denominational Welcoming organization or from www.rcp.org Don’t miss this opportunity to “help the rest of the church rediscover its soul.” —from book review by James B. Nelson $14.00 12 Open Hands Winter 2001 13 WELCOMING COMMUNITIES 2001 Welcoming Movement Tops 1500! Since 1978, 1,416 churches, 55 campus ministries, 37 judicatories, and seven national and international ministries have publicly declared themselves welcoming of lesbian and gay people. These 1,515* welcoming communities are found in ten denominations in 46 states and the District of Columbia of the United States and in six provinces of Canada. The affiliation of each is designated by the following codes: WELCOMING CHURCHES UNITED STATES ALABAMA Auburn Auburn UU Fellowship (WEL) Huntsville UU Church (WEL) ALASKA Anchorage Immanuel Presbyterian (ML) UU Fellowship (WEL) Palmer Church of the Covenant (W&A) Sitka UMC of Sitka (RC) ARIZONA Chandler Valley UU Church (WEL) Mesa Celebration of Life Presbyterian (ML) Phoenix Asbury UMC (RC) Augustana Lutheran (RIC) Faith Lutheran (RIC) Palo Cristi Presbyterian (ML) Shadow Rock Cong. UCC (ONA) Scottsdale Scottsdale Cong. UCC (ONA) Tempe Desert Palm UCC (ONA) University Lutheran (RIC) Tucson Church of the Painted Hills (ONA) First Christian (O&A) First Congregational, UCC (ONA) Rincon Congregational UCC (ONA) Santa Cruz Lutheran (RIC) St. Francis in the Foothills UMC (RC) UU of NW Tucson (WEL) UU of Tucscon (WEL) ARKANSAS Fayetteville St. Martin’s Episcopal Center (INT) Little Rock Pulaski Heights Christian (O&A) Trinity Cathedral (INT) CALIFORNIA Alameda First Christian (O&A) First Congregational (ONA) Albany Albany UMC (RC) Altadena Altadena Congregational (ONA) Christ the Shepherd Lutheran (RIC) Baldwin Park First Presbyterian (ML) Banning St. Agnes Episcopal (O) Bayside Humboldt UU Fellowship (WEL) Belmont Congregational Church UCC (ONA) Benicia Community Congregational (ONA) Berkeley Berkeley/Richmond Intercity Min. (O&A) Epworth UMC (RC) First Baptist (W&A) First Congregational (ONA) St. John’s Presbyterian (ML) Shepherd of the Hills Lutheran (RIC) Trinity UMC (RC) University Lutheran Chapel (RIC) University Church (O&A) Campbell First UMC (RC) Carlsbad Pilgrim Congregational UCC (ONA) Carmel UU of Monterey Peninsula (WEL) Canoga Park Emerson Unitarian Church (WEL) Chico Congregational Church (ONA) Claremont Claremont UMC (RC) Claremont UCC, Congregational (ONA) Cloverdale United Ch. of Cloverdale (ONA) Concord First Christian (O&A) Costa Mesa Orange Coast UU Church (WEL) St. John the Divine (O) Danville Danville Cong. UCC (ONA) Peace Lutheran (RIC) Davis Davis UMC (RC) El Cajon Summit UU Fellowship (WEL) El Cerrito Christ Lutheran (RIC) El Cerrito UMC (RC) Mira Vista UCC (ONA) Northminster Presbyterian (ML) Eureka First Congregational (ONA) Fair Oaks Fair Oaks UMC (RC) Fairfax Fairfax Community (ONA) Fremont Fremont Congregational (ONA) Niles Congregational UCC (ONA) Fresno College Comm. Cong. (ONA) First Congregational (ONA) Wesley UMC (RC) Fullerton Fullerton Congregational (ONA) Gardena First UMC (RC) Geyserville Geyserville Christian (O&A) Goleta Live Oaks UU Congregation (WEL) Guerneville Community Church, UCC (ONA) Hayward Eden UCC (ONA) New Fellowship UCC (ONA) United Church (ONA) Westminster Hills Presbyterian (ML) Hollywood Hollywood Lutheran (RIC) Hollywood UMC (RC) Hope Lutheran (RIC) Irvine Irvine UCC (ONA) Kensington Arlington Community UCC (ONA) Lafayette Lafayette Christian (O&A) Laguna Niguel Shepherd of the Hills (ONA) La Puente Delhaven Christian Church (O&A) Larkspur Redwoods Presbyterian (ML) La Verne Church of the Brethren (SCN) Long Beach First Congregational UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Resurrection Lutheran (RIC) St. Luke’s Episcpal (O) St. Thomas of Canterbury (O) The UU Church (WEL) Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Los Alamitos Community Congregational UCC (ONA) Los Angeles All Saints’ Episcopal (O) Bethel Lutheran (RIC) First Unitarian of Los Angeles (WEL) Holy Nativity Episcopal (O) Mt. Hollywood Congregational UCC (ONA) Pueblo Nuevo de Jesucristo (O) St. Bede’s Episcopal (O) St. John’s Episcopal (O) St. Mary’s Episcopal, Palms (O) St. Thomas the Apostle (O) St. James’ Episcopal (O) Trinity Episcopal (O) United University (ML, RC) Westwood Hills Congregational (ONA) Wilshire UMC (RC) Los Gatos First UMC (RC) Skyland Community (ONA) Malibu Malibu UMC (RC) Marin City St. Andrews Presbyterian (ML) Martinez Martinez UMC (RC) Milpitas Sunnyhills UMC (RC) Modesto College Avenue Congregational (ONA) Napa Emmanuel Lutheran (RIC) Newark Holy Redeemer Lutheran (RIC) North Hollywood St. Matthew’s Lutheran (RIC) Toluca Lake UMC (RC) Oakland Beacon Presbyterian Fellowship (ML) Faith American Lutheran (RIC) First Congregational (ONA) First Lutheran (RIC) Lake Merritt UMC (RC) Lakeshore Avenue Baptist (W&A) Lutheran Peace Fellowship (RIC) Montclair Presbyterian (ML) Plymouth UCC (ONA) St. Paul Lutheran (RIC) Orinda Orinda Comm. Ch. UCC (ONA) Palo Alto Covenant Presbyterian (ML) First Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) First Presbyterian (ML) TOTAL AC Affirming Congregation (United Church of Canada) ....................... 15 ML More Light Presbyterians ................................................................. 100 O O, OAS, INT (Episcopal)** .............................................................. 165 ONA Open and Affirming (United Church of Christ) ............................. 338 O&A Open & Affirming (Disciples) ............................................................ 45 RIC Reconciling in Christ (Lutheran) .....................................................209 RC Reconciling Congregation (United Methodist) ................................ 198 SCN Supportive Congregation Network (Brethren/Mennonite) ............... 28 W&A Welcoming & Affirming (American Baptist) .....................................42 WEL Welcoming (Unitarian Universalist) ................................................ 257 *This total is lower than the sum of the numbers listed above and on the right because some welcoming communities are multiply designated and affiliated with more than one denomination. ** O=Officially Welcoming; OAS=Oasis; INT=Integrity Host. ➚ PULL-OUT SECTION ➚ 14 Open Hands St. Andrew’s UMC (RC) University Lutheran (RIC) UU Church of Palo Alto (WEL) Palm Springs St. Paul in the Desert (INT) Pasadena All Saints’ Episcopal (O) First Congregational UCC (ONA) Neighborhood Church (WEL) Throop Memorial UU Church (WEL) Pomona St. Paul’s Episcopal (O) Portola Valley Ladera Community Church (ONA) Rancho Palos Verdes Pacific Unitarian Church (WEL) Redondo Beach St. Paul’s UMC (RC) Richmond Grace Lutheran (RIC) Riverside First Congregational (ONA) St. George’s Episcopal (O) UU Church of Riverside (WEL) Sacramento Lutheran Church of Our Redeemer (RIC) Parkside Community (ONA) Unitarian Universalist Society (WEL) Salinas Good Shepherd Episcopal (INT) San Bernardino First Congregational Church, UCC (ONA) St. John’s Episcopal (O) San Bruno Peace Lutheran (RIC) San Diego First Lutheran (RIC) First Unitarian (WEL) Pacific Beach UMC (RC) St. Paul’s Cathedral (INT) San Diego Mennonite (SCN) University Christian (O&A) San Francisco Bethany UMC (RC) Calvary UMC (RC) Christ Church Lutheran (RIC) Church of the Advent (OAS) Ch. of the Incarnation (OAS) Church of St. John the Evangelist (OAS) City of Refuge (ONA) Dolores Street Baptist (W&A) First Congregational UCC (ONA) First Mennonite Church (SCN) First St. John’s UMC (RC) First Unitarian Society (WEL) First United Lutheran (RIC) Glide Memorial UMC (RC) Grace Cathedral (OAS) Hamilton UMC (RC) Noe Valley Ministry (ML) Pine UMC (RC) Seventh Avenue Presbyterian (ML) St. Aidan’s Church (OAS) St. Francis Lutheran (RIC) St. John the Evangelist Episcopal (OAS) St. John’s UCC (ONA) St. Mark’s Lutheran (RIC) St. Paulus Lutheran (RIC) Temple UMC (RC) Trinity Church (OAS) San Jose Almaden Hills UMC (RC) Alum Rock UMC (RC) Christ the Good Shepherd Lutheran (RIC) 1st Cong. Ch. of San Jose UCC (ONA) First Christian Church (O&A) New Community of Faith (ONA, W&A) St. Paul’s UMC (RC) Trinity Cathedral (INT) San Leandro San Leandro Comm. Church (ONA, W&A) San Mateo Chalice Christian Church (O&A) College Heights UCC (ONA) First Christian (O&A) UU of San Mateo (WEL) San Pedro St. Peter’s Episcopal (O) San Rafael Christ in Terra Linda Presb. (ML) Faith Lutheran (RIC) First Congregational UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) UU Congregation of Marin (WEL) Santa Ana Messiah Episcopal (O) Santa Barbara First Congregational UCC (ONA) La Mesa Community (ONA) Trinity Episcopal Church (O) Santa Clarita St. Stephen’s Episcopal (O) Santa Cruz First Congregational UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Grace UMC (RC) Santa Monica The Church in Ocean Park (RC) St. Augustine-by-the-Sea Episcopal (O) Santa Rosa Christ UMC (RC) First Congregational UCC (ONA) UU Fellowship of Sonoma Co. (WEL) Saratoga Grace UMC (RC) Sausalito First Presbyterian (ML) Sebastopol Community Church (ONA) Simi Valley United Church of Christ (ONA) South Lake Tahoe Lake Tahoe UU Fellowship (WEL) Stockton Central UMC (RC) First Christian (O&A) St. Mark’s UMC (RC) Studio City St. Michael and All Angel’s Episcopal (O) Sunnyvale Congregational Community (ONA) Raynor Park Christian (O&A) St. John’s Lutheran (RIC) Sunol Little Brown Church (ONA) Thousand Oaks Conejo Valley UU Fellowship (WEL) Tiburon Community Congregational (ONA) Shepherd of the Hills Lutheran (RIC) Westminster Presbyterian (ML) Vacaville St. Paul’s UMC (RC) Vallejo Fellowship UMC (RC) First Christian (O&A) Ventura UU Church of Ventura (WEL) Walnut Creek Mt. Diablo UU (WEL) Walnut Creek UMC (RC) West Covina Shepherd of the Valley Lutheran (RIC) West Hollywood Crescent Heights UMC (RC) West Hollywood Presbyterian (ML) Whittier St. Matthias’ Episcopal (O) Yucaipa Faith Lutheran (RIC) COLORADO Arvada Arvada Mennonite (SCN) Arvada UMC (RC) Aurora Parkview Congregational UCC (ONA) Boulder Boulder Mennonite (SCN) Community UCC (ONA) First Christian (O&A) First Congregational (ONA) First UMC (RC) Mount Calvary Lutheran (RIC) St. John’s Episcopal (O&I) UU Church of Boulder (WEL) Colorado Springs All Souls Unitarian (WEL) First Congregational (ONA) High Plains UU Church (WEL) Denver Capitol Heights Presbyterian (ML) Fireside Christian (O&A) First Universalist (WEL) Our Savior’s Lutheran (RIC) Park Hill Congregational UCC (ONA) Sixth Avenue United (ONA) Spirit of Joy Fellowship (SCN) St. Andrew’s Episcopal (O) St. Barnabas Episcopal (O) St. John’s Episcopal (O) St. Paul Lutherans (RIC) St. Paul’s UMC (RC) St. Thomas Episcopal (O) Warren UMC (RC) Washington Park UCC (ONA) Englewood First Plymouth Cong. UCC (ONA) Evergreen Wild Rose UCC (ONA) Fort Collins Foothills Unitarian Church (WEL) Fort Collins Mennonite Fel. (SCN) St. Thomas Lutheran Chapel (RIC) Grand Junction Koinonia Church (SCN, W&A) Greeley Family of Christ Presbyterian (ML) Littleton Columbine UU Church (WEL) Longmont First Cong. UCC (ONA, W&A) Pueblo Christ Congregational, UCC (ONA) UU Church (WEL) Telluride Christ Presbyterian (ML) CONNECTICUT Bridgeport (Stratford) UU Church of Greater Bridgeport (WEL) Coventry Second Congregational (ONA) Ellington First Lutheran (RIC) Fairfield First Church Cong. (ONA) Glastonbury First Church of Christ Cong. (ONA) Guilford First Congregational UCC (ONA) Hamden Spring Glen Church, UCC (ONA) U Society of New Haven (WEL) Hartford Central Baptist (W&A) First Church of Christ, UCC (ONA) Madison Shoreline UU Society (WEL) Manchester UU Society: East (WEL) Mansfield Center First Church of Christ Cong. (ONA) Meriden UU Church in Meriden (WEL) Middletown First Church of Christ Cong. (ONA) New Haven Church of Christ in Yale Univ. (ONA) The Church of the Redeemer, UCC (ONA) First Church of Christ (ONA) First & Summerfield UMC (RC) United Church on the Green (ONA) Noank Noank Baptist (W&A) South Glastonbury Congregational Church (ONA) Stamford St. John Lutheran (RIC) Storrs Storrs Congregational (ONA) Unitarian Fellowship of Storrs (WEL) Uncasville Uncasville UMC (RC) Waterbury South Congregational (ONA) St. John’s Church (INT) West Redding UU Society of Northern Fairfield Cty (WEL) Westport Unitarian Church (WEL) Windsor First Church UCC (ONA) DELAWARE Newark New Ark UCC (ONA) Wilmington First Unitarian Society of Wilmington (WEL) West Presbyterian (ML) DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Washington, D.C. All Souls Unitarian (WEL) Augustana Lutheran (RIC) Christ Lutheran (RIC) Christ UMC (RC) Community of Christ Lutheran (RIC) Dumbarton UMC (RC) First Congregational (ONA) First Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Winter 2001 15 Foundry UMC (RC) Georgetown Lutheran (RIC) Grace Lutheran (RIC) Lutheran Church of the Reformation (RIC) New York Ave. Presbyterian (ML) Riverside Baptist (W&A) Sojourner Truth Cong. UU (WEL) St. Thomas’ Parish (INT) St. Paul’s Lutheran (RIC) Westminster Presbyterian (ML) FLORIDA Bradenton Manatee UU Church (WEL) Clearwater UU Church of Clearwater (WEL) Daytona Beach (Ormond Beach) UU Society Daytona Beach Area (WEL) Dunedin Faith Presbyterian (ML) Fort Lauderdale UU Church of Fort Lauderdale (WEL) Gainesville United Church (ONA) Unitarian Universalist Fellowship (WEL) Key West Holy Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Lake Mary Grace UMC (RC) Miami Beach Miami Beach Community (ONA) Riviera Presbyterian (ML) St. John’s UMC (RC) North Palm Beach First Unitarian (WEL) Orlando First Unitarian (WEL) Pinellas Park Good Samaritan Presbyterian (ML, ONA) St. Petersburg Lakewood UCC (ONA) Sunrise Christ the King Lutheran (RIC) Tallahassee St. Stephen Lutheran (RIC) United Church (ONA) Tampa First United Church (ONA) John Calvin Presbyterian (ML) Unitarian Universalist (WEL) GEORGIA Athens Unitarian Universalist Fellowship (WEL) Atlanta Clifton Presbyterian (ML) Ormewood Park Presbyterian (ML) Trinity UMC (RC) UU Congregation of Atlanta (WEL) Macon High Street UU Church (WEL) Marietta Pilgrimage UCC (ONA) Savannah St. Luke Lutheran (RIC) HAWAI‘I Honolulu Calvary By the Sea Lutheran (RIC) Church of the Crossroads (ONA) Honolulu Lutheran (RIC) St. Mark’s Church (INT) Kalaupapa Kanaana Hou-Siloama, UCC (ONA) Pearl City Trinity UMC (RC) IDAHO Boise First Cong. UCC (ONA) St. Michael’s Cathedral (INT) Pocatellow Trinity Episcopal (INT) ILLINOIS Aurora Lutheran Church of the Redeemer (RIC) The N.E. Cong. UCC (ONA) Bloomington Unitarian Church of Bloomington (WEL) Carbondale Carbondale UU Fellowship (WEL) Church of the Good Shepherd (ONA) Champaign Community UCC (ONA) McKinley Memorial Presbyterian (ML) St. Andrew’s Lutheran (RIC) Chicago Albany Park UMC (RC) Augustana Lutheran (RIC) Berry Memorial UMC (RC) Broadway UMC (RC) Christ the King Lutheran (RIC) Christ the Mediator Lutheran (RIC) Ebenezer Lutheran (RIC) Epworth UMC (RC) Douglas Park Ch. of the Brethren (SCN) First UMC (RC) First Unitarian Church of Chicago (WEL) Grace Baptist (W&A) Grace UMC (RC) Holy Covenant UMC (RC) Holy Trinity Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) Immanuel Lutheran (RIC) Irving Park Christian (O&A) Irving Park UMC (RC) Lake View Lutheran (RIC) Lincoln Park Presbyterian (ML) Nazareth UCC (ONA) New Hope UMC (RC) New Light of Christ Lutheran (RIC) Park View Lutheran (RIC) Peoples Church (ONA) Resurrection Lutheran (RIC) Second Unitarian Church (WEL) St. Luke’s Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) St. Paul’s UCC (ONA) Third Unitarian Church (WEL) Trinity Lutheran (RIC) United Church of Rogers Park (RC) University Church (ONA, O&A) Wellington Avenue UCC (ONA) Elmhurst Maywood House Church (RIC) Decatur UU Fellowship of Decatur (WEL) East Peoria New Church (ONA) Evanston Lake Street Church of Evanston (W&A) Hemenway UMC (RC) Unitarian Church of Evanston (WEL) Wheadon UMC (RC) Hazel Crest Hazel Crest Community UMC (RC) Jacksonville Congregational Church, UCC (ONA) La Grange First Congregational (ONA) Metamora Christ UCC of Germantown Hills (ONA) Naperville Dupage UU Church (WEL) First Congregational Church (ONA) Normal New Covenant Comm. (ML, ONA, O&A) Northampton St. John’s Episcopal (INT) Oak Park Euclid Avenue UMC (RC) First United Church (ML, ONA) Good Shepherd Lutheran (RIC) Grace Church (INT) Oak Park Mennonite (SCN) Pilgrim Church (ONA) Unity Temple UU Congregation (WEL) Park Forest UU Community (WEL) Rockford Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Schaumburg Prince of Peace Lutheran (RIC) Springfield Abraham Lincoln UU Congregation (WEL) Streamwood Immanuel UCC (ONA) Urbana UU Church (WEL) Waukegan First Congregational UCC (ONA) Wheaton St. Paul Lutheran (RIC) Wilmette First Congregational UCC (ONA) Winfield Winfield Community UMC (RC) INDIANA Bloomington St. Thomas Lutheran (RIC) Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Fort Wayne UU Congregation of Fort Wayne (WEL) Goshen Circle of Hope Mennonite Fellowship (SCN) Greencastle Gobin Memorial UMC (RC) Indianapolis First Congregational UCC (ONA) Northeast UCC (ONA) Lafayette UU Church of Lafayette (WEL) North Manchester Manchester Church of the Brethren (SCN) South Bend Central UMC (RC) First Unitarian (WEL) Southside Christian (O&A) West Lafayette Shalom UCC (ONA) IOWA Ames Ames Mennonite (SCN) Lord of Life Lutheran (RIC) UCC Congregational (ONA) University Lutheran (RIC) UU Fellowship of Ames (WEL) Cedar Rapids Faith UMC (RC) Peoples Church UU (WEL) Clinton Clinton-Camanche, Iowa MFSA (RC) Davenport Davenport Unitarian (WEL) Des Moines Cottage Grove Avenue Presbyterian (ML) First Unitarian (WEL) Plymouth Congregational UCC (ONA) Trinity UMC (RC) Urbandale UCC (ONA) Grinnel UCC Congregational (ONA) Iowa City Faith UCC (ONA) UU Society of Iowa City (WEL) KANSAS Kansas City FaithWorks Community (O&A) Rainbow Mennonite (SCN) Olathe St. Andrews Christian (O&A) Topeka Central Congregational UCC (ONA) Wichita First UU Church (WEL) KENTUCKY Henderson Zion UCC (ONA) Lexington The UU Church of Lexington (WEL) Louisville Calvary Lutheran (RIC) Central Presbyterian (ML) First Unitarian (WEL) Third Lutheran (RIC) Mount Prospect Grace and Glory Lutheran (RIC) LOUISIANA New Orleans St. Mark’s UMC (RC) MAINE Alfred Alfred Parish Church (ONA) Bath UCC, Congregational (ONA) Camden John Street UMC (RC) Ellsworth Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Mt. Desert Somesville Union Meeting House (ONA) Parsonfield Riverside UMC (RC) Portland Woodfords Cong. UCC (ONA) Rockland The First Universalist (WEL) Saco First Parish Cong. Ch. of Saco (ONA) Sanford UU Church (WEL) Waterville Universalist Unitarian (WEL) Wilton First Congregational (ONA) MARYLAND Adelphi Paint Branch UU (WEL) Annapolis St. Margaret’s Episcopal (O) Unitarian Church of Annapolis (WEL) 16 Open Hands Baltimore Brown Memorial Park Ave. Pres. (ML) Cathedral Church of the Incarnation (INT) Church of the Good Shepherd (O) Church of the Holy Apostles (O) Church of the Holy Nativity (O) Church of the Redeemer (O) Dundalk Church of the Brethren (SCN) First & Franklin Presbyterian (ML) Grace and St. Peter’s Church (O) Govans Presbyterian (ML) St. Andrew’s Episcopal (O) St. George’s and St. Matthew’s (O) St. James, Lafayette Square (O) St. John’s Huntingdon (O) St. John’s UMC (RC) St. Margaret’s, Coventry (O) St. Mark’s Lutheran (RIC) St. Paul’s Parish (O) First Unitarian of Baltimore (WEL) Bethesda Cedar Lane Unitarian (WEL) River Road Unitarian (WEL) Westmoreland Cong. UCC (ONA) Cockeysville Sherwood Episcopal Church (O) Columbia Abiding Savior Lutheran (RIC) Christ UMC (RC) Columbia United Christian (O&A) Columbia United Christian (ONA) St. John UM-Presbyterian (ML, RC) UU Congregation (WEL) Cumberland Emmanuel Parish (O) Holy Cross Episcopal Church (O) Darlington Deer Creek Parish, Grace Memorial (O) Davidson All Hallow’s Parish (O) Deer Park St. John’s Church (O) Essex Holy Trinity Church (O) Frederick St. Timothy’s Church (O) Gaithersburg Christ the Servant Lutheran (RIC) Glencoe Immanuel Church (O) Glen Dale St. George’s Episcopal (INT) Lanham Good Samaritan Lutheran (RIC) Lutherville Church of the Holy Comforter (O) Towson UU Church (WEL) Oakland St. Matthew’s Church (O) Odenton Epiphany Episcopal Church (O) Prince Frederick St. Paul’s Parish (O) Rockville Rockville Presbyterian (ML) Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Unitarian Church of Rockville (WEL) Silver Spring Christ Congregational UCC (ONA) Silver Spring Presbyterian (ML) UU Church of Silver Spring (WEL) Street Holy Cross Church, The Rocks (O) Takoma Park Takoma Park Presbyterian (ML) Timonium Epiphany Church (O) Walkersville The Gathering–A Family of Faith (O) MASSACHUSETTS Acton St. Matthew’s UMC (RC) Amherst First Congregational UCC (ONA) South Congregational (ONA) Andover Ballardvale United (ONA, RC) Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Arlington First Parish UU Church (WEL) Athol South Athol UMC (RC) Auburn Pakachoag (ONA) Auburndale United Parish of Auburndale (ONA) Barnstable The Unitarian Church (WEL) Boston Arlington Street (WEL) Church of the Covenant (ML, ONA) Old South Church (ONA) Union UMC (RC) Braintree All Souls Church (WEL) Brewster First Parish (WEL) Cambridge First Church, Congregational (ONA) Harvard-Epworth UMC (RC) Old Cambridge Baptist (W&A) University Lutheran (RIC) Concord West Concord Union (ONA) Danvers Holy Trinity UMC (RC) Duxbury First Parish Church, UU (WEL) Framingham Edwards Church UCC (ONA) First Parish in Framingham, UU (WEL) Grace UCC (ONA) Franklin First Universalist Society (WEL) Greenfield First Congregational UCC (ONA) Hingham First Parish Old Ship (WEL) Hingham Congregational (ONA) Holliston First Congregational (ONA) Jamaica Plain Central Congregational (ONA) First Church, UU (WEL) Lexington Follen Community Church (WEL) The First Parish Church, UU (WEL) Lexington UMC (RC) Lincoln The First Parish in Lincoln (ONA) Malden The First Ch. in Malden (ONA) Marblehead St. Stephen’s UMC (RC) Marshfield Marshfield UMC (RC) Medford UU Church (WEL) Middleboro First Unitarian Society (WEL) Needham Cong. Church of Needham, UCC (ONA) First Parish UU (WEL) Newburyport Belleville Congregational UCC (ONA) First Parish Society (WEL) People’s UMC (RC) Newton Eliot Church of Newton, UCC (ONA) Newton Highlands Congregational (ONA) Northampton First Baptist Church (W&A) First Church of Christ (ONA) Unitarian Society (WEL) North Easton Unity Church (UU) (WEL) Norwell First Parish Church (WEL) UCC Congregational (ONA) Osterville United Methodist (RC) Penbroke First Church in Penbroke (ONA) Plymouth First Parish Church (WEL) Provincetown Universalist Meeting House (WEL) Reading Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Roxbury Ch. Of United Community (O&A, ONA) Salem Crombie Street UCC (ONA) First Universalist Society (WEL) Shrewsbury Mt. Olivet Lutheran (RIC) Somerville Clarenden Hill Presbyterian (ML) First Cong. of Somerville (ONA) South Hadley UMC of Holyoke, S. Hadley, & Granby Springfield First Ch. of Christ Congregational (ONA) South Cong. Church, UCC (ONA) UU Society of Greater Springfield (WEL) Stowe First Parish Ch. of Stowe & Acton (WEL) Sudbury The First Parish (WEL) Memorial Congregational UCC (ONA) Waltham First Presbyterian (ML) Wayland First Parish Church, UU (WEL) Wellesley Wellesley Congregational (ONA) UU Society (WEL) Wendell Wendell Congregational (ONA) West Newton First Unitarian Society (WEL) Second Church in Newton UCC (ONA) West Somerville College Avenue UMC (RC) Williamstown First Congregational UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Winchester The Winchester Unitarian Society (WEL) Worcester Bethany Christian (W&A, ONA, O&A) United Congregational (ONA) UU Church (WEL) MICHIGAN Ann Arbor Amistad Community Church, UCC (ONA) Central UMC (RC) Church of the Good Shepherd (ONA) First UU (WEL) Lord of Light Lutheran (RIC) Memorial Christian (O&A) Northside Presbyterian (ML) St. Andrew’s Episcopal (OAS) Bloomfield Hills Birmingham Unitarian (WEL) Detroit First UU Church (WEL) Truth Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) Douglas Douglas Congregational UCC (ONA) East Lansing Edgewood United Church (ONA) UU of Greater Lansing (WEL) Ferndale Zion Lutheran (RIC) Flint UU Church of Flint (WEL) Farmington Hills UU Church of Farmington Grand Rapids Plymouth Congregational, UCC (ONA) Kalamazoo Phoenix Community UCC (ONA) Skyridge Church of the Brethren (SCN) Lansing Ecclesia (O&A) Lansing Church of the Brethren (SCN) Pilgrim Congregational UCC (ONA) Muskegon Our Savior Lutheran (RIC) Port Huron St. Martin Lutheran (RIC) Southfield Calvary Lutheran (RIC) Traverse City UU Fellowship of Grand Traverse (WEL) Williamston Williamston UMC (RC) Ypsilanti First Congregational UCC (ONA) MINNESOTA Albert Lea Christ Church Episcopal (O) Austin Christ Church Episcopal (O) Burnsville Church of the Nativity (O) Presbyterian Church of the Apostles (ML) Chatfield St. Matthew’s Church (O) Duluth Gloria Dei (RIC) St. Andrew’s by the Lake (O) St. Paul’s Episcoapl (O) Winter 2001 17 Eagan Ss. Martha and Mary Episcopal (O) Edina Edina Community Lutheran (RIC) Good Samaritan UMC (RC) Falcon Heights Falcon Heights UCC (ONA) Frontenac Christ Church Episcopal (O) Hibbing St. James’ Episcopal (O) Little Falls The Church of Our Saviour (O) Mahtomedi White Bear UU (WEL) Mankato First Congregational UCC (ONA) St. John’s Church (O) Maple Grove Pilgrims United (ONA) Marshall St. James’ Church (O) Minneapolis Cathedral Church of St. Mark (O) The Church of Gethsemane (O) Christ the Redeemer Lutheran (RIC) First Congregational (ONA) First Unitarian Society (WEL) First Universalist (WEL) Grace University Lutheran (RIC) Hennepin Avenue UMC (RC) Hobart UMC (RC) Holy Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Judson Memorial Baptist (W&A) Lyndale UCC (ONA) Lynnhurst Congregational (ONA) Mayflower Community Cong. UCC (ONA) Minnehaha UCC (ONA) Mt. Olive Lutheran (RIC) Our Savior’s Lutheran (RIC) Parkway UCC (ONA) Praxis (RC) Prospect Park UMC (RC) Spirit of the Lakes (ONA) St. Andrew’s Lutheran (RIC) St. James’ on the Parkway (O) St. John the Baptist Episcopal (O) St. Luke’s Parish (O) St. Matthew’s Church (O) St. Paul’s Parish (O) St. Peter Lutheran (RIC) The Parish of Holy Trinity & St. Ansgar (O) University Baptist (W&A) Univ. Lutheran Church of Hope (RIC) Walker Community (RC) Wesley UMC (RC) Zion Lutheran (RIC) Minnetonka St. David’s Church (O) New Brighton United Church of Christ (ONA) New Ulm St. Peter’s Church (O) Northfield All Saints’ Church (O) First UCC (ONA) Onamia Onamia UMC (RC) Prairie Island Church of the Messiah (O) Red Wing Christ Church (O) Richfield St. Nicholas’ Church Robbinsdale Robbinsdale UCC (ONA) Roseville St. Christopher’s Church (O) Sauk Center The Church of the Good Samaritan (O) The Living Waters (O) Shoreview Peace UMC (RC) St. Cloud St. Cloud UU Fellwoship (WEL) St. John’s Episcopal Church (O) Univ. Lutheran of the Epiphany (RIC) St. Paul Ascension Church (O) Cherokee Park United (ML, ONA) The Church of St. Paul on the Hill & La Mision El (O) Dayton Avenue Presbyterian (ML) Gloria Dei Lutheran (RIC) Hamline UMC (RC) Macalester-Plymouth United (ML, ONA) St. Anthony Park UCC St. Clement’s Church (O) St. John the Evangelist (O) St. Mary’s Church (O) St. Paul Mennonite Fellowship (SCN) St. Paul-Reformation Lutheran (RIC) Stillwater The Church of the Ascension (O) Sunfish Lake St. Anne’s Church (O) Wabasha Grace Memorial Church (O) Waseca Trinity Episcopal (O) Wayzatta St. Luke Presbyterian (ML) White Bear Lake St. John in the Wilderness (O) MISSISSIPPI Meridian Church of the Mediator (INT) MISSOURI Kansas City Abiding Peace Lutheran (RIC) All Souls Unitarian (WEL) Country Club Congregational (ONA) Epworth Roanoke UMC (RC) Fountain of Hope Lutheran (RIC) Kairos UMC (RC) Spirit of Life Community (RIC) St. James Lutheran (RIC) St. Mark’s Lutheran (RIC) Trinity UMC (RC) Van Brunt Blvd. Presbyterian (ML) St. Louis Centenary UMC (RC) Epiphany (ONA) Gibson Heights United (ML) Lafayette Park UMC (RC) St. Marcus Evangelical UCC (ONA) Tyler Place Presbyterian (ML) University City Bethel Lutheran (RIC) MONTANA Billings Billings UU Fellowship (WEL) First Congregational UCC (ONA) Mayflower Cong. UCC (ONA) Bozeman UU Fellowship of Bozeman (WEL) Butte United Congregational Church (ONA) Helena Big Sky UU Fellowship (WEL) Kalispell Glacier UU Fellowship (WEL) Missoula University Congregational UCC (ONA) UU Fellowship of Missoula (WEL) NEBRASKA Lincoln St. Mark’s on the Campus (INT) Unitarian Church (WEL) Omaha First Lutheran (RIC) First UMC (RC) Reconciling Worship Community (RC) NEVADA Las Vegas UU Congregation of Las Vegas (WEL) Reno UU Fellowship of Northern Nevada (WEL) NEW HAMPSHIRE Chocura UU Fell. of the Eastern Slopes (WEL) Concord South Congregational, UCC (ONA) Exeter Congregational (ONA) Hanover Church of Christ at Dartmouth (ONA) Our Savior Lutheran (RIC) Jaffrey United Church (ONA) Laconia UU Society of Laconia (WEL) Milford Unitarian Universalist Congregation (WEL) Nashua UU Church (WEL) Pelham First Congregational (ONA) Plymouth Plymouth Congregational (ONA) Starr King UU Fellowship (WEL) Sanbornton Sanbornton Congregational UCC (ONA) NEW JERSEY Asbury Park Trinity Episcopal Church (INT) Belleville Christ Church Episcopal (OAS) Belvedere St. Mary’s Episcopal (OAS) Bloomfield Christ Episcopal (OAS) Boonton St. John’s Episcopal (OAS) Chatham St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Cherry Hill UU Church (WEL) Chester Church of the Messiah Episcopal (OAS) Clifton St. Peter’s Episcopal (OAS) Closter First Cong. Ch. UCC (ONA) Denville Church of Our Saviour Episcopal (OAS) East Brunswick East Brunswick Cong. UCC (ONA) Englewood St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Exeter Congregational Church (ONA) Fort Lee Church of the Good Shepherd (OAS) Hackensack Christ Episcopal (OAS) Hackettstown St. James’ Episcopal (OAS) Harrington Park St. Andrew’s Episcopal (OAS) Hasbrouck Heights Church of St. John the Divine (OAS) Haworth St. Luke’s Episcopal (OAS) Hawthorne St. Clement’s Episcopal (OAS) Hoboken All Saints Parish (OAS) Jersey City Grace Lutheran (RIC) Grace Van Vorst Episcopal (OAS) St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Kearny Trinity Episcopal (OAS) Leonia All Saints Episcopal (OAS) Lincoln Park St. Andrews Episcopal (OAS) Lincroft First Unitarian of Monmouth Cty (WEL) Madison Grace Episcopal (OAS) Maplewood St. George’s Episcopal (OAS) Mendham St. Mark’s Episcopal (OAS) Millburn St. Stephen’s Episcopal (OAS) Montclair St. John’s Episcopal (OAS) St. Luke’s Episcopal (OAS) Unitarian (WEL) Montvale St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Morristown Church of the Redeemer (OAS) St. Peter’s Episcopal (OAS) Unitarian Fellowship (WEL) Mt. Arlington St. Peter’s Episcopal (OAS) New Brunswick Emanuel Lutheran (RIC) Newark Cathedral of Trinity and St. Philip (OAS) Grace Episcopal (OAS) Norwood Church of the Holy Communion (OAS) Nutley Grace Church (O) Oakland St. Alban’s Episcopal (OAS) Paramus Central Unitarian Church (WEL) Parsippany St. Andrew Lutheran (RIC) St. Gregory’s Episcopal (OAS) Passaic St. John’s Episcopal (OAS) 18 Open Hands Paterson St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Plainfield First Unitarian Society (WEL) Pompton Lakes Christ Church (OAS) Princeton Christ Congregation (ONA, W&A) Ramsey St. John’s Episcopal (OAS) Ridgewood Christ Episcopal (OAS) The Unitarian Society of Ridgewood (WEL) Rutherford Rutherford UMC (RC) Short Hills Christ Episcopal (OAS) South Orange First Presbyterian & Trinity (ML) Sparta St. Mary’s Episcopal (OAS) Summit Calvary Episcopal (OAS) Christ Church (ONA) Teaneck St. Mark’s Episcopal (OAS) Tenafly Church of the Atonement (OAS) Towaco Church of the Transfiguration (OAS) Titusville UU of Washington Crossing (WEL) Union City St. John’s Episcopal (OAS) Upper Montclair St. James’ Episcopal (OAS) Verona Holy Spirit Episcopal (OAS) Wantage Good Shepherd Episcopal (OAS) NEW MEXICO Albuquerque First Unitarian (WEL) St. Michael & All Angels (INT) St. Thomas of Canterbury (INT) Santa Fe Christ Lutheran (RIC) First Christian Church (O&A) St. Bede’s Episcopal (OAS) Unitarian Church (WEL) United Church (ONA) NEW YORK Albany Emmanuel Baptist (W&A) First Presbyterian (ML) First UU Society of Albany (WEL) Bay Shore St. Peter’s Church (INT) Binghamton Centenary-Chenango Street UMC (RC) UU Congregation (WEL) Blooming Grove Blooming Grove UCC (ONA) Brookhaven Old South Haven Presbyterian (ML) Brooklyn All Souls Bethlehem (O&A, ONA) Church of Gethsemane (ML) First Unitarian Cong. Society (WEL) King’s Highway UMC (RC) Lafayette Avenue Presbyterian (ML) Park Slope UMC (RC) St. Jn-St. Matt-Emmanuel Luth. (RIC) Buffalo Westminster Presbyterian (ML) Canandaigua UU Church of Canandaigua (WEL) Canton The UU Church (WEL) Churchville Union Congregational (ONA) Copake Craryville UMC (RC) Cortland United Community Church (W&A, ONA) Dobbs Ferry South Presbyterian (ML) Fairport Mountain Rise UCC (ONA) Gloversville First Congregational UCC (ONA) Grand Island Riverside Salem (ONA) Henrietta John Calvin Presbyterian (ML) Huntington UU Fellowship (WEL) Ithaca First Baptist (W&A) First Baptist Church (W&A) St. Paul’s UMC (RC) Manhasset UU Congregation at Shelter Rock Marcellus First Presbyterian (ML) Merrick Community Presbyterian (ML) Mt. Kisco Mt. Kisco Presbyterian (ML) UU Fell. of Northern Westchester (WEL) Mt. Sinai Mt. Sinai Congregational UCC (ONA) New York City Broadway UCC (ONA) Central Presbyterian (ML) Church of the Holy Apostles (OAS) The Community Church of NY, UU (WEL) Good Shepherd-Faith Presbyterian (ML) Grace & St. Paul’s Lutheran (RIC) Holy Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Jan Hus Presbyterian (ML) Judson Memorial (ONA, W&A) Madison Avenue Baptist (W&A) Metropolitan-Duane UMC (RC) Our Savior’s Atonement Lutheran (RIC) Park Avenue Christian (O&A) Riverside (ONA, W&A) Rutgers Presbyterian (ML) St. Paul & St. Andrew UMC (RC) St. Peter’s Lutheran (RIC) Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Trinity Lutheran-Lower East Side (RIC) Trinity Presbyterian (ML) Unitarian Ch. of All Souls (WEL) Washington Square UMC (RC) West-Park Presbyterian (ML) Norwich First Congregational, UCC (ONA) Oneonta First UMC (RC) UU Society (WEL) Palisades Palisades Presbyterian (ML) Plattsburgh Plattsburgh UMC (RC) Poughkeepsie Unitarian Fellowship (WEL) Richmondtown (Staten Island) The Church of St. Andrew (INT) Riverhead First Congregational (ONA) Rochester Calvary-St. Andrews (ML) Ch. of St. Luke & St. Simon Cyrene (INT) Downtown United Presbyterian (ML) First Unitarian (WEL) First Universalist of Rochester (WEL) Lake Avenue Baptist (W&A) Third Presbyterian (ML) Westminster Presbyterian (ML) Saratoga Springs Presb.-New Eng. Cong. (ML, ONA) Saratoga Springs UMC (RC) Sayville Sayville Congregational UCC (ONA) Schenectady Emmanuel Bapt.–Friedens UCC (ONA, W&A) First UMC (RC) First Unitarian (WEL) Sea Cliff UMC of Sea Cliff (RC) Slatehill Grace UMC of Ridgebury (RC) Slingerlands Community UMC (RC) Snyder Amherst Community (ONA, O&A) Syosset The Community Church (ONA) Syracuse First UU Society of Syracuse (WEL) May Memorial UU Society (WEL) Plymouth Congregational UCC (ONA) Troy First United Presbyterian (ML) Utica Unitarian Universalist (WEL) White Plains St. Bartholomew’s Episcopal (INT) Williamsville UU of Amherst (WEL) Yorktown Heights First Presbyterian (ML) NORTH CAROLINA Asheville UU Church of Asheville (WEL) Chapel Hill Church of the Reconciliation (ML) Olin T. Binkley Memorial Baptist (W&A) United Church (ONA) Charlotte Holy Covenant UCC (ONA) Holy Trinity Lutheran (RIC) UU Church of Charlotte (WEL) Durham Eno River UU Fellowship (WEL) Pilgrim UCC (ONA) Greensboro UU Church of Greensboro Raleigh Community UCC (ONA) Pullen Memorial Baptist (W&A) UU Fellowship of Raleigh Wilmington Church of the Servant (INT) UU Fellowship (WEL) Winston-Salem Parkway UCC (ONA) UU Fellowship (WEL) NORTH DAKOTA Fargo Fargo-Moorhead UU Church (WEL) St. Mark’s Lutheran (RIC) OHIO Akron UU Church of Akron (WEL) Brecksville United Church of Christ (ONA) Chesterland Community Church (ONA) Chillicothe Orchard Hill UCC (ONA) Cincinnati Church of Our Savior (INT) Clifton UMC (RC) Mt. Auburn Presbyterian (ML) Saint John’s Unitarian Church (WEL) Cleveland Archwood UCC (ONA) Euclid Ave. Congregational UCC (ONA) Pilgrim Congregational UCC (ONA) Simpson UMC (RC) Trinity Cathedral (INT) Trinity UCC (ONA) UU of Cleveland (Cleveland Hts) (WEL) West Shore UU (WEL) Zion UCC (ONA) Cleveland Heights Church of the Redeemer (RC) Noble Road Presbyterian (ML) Columbus Calvary Lutheran (RIC) First English Lutheran (RIC) First Unitarian Universalist (WEL) North Congregational UCC (ONA) Redeemer Lutheran (RIC) St. Mark Lutheran (RIC) Dayton Congregation for Reconciliation (ONA) Cross Creek Community (ONA) Faith UCC (ONA) Miami Valley Unitarian Fellowship (WEL) Delaware Delaware UU Fellowship (WEL) Granville First Baptist (W&A) Lakewood Cove UMC (RC) Liberation UCC (ONA) Lorain First Cong. Church, UCC (ONA) Marietta First UU Church (WEL) Norton Grace UCC (ONA) Oberlin First Church in Oberlin (ONA) Sandusky UU Fellowship of Erie Cty (WEL) Shaker Heights First Unitarian of Cleveland (WEL) Strongsville Southwest UU Church (WEL) Toledo Central UMC (RC) St. Lucas Lutheran (RIC) Winter 2001 19 OKLAHOMA Oklahoma City Church of the Open Arms, UCC (ONA) Epworth UMC (RC) First Unitarian Church of Okla.City (WEL) St. Andrew’s Presbyterian (ML) Tulsa College Hill Presbyterian (ML) Community UU Congregation (WEL) Fellowship Congregational, UCC (ONA) UM Community of Hope (RC) OREGON Ashland The Rogue Valley UU Fellowship (WEL) United Church of Christ, Cong. (ONA) Beavercreek Beavercreek UCC (ONA) Beaverton Southminster Presbyterian (ML) Bend First Presbyterian (ML) UU Fellowship of Central Oregon (WEL) Corvallis First Congregational Church (ONA) First UMC (RC) Estacada Estacada UMC (RC) Eugene First Congregational, UCC (ONA) Unitarian of Eugene & Lane Co. (WEL) Forest Grove Forest Grove UCC (ONA) Gresham Eastrose Fellowship UU (WEL) Zion UCC (ONA) Hubbard Hubbard UCC (ONA) Klamath Falls Klamath Falls Cong. UCC (ONA) Lake Oswego Lake Oswego UCC (ONA) Milwaukie Clackamus UCC (ONA) Milwaukie UCC (ONA) Portland Ainsworth UCC (ONA) First Congregational (ONA) First UMC (RC) Metanoia Peace Community (RC) Peace Church of the Brethren (SCN) Southwest United (ONA) St. James Lutheran (RIC) St. Mark Presbyterian (ML) Trinity Cathedral (INT) University Park UMC (RC) Salem First Congregational UCC (ONA) First Unitarian Society (WEL) Morningside UMC (RC) Springfield Church of the Brethren (SCN) Wilsonvillle Meridian UCC (ONA) PENNSYLVANIA Allentown Muhlenberg College Chapel (RIC) St. John Lutheran (RIC) Bethlehem Trinity Episcopal (INT) Devon Main Line Unitarian (WEL) Harrisburg Unitarian Church (WEL) Lansdale Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Levittown United Christian Church (O&A, ONA) Lewisburg Beaver Memorial UMC (RC) Norristown Olivet-Schwenkfelder UCC (ONA) Philadelphia Calvary UMC (RC) First UMC of Germantown (RC) Germantown Mennonite Church (SCN) Holy Communion Lutheran (RIC) Holy Trinity Church (INT) Old First Reformed (ONA) St. Michael’s Lutheran (RIC) Tabernacle United (ML, ONA) Unitarian Society of Germantown (WEL) Univ. Lutheran of the Incarnation (RIC) Pittsburgh First Unitarian (WEL) Sixth Presbyterian (ML) St. Andrew Lutheran (RIC) State College Univ. Baptist & Brethren (SCN, W&A) Smithton Thomas UU Church (WEL) State College UU Fellowship of Centre County (WEL) Upper Darby Christ Lutheran (RIC) Wayne Central Baptist (W&A) York UU Congregation of York (WEL) RHODE ISLAND East Greenwich Westminster Unitarian (WEL) Newport Newport Congregational (ONA) North Providence St. James Church Pawtucket Park Place Cong. UCC (ONA) Providence Mathewson Street UMC (RC) SOUTH CAROLINA Charleston Circular Congregational (ONA) Columbia Gethsemane Lutheran (RIC) SOUTH DAKOTA Erwin Erwin UCC (ONA) TENNESSEE Chattanooga Christ Church–Episcopal (INT) Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Knoxville Ch.of St. Michael and All Angels (INT) Tennessee Valley UU (WEL) Memphis Calvary Church (INT) First Congregational UCC (ONA) Nashville Brookmeade Congregational UCC (ONA) Edgehill UMC (RC) First UU Church (WEL) Hobson UMC (RC) St. David’s Episcopal (INT) TEXAS Austin First English Lutheran (RIC) First UU Church (WEL) St. Andrews Presbyterian (ML) St. George’s Episcopal Church (O) Trinity UMC (RC) College Station Friends Congregational (ONA) St. Francis’ Episcopal Church (O) UU Fellowship of Brazos Valley (WEL) Corpus Christi St. Paul UCC (ONA) Dallas Bethany Presbyterian (ML) First Unitarian (WEL) Midway Hills Christian (O&A) Northaven UMC (RC) El Paso St. Timothy Lutheran (RIC) Fort Worth St. Matthew’s Lutheran (RIC) Houston Bering Memorial UMC (RC) Comm. of the Reconciling Servant (ML) Community of the Servant-Savior (ML) Covenant Baptist (W&A) Faith Covenant (ML, ONA) First Congregational (ONA) First UU Church of Houston (WEL) Grace Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) St. Stephen’s Episcopal Church (O) Lubbock St. John’s UMC (RC) Mesquite St. Stephen UMC (RC) Plano Community UU Church (WEL) San Antonio Spirit of Life (RIC) UTAH Midvale St. James Episcopal (INT) Ogden UU Church of Ogden (WEL) Salt Lake City All Saints Church (INT) First Unitarian Church (WEL) Holladay UCC (ONA) Mount Tabor Lutheran (RIC) South Valley UU Society (WEL) VERMONT Bennington Second Congregational (ONA) Burlington Christ Presbyterian (ML) College Street Congregational (ONA) First UU Society of Burlington (WEL) Middlebury Champlain Valley UU Society (WEL) Congregational UCC (ONA) Putney United Church (ONA) Rutland Rutland UMC (RC) Thetford First Congregational Church (ONA) Westminster West Congregational Church (ONA) VIRGINIA Alexandria Hope UCC (ONA) Mount Vernon Unitarian (WEL) Peace Lutheran (RIC) Arlington Clarendon Presbyterian (ML) Unitarian Church (WEL) Burke Accotink UU Church Charlottesville Sojourners UCC (ONA) Harrisonburg Sanctuary UCC (ONA) Manassas Bull Run UU (WEL) Oakton Fairfax Unitarian (WEL) Reston Washington Plaza Baptist (W&A) Roanoke Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Saxton’s River Christ’s Church (ONA) Winchester UU of the Shenandoah Valley (WEL) WASHINGTON Bellevue Eastgate Congregational UCC (ONA) First Congregational, UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Bellingham First Cong. of Bellingham (ONA) Bremerton Kitsap UU Fellowship (WEL) Carnation Tolt Congregational, UCC (ONA) Chelan Fullness of God Lutheran (RIC) Edmonds Edmonds UU (WEL) Ellensburg First UMC (RC) Everett First Congregational (ONA) Federal Way Wayside UCC (ONA) Kirkland Holy Spirit Lutheran (RIC) Leavenworth Faith Lutheran (RIC) Marysville Evergreen UU Fellowship (WEL) Medical Lake Shalom UCC (ONA) Mountlake Terrace Terrace View Presbyterian (ML) Olympia Comm. for Interfaith Celebration (ONA) Olympia UU Congregation (WEL) Pullman Community Congregational UCC (ONA) Reston Washington Plaza Baptist (W&A) Richland Shalom UCC (ONA) Seattle Alki Cong. UCC (ONA) Broadview Community UCC (ONA) Central Lutheran (RIC) Fauntleroy UCC (ONA) Findlay Street Christian (O&A) First Baptist (W&A) Gethsemane Lutheran (RIC) Gift of Grace Lutheran (RIC) 20 Open Hands Immanuel Lutheran (RIC) Keystone Cong. UCC (ONA) Magnolia UCC (ONA) Normandy Park Cong. UCC (ONA) Pilgrim Congregational (ONA) Plymouth Congregational (ONA) Prospect UCC Cong. (ONA) Ravenna UMC (RC) Richmond Beach Cong. UCC (ONA) Trinity UMC (RC) St. Paul’s UCC (ONA) University Baptist (W&A) University Christian (O&A) University Congregational (ONA) University Temple UMC (RC) Wallingford UMC (RC) Spokane Unitarian Church (WEL) Suquamish Community Congregational (ONA) Vancouver East Vancouver UMC (RC) First Congregational UCC (ONA) Walla Walla First Congregational Church White Salmon Bethel Cong., UCC (ONA) Woodinville Northshore UCC WEST VIRGINIA Morgantown UU Fellowship of Morgantown (WEL) Wheeling UU Congregation (WEL) WISCONSIN Brown Deer Brown Deer UCC (ONA) Delavan Delavan UMC (RC) Eau Claire University Lutheran (RIC) Green Bay Union Cong. UCC (ONA) Kenosha Bradford Comm. Church UU (WEL) Madison Advent Lutheran (RIC) Community of Hope UCC (ONA) First Baptist (W&A) First Congregational UCC (ONA) First Unitarian Society (WEL) James Reeb UU Congregation (WEL) Lake Edge Lutheran (RIC) Orchard Ridge UCC (ONA) Prairie UU Society Plymouth Congregational UCC (ONA) St. Francis House (INT) University UMC (RC) Milwaukee Broken Walls Christian Comm. (W&A) Cross Lutheran (RIC) Incarnation Lutheran (RIC) Lake Park Lutheran (RIC) Pentecost Lutheran (RIC) Plymouth UCC (ONA) Reformation Lutheran (RIC) Village Church, Lutheran (RIC) Racine Olympia Brown UU Church (WEL) Our Savior’s Lutheran (RIC) Sheboygan Wesley UMC (RC) Waukesha Christ the Servant Lutheran (RIC) Maple Avenue Mennonite (SCN) Wauwatosa Mt. Zion Lutheran (RIC) CANADA ALBERTA Calgary Calgary Inter-Mennonite (SCN) The Unitarian Church of Calgary (WEL) Edmonton Southminster-Steinhauer United (AC) Unitarian Church (WEL) BRITISH COLUMBIA Burnaby St. Paul’s United (AC) Kelowna Unitarian Fellowship of Kelowna (WEL) Vancouver First United Church (AC) Trinity United (AC) Unitarian Church (WEL) Victoria Capital UU Cong. of Victoria (WEL) MANITOBA Winnipeg Augustine United (AC) First Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Young United (AC) ONTARIO Hamilton First Unitarian Ch. of Hamilton (WEL) Kingston Sydenham Street United (AC) Ottawa First Unitarian Cong. of Ottawa (WEL) Thunder Bay Lakehead U. Fellowship (WEL) Toronto Bathurst United (AC) Bloor Street United (AC) First Unitarian Cong. of Toronto Glen Rhodes United (AC) Metropolitan United (AC) Trinity-St. Paul’s United (AC) Waterloo Olive Branch Mennonite (SCN) Westminster United (AC) QUEBEC Montreal, Quebec City Unitarian Church of Montreal (WEL) SASKATCHEWAN Regina St. James United (AC) Saskatoon King of Glory Lutheran (RIC) St. Thomas-Wesley United (AC) CAMPUS MINISTRIES LCM, LSC, LSM=Lutheran Campus Ministry, Student Center, Student Movement UCM=United Campus Ministry UMSF=United Methodist Student Fellowship UNITED STATES ARKANSAS St. Martin’s Ctr, Fayetteville (INT) CALIFORNIA Cal-Aggie Christian House, UC-Davis (RC) UCM, UC, Riverside (RC) UCM, USC, Los Angeles (RC) Wesley Fdn., UC-Berkeley (RC) Wesley Fdn., UC-Santa Barbara (RC) Wesley Fdn., UCLA, Los Angeles (RC) COLORADO LCM-Co.State Univ., Ft. Collins (RIC) LCM, CU-Boulder (RIC) Wesley Foundation, U. of Denver (RC) DELAWARE Wesley Fdn., UD, Newark (RC) DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UMSF, American U. (RC) ILLINOIS Agape House, U. of Illinois, Chicago (RC) Ill. Disciples Fdn., UI, Champaign (O&A) UMSF, Ill. Wesleyan, Bloomington (RC) UCM, No. Illinois, DeKalb (RC) U. Christ. Min., Northwestern, Evanston (RC) INDIANA LCM, IU, Bloomington (RIC) IOWA LCM, UI, Iowa City (RIC) Stud. Cong., Luther Coll., Decorah (RIC) KANSAS Episc./Luth. Ctr, U. of KS, Lawrence (RIC) LCM, KSU, Manhattan (RIC) United Methodist CM, UK, Lawrence (RC) KENTUCKY Louisville Presb. Theo. Seminary (ML Chap.) MARYLAND U. of Md. Episc. CM, College Park (INT) MICHIGAN Guild House, UM, Ann Arbor (O&A) Wesley Fdn., Cen. MI U., Mt. Pleasant (RC) Wesley Fdn., U. of Michigan, Ann Arbor (RC) MINNESOTA Augsburg Coll. LCM, Minneapolis (RIC) Episc. Ctr, Minneapolis (INT) LCM in Minneapolis (RIC) Stud. Cong., St. Olaf, Northfield (RIC) MONTANA U. of Montana LCM, Missoula (RIC) NEBRASKA St. Mark’s on Campus, Lincoln (INT) NORTH DAKOTA Univ. Lutheran Center, NDSU, Fargo (RIC) OHIO UCM, OU, Athens (O&A, RC, W&A) OREGON LCM in Portland (RIC) Wesley Fdn., UO, Eugene (RC) PENNSYLVANIA Christ Chapel, Gettysburg College, Gettysburg (RIC) LSC-LCM, Kutztown U, Kutztown (RIC) TENNESSEE Wesley Fdn., Vanderbilt, Nashville (RC) TEXAS LCM, UT, Austin (RIC) VIRGINIA Campus Christian Community, MWC, Fredericksburg (RC, RIC) WASHINGTON Common Min., Wash. State U.,Pullman (RC) LCM, WWU, Bellingham (RIC) Wesley Club, UW, Seattle (RC) UM Fellowship, UPS, Puget Sound (RC) WISCONSIN LCM, UW, LaCrosse (RIC) LCM, Metro Milwaukee(RIC) LCM, UW-Stout, Menomonie (RIC) St. Francis House, Madison (INT) Wesley Fdn., U. of Wisconsin, Madison (RC) ➚ PULL-OUT SECTION ➚ CANADA SASKATCHEWAN LSC, LSM, Saskatoon (RIC) JUDICATORIES which have passed welcoming resolutions Conferences (ONA) California/Nevada N. Central Atlantic Central Pacific Connecticut Massachusetts Michigan Conferences (RC) California-Nevada New York Northern Illinois Regions (O&A) Northern California/Nevada Synods (ML) Synod of the Northeast Synods, ELCA (RIC) Delaware-Maryland Eastern North Dakota Eastern Wash.-Idaho Greater Milwaukee Metro Chicago Metro New York Metro Washington, D.C. Minneapolis Area Pacifica NATIONAL MINISTRIES which have passed welcoming resolutions Disciples Justice Action Network (O&A) Disciples Peace Fellowship (O&A) Gen’l Commission on Christian Unity & Interreligious Concerns (RC) Lutheran Student Movement—USA (RIC) Methodist Fed. for Social Action (RC) Urban Servants Corps (RIC) INTERNATIONAL MINISTRIES Baptist Peace Fell. of North America (W&A) Minnesota New Hampshire New York Ohio Rocky Mountain Southern California Oregon-Idaho Troy Wisconsin Rocky Mountain Sierra-Pacific Southeastern Southeast MI Southeast PA Southern CA–West Southwestern TX St. Paul (MN) Area Shaping An Inclusive Church Quarterly magazine of Welcoming congregations in the U.S. and Canada Annual subscriptions $20 ($25 outside U.S.) Mail to Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Ave. Chicago, IL 60641 Phone 773/736-5526 Fax 773/736-5475 www.rcp.org/openhands/ index.html Winter 2001 21 teachers hone their skills at nurturing, managing behavior, providing information and dealing with conflict. Often what is missing is the acknowledgment that there are LGBT students, and students with LGBT family members. Once acknowledged, they become people. Once they are people, it follows that they have needs of inclusion, safety, modeling, accurate information, and appropriate social opportunities— just like their peers. Also missing has been the permission and support for teachers, counselors and administrators to include LGBT people in their thinking. The same is true of leaders in the church. Invisible Girls and Boys Teachers and counselors, pastors and Sunday School teachers, need to know what development in a hostile environment “feels” like. They need to know what it is like to be an LGBT person in a heterocentric world— home, school, church, and community. When these missing pieces are provided, teachers, counselors, and administrators can begin to effect change in their schools; pastors, church educators, and lay leaders can begin to effect change in their congregations. One veteran teacher said, “I can’t believe that I’ve been teaching for almost 30 years and this is the first time I’m having this conversation.” Lacking inclusion, safety, modeling, accurate information, and appropriate social opportunities, LGBT kids are forced to use much of their energy to deal with alienation and attack, verbal and physical, whether projected, anticipated, or real. Historically this has lead to invisibility of the person through a de facto unspoken, yet enforced, policy of “don’t ask, don’t tell.” A great amount of energy goes into this exercise, and it contradicts other basic learnings like “tell the truth,” “be yourself,” “do what your ‘gut’ tells you.” Retrospectively, LGBT adults have generally been aware of a sense of being “different” from very early on, including the first years of school. Though some understand the nature of the difference then, most don’t realize it until puberty, when the relationship to sexual/affectional or gender identity begins to become clear. Any pervasive distraction of energy during foundational developmental periods makes a child, or an adult for that matter, less available for “authentic” relationships. Relationship building is crucial during the social/emotional milestones of the school years, and is the stuff of identity formation. It does indeed “take a village,” though preferably one willing to understand and include you. Corrective experiences regarding inclusion benefit all children. Non-LGBT kids suffer from not receiving corrective experiences and information as they continue to be confused by apparently contradicting values i.e. “do unto others”— except for “them.” Kids place great stock in “fairness,” and are gratified and comforted by seeing it displayed. As shown in our sixth grade teacher’s story, when kids (and teachers) are invited to rise to the occasion, they do. This is especially true where inclusion and protection of all is modeled for them on a consistent basis. Without these advantages, young people are ill-prepared to have comfortable relationships with LGBT peers, community and family members, and continue to operate defensively or offensively due to mis/dis-information. Simple but powerful interventions can be achieved using the “teachable moment.” The basic ingredients of this corrective recipe are: dealing firmly with all harassment and violence; stopping all put-down language, clearly including pejorative use of terms referring to sexual or gender identity; detoxifying the words gay and lesbian by using them appropriately; and supporting a full range of identity expression unfettered by gender role stereotypes. Kairos: A Moment of Spiritual Opportunity Oh, I’m so excited,” exclaimed the sixth grade science teacher. “I used what we learned last week, and it went great.” She was telling a story at the start of class in a series of workshops I was giving on meeting the needs of LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) students. “During my class, the lesson was to do a ‘query,’ ” she continued. “Some of the boys began snickering and using the word ‘queer.’ I stopped the lesson,” she puffed, “and told them it’s my job to make sure that everyone who walks in that door feels safe and treated fairly so they can learn, and no putting people down for who they are will be allowed.” “Well,” she continued, “the boy who started it actually apologized to me and the class, and a girl sitting on her own in the back of the class looked right at me silently nodding her head up and down. It’s one of the most powerful moments I’ve had in teaching, and I felt so powerful. I don’t think I would have been able to do that before. I knew what to do and I did it. I made a difference. I felt empowered.” In presenting to increasing numbers of school faculties and community agencies, I have come to realize that part of what I do, for some, is to re-personalize LGBT people. There is a depersonalizing sense of sexual-affectional minorities as being alien and “somewhere else,” particularly when considering children and adolescents. I add “affectional” as a reminder that we are dealing with an expression of personhood, that defining an identity simply by sexuality skews the picture in a minimizing and sensational way, and has left a group of kids under-served. I am finding that schools are already equipped to deal appropriately with the needs of LGBT students and want to do so. They include all students in the language of their mission statements, and “ The Pink Cup Kairos Teaching Moments Chip James 22 Open Hands Silence. They looked at me and each other. “We’re getting angry at each other,” offered Anna firmly. “Why?” “Because there are things wrong on those lists.” “So,” I proposed, “how about we go back to the lists, and if you can tell me what’s wrong with an item, we’ll agree to take it off the list.” Third Grade Deconstructionists We began to dismantle the lists. Girls were quick and clear about owning things on the boys list. Girls can also be strong, fast, and can like and be good at sports. With examples agreeable to all, these items were removed from the list. The boys sat silently as their list grew shorter. I wondered if they were feeling emasculated. They needed help. Knowing them all rather well, I encouraged the boys to own something on the girls’ list, something they needed but were terrified to do. “Now listen here you guys,’ I cajoled, “I happen to know how long it takes to make those spikes in your hair, tie laces like that, and make sure the pants hang right up top and at the bottom. I also happen to know that you wouldn’t even think of leaving your house unless they were all perfect. So don’t even try to tell me otherwise. Am I right?” The boys looked at one another blushing, with chirps of suppressed giggles. The girls were thrilled with the suggestion, and joined the boys chirping, till they all laughed together at the truth of the situation. It was removed from the girls’ list without opposition. I pushed again. “And you, Tony, brought me spaghetti that you made so I would know what a good cook you are, right?” Again, laughter, and still lighter spirits. That item was removed from the girls’ list. It was just about time to end the meeting for that day, and there were only a few items left on the lists. “I have another idea,” I said, “tell me what you think about this.” I erased the line dividing the board into two lists. “That’s it,” Anna cried out, “we’ll have only one list!” She got it immediately. They all excitedly agreed. “If it’s going to be one list it has to have one title,” I stated. “What will we title the list?” Again, silence. Then, Anna (on a roll) states with certainty, “let’s call it ‘Humankind.’” “Yes, yes,” the chorus went. “Humankind.” I wrote HUMANKIND over the one list of items not yet fully addressed. They literally bounced together out of my room to rejoin their classes. They looked as though pounds of extra weight had been taken off them. There was such relief in surviving and even flourishing through the process of constructing, then consciously deconstructing a system that is experienced as oppressive. The children were clearly moved by the boys’ acceptance of my use of humor to weather the vulnerability of potential humiliation. As it turns out, there are all kinds of boys and all kinds of girls, and it feels good to remember that. Two weeks later I played a board game with this same group of kids. Anna stopped the play for a moment saying, “Hey, look what we did!” She pointed to the plastic pawns on the board. “We all chose opposite colors.” We all looked at the pieces to see that, indeed each child had chosen a color from the ‘other’ side of the original two lists. We all laughed, and they reminisced about how fun that meeting had been. Privately, I feared that once attention was called to their ‘gender-atypical’ choices, something tantamount to a crime, they would rectify this by trading colors. I was gratified to see that they laughed right over it, and, eventually, we continued the game. They seemed gratified too. What Needs to Be Done, One Level at a Time These stories confirm the fact that when we consider what needs to be done in school or churches regarding LGBT issues, we are talking about ensuring safe and healthy identity formation so that all kids can make responsible choices and are capable of authentic, healthy relationships. The work is about withdrawing our participation in Boys Must Be Boys and Girls Must Be Girls Hey! Mr. James, how can you do that?” asked a boy in the third grade, first to arrive of six boys and girls in a weekly counseling group. I had no idea what he was referring to. “Your cup— you’re drinking out of a pink cup!” With his permission, I brought the question to the group when they arrived with lunch bags and trays of mass-produced food. “Yeah,” they chided, “how can you drink out of a pink cup?!” Their incredulity was unanimous. “Well,” I told them, “it’s got a bottom, a handle, and it’s filled with coffee exactly the way I like it, so I don’t have any problem drinking out of it. What could be the problem with me drinking out of it?” “It’s a girl color,” they agreed. “Oh,” I said, “you mean there are things only for girls and only for boys?” “YES!” “OK, so let’s do this so we can get really clear.” I drew a line down the center of the black board, labeling one side BOYS, and the other GIRLS. “Let’s list as many girl things and boy things as we can.” They instantly began calling out items for the lists, seemingly without dispute. Of course, the lists began with colors. Girl colors are pink, red, yellow, and purple, while boy colors are blue, green, brown and black. Boys are faster, stronger, better at and more interested in sports, and they like tools and cars. Girls, on the other hand, like to play with dolls, dance, clean, cook and sew, and care more about their looks. I found myself reminiscing about television shows from the fifties like Donna Reed, Father Knows Best, and Leave It To Beaver—and this the cusp of the year 2000! Though there were no overt challenges to individual items, as the lists lengthened the group became increasingly polarized, and the tension was palpable. They began pushing one another’s lunch materials into small, identifiable “territories” separating the boys’ camp from the girls’ camp. “OK, stop,” I said. “Let’s forget about the list for a minute. What’s happening in this room at this table?” “ Winter 2001 23 the unspoken “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy which shrouds with paralyzing misinformation. As we see with the third grade deconstructionists (!), dealing with LGBT issues in the elementary years can mean simply broadening the range of what’s allowable for boys and girls, and correcting put-downs. With a fifth grade group, it means including ‘gay people’ in the discussion of minorities and social issues, and in addressing pejorative language. These must continue into the middle school/junior high years (typically the most difficult for LGBT students due to heightened social consciousness), and must include age appropriate accurate information about growing up as a gay person. In the high school years, LGBT students need age appropriate social opportunities with LGBT peers and non-LGBT allies. At the dawn of the new millennium it seems appropriate that we are challenged to reexamine and reaffirm our core values, and to find ways to establish them anew in ourselves, families, communities, and institutions, including the church. We are challenged to find the courage, creativity, patience and humor required for this process. We are humbled by the legitimate reality that we are all in different places in this forward momentum. It is good to revisit the intent of our founding mothers and fathers, and to celebrate their wisdom in providing protections for our growth. Well, time for a cup of coffee…in my pink cup. Such a rebel. Chip James, CSW, CASAC, is with the Clarkstown Central School District of New York state, and part of CANDLE: Community Awareness Network for a Drug-free Life & Environment, which provides many K- 12 programs, including a group for LGBT and questioning youth. Nearly eleven years ago, my partner and I adopted our daughter. We were clear in our minds about how we would deal with the fact that our family was different. We planned to be honest about our lesbian relationship and believed that she would grow up secure in the knowledge that she had two moms who loved her and each other. Our church, a United Methodist Reconciling Congregation, provided support, reinforcing the belief that we are loved by God, as well as by people both gay and straight in our church family. In spite of the strength of our convictions and the support of our church, I admit that we both held some internalized homophobia, and had some fears about the potential outcome of our decisions. There were not many families at that time which had children who had spent their entire lives in lesbian families. Like all parents, we had the unrealistic hope that our child would never face discrimination or hardship. I heard the messages that my child would be damaged by not having a father or by being raised by lesbians. I feared the possible damage to her developing psyche by the heterosexist and homophobic society she would have to face. When our daughter was about three years of age, there was a transgender person who regularly attended our church. She worked in a blue-collar job, and would come to church dressed as a man if she was going to work. If she had Sunday off, she would dress as a woman. Our daughter believed her to be two different people. My uncertainty about addressing our own family issues led me to believe that I should not point out the fact that both the male and female presentations were manifestations of the same person. It seemed complicated enough that we were a family with two female parents, and it was incredibly complicated to imagine introducing the concept that gender could be anything other than dichotomous and clearly defined. As we have all grown through the process of being the family which we are, it has occurred to me that my daughter has a better understanding of sexual orientation and gender identity than I do. At age 11, she has an intense interest in understanding relationships and identity issues. She does not have to categorize people in relation to scientific definitions. She has not thought about the question of biological determination or social construction of identity. She is able, through her experience, to see people for who they are and by how they present themselves. She has learned through her relationships with individuals that people can feel they are not the same gender that they were assigned at birth. She knows that it is possible for people to love someone of the same or other gender. She knows that masculinity and femininity are constructs which people of any gender have in varying degrees. Oppression often takes the form of silence. By not addressing issues of variety in gender and sexual orientation, we maintain the heterosexist and homophobic messages which our society wants to maintain. Even in our gay and lesbian communities, it is easy to continue to oppress and marginalize those who do not fit neatly into our agenda to create families and fit in to mainstream society. What my daughter has taught me is that I must accept all people as they are, to allow them to tell me how they perceive themselves. Transgender persons should expect the same of me which I expect of heterosexuals. I want parents to tell their children that there are families in which two women or two men love each other as a man and woman love each other. I should tell my children that gender is not fixed and biologically determined. There are people who were born female, who identify themselves as male and vice versa. There are also males who identify with a feminine role and vice versa. In my life, it is my daughter who has taught me these lessons. Learning From Our Daughter Patricia A. Groves 24 Open Hands It Begins as Children From the time I was a small child, I was baffled by the importance people placed on someone being male or female. I didn’t understand why my parents treated me differently from my brother or why adults would admonish me or shame me for something that would have been okay if I’d been a boy. I hated the restrictions that came with being a girl, and I worried a lot that I wasn’t a good enough girl. But I was clear I was a girl. I never had the sense there was anything wrong with my being a girl. What was wrong was the restrictiveness and my difficulty conforming to it. For some children, however, what is wrong is that they have the body they have. For example, a child with a male body may be as clear as I was about being female. But every time she is true to herself, asserts herself as the girl she knows herself to be, the world comes crashing down on her. In most families and communities, she’s not allowed to play with the other girls, not allowed to dress like the other girls. What’s even worse, when she reaches puberty, instead of growing breasts and starting to menstruate, which would seem normal and natural, she gets big, muscular, and hairy in all the wrong places. And it’s perfectly obvious that no-one understands the pain she’s in. Similarly, some children with female bodies are clear they are male, find adults’ wish to dress them in frills and ribbons abhorrent, and only want to be with the other guys. They may, as young children, assume they just haven’t grown their penis yet, but eventually discover, to their horror, the development instead of breasts and soft curves and monthly periods. Transexualism and Gender Identity Disorder The technical term for both the maleto- female and the female-to-male child is transexual, the current medical diagnosis, gender identity disorder. Like homosexuality, transexualism shows up at a very young age and occurs among people in every walk of life, socioeconomic position, race/ethnicity, and religion. And we know very little about its etiology. Societies differ in their response to transexuals. In the United States, transexuals and other people who don’t conform to gender stereotypes are shamed, forced to conform, ostracized, and often beaten, raped, or killed. However, in some societies, such as in Native North America, transexuals were considered to bring special gifts to the community, and they were revered or given a privileged position. In the Netherlands, transexual children are treated with compassion and given hormones so they don’t have to go through the wrong puberty. A big stumbling block in the United States is our tendency to lump together gender identity and sexual orientation, which are really two distinct phenomena. • Gender identity is who we know ourselves to be as male, female or other. For most people, gender identity is aligned with physical sex, but in the case of transexuals, is not. • Sexual orientation has to do with whom we’re attracted to. Most people are attracted to people of the other sex, many are not. Gender identity and sexual orientation are confused as early as the kindergarten playground. Many children are harassed as gay, not for anything sexual, but because of how they’re being a girl or boy. When boys don’t conform to what society says is okay for their gender, they’re called “gay,” “sissy” or “girl”; girls are called “tomboy” and “dyke.” They may or may not figure out later that they’re gay or lesbian, but internally, their gender identity (male or female) matches the body they have. When the same names are hurled at a transexual child, however, their profound confusion has a different source. For example, a child with a male body has the experience of being a girl, has probably said so and wasn’t believed, and now is being called a girl as an insult. My friend Bren told me that throughout his childhood, he prayed every night, “Please, God, let me wake up a girl.” Every morning, he would check to see if his prayer had been answered and, when he saw it hadn’t, was deeply disappointed. In addition to transexuals, there are intersexed people, whose chromosomes or genitals at birth leave room for doubt about their gender. In such cases, doctors frequently encourage parents to approve surgery in order to “correct” the ambiguity and then to raise the child in whichever gender was assigned. Many intersexed adults are now complaining about not having been consulted and say they would have preferred to have been left as they were born. The list goes on. Many other people also feel out of sync with society’s rigid gender requirements. People may be satisfied with the body they were born with, but behave in ways that other people see as different. People may cross-dress, or dress “ambiguously.” Ironically, even children who fit the stereotypes are in gender trouble! I know a mother who is upset that her four year old daughter loves pink and always wants to wear frilly dresses. “That’s not the way I raised her,” she tells me, and then explains her philosophy of gender neutral parenting. Making the World Safe for Gender Diversity I’m writing about gender diversity in Open Hands to make a request. The Ed. Note: An individual is typically referred to as a transgender person; collectively transgenders are the transgendered community. Sometimes transgendered is used singly; sometimes transgender is the preferred self-designation over either male or female. Welcoming Transgender Children Ann Thompson Cook Winter 2001 25 world is not safe for gender non-conforming people, and I think we, the Welcoming movement, are the people who can change that. Think about it. We’ve already created a sea change with regard to sexual orientation! Fifteen years ago, few people outside the gay community questioned the prevailing view that homosexuality was abnormal, immoral, a sinful choice. Yes, there’s still a lot of work to do, but consider that 15 years ago, few of us predicted that large corporations would, by the year 2000, pull support from the Boy Scouts because of their intractable stance on homosexuality. Consider that 15 years ago, few of us could imagine that a state would provide for same-sex unions in our lifetime. We in the Welcoming movement had stepped forward as a religious community and challenged assumptions about what is moral. In doing so, we’ve altered the future for our children and youth. The world we are creating as a Welcoming movement is a world that values God’s creation, a world that stands for all people being free to be fully themselves. It’s time to extend that valuing beyond sexuality to gender, to extend our acceptance and unconditional love to people on the whole continuum of gender diversity. Some would say we’ve done that. We’ve added “T” to “GLB.” Doesn’t that prove we’re accepting? Not in itself. As an emerging Welcoming movement, we knew from the beginning it wasn’t enough for our churches to say we wel- A Prayer for Coming Out as Transgender Creator God, I am learning things all the time. It is a gift to be young and to get to know you and your world, your beautiful creation. I am also getting to know myself, and I’m discovering that sometimes I feel as if I am the other gender. Sometimes I feel scared about these feelings. Sometimes I feel wonderful about them. I know that I am your creation, and you have given me a wonderful gift in my gender identity. I pray for your supportive presence as I become more comfortable with my feelings. I pray for your guidance, that I may know when it is the right time for me to let other people know about this part of me. I pray for your supportive presence if I should be rejected, knowing that you, God who created me, will not reject me, that you will affirm me as part of your beautiful creation. In you I trust. Amen. From Coming Out Young and Faithful by Timothy J. Brown and Leanne McCall Tigert (Pilgrim Press, Spring 2001, used by permission). comed everyone. We knew it wasn’t even enough to say we welcomed gay and lesbian people. Something fundamental had to be altered in our relationships, our language, our assumptions, and our way of being with each other. When I first began confronting my own homophobia, I saw that I had absorbed all kinds of negativity about GLB people. Like the culture I had grown up in, I identified homosexuality with aberrant sex. To become an ally required acknowledging that in myself. To become an ally required me to become open to people’s experience and to listen and listen, and then listen some more. Lesbian, gay and bi folks were unbelievably generous in sharing their lives so I could “get it,” and we all struggled together to create a new way of being church with each other. To truly stand with transpeople will require all of us, both GLB and straight, to undertake a similar process of listening. GLB Solidarity with T Many GLB and transgender people, of course, have strikingly parallel experiences: being taunted, scorned and often bullied for being different; feeling isolated and alone; carrying what feels like a terrible secret; monitoring one’s own behavior at a microscopic level so as not to reveal the secret; struggling with shame, low self-esteem, drug abuse, suicide; and having little access to people who seem like oneself. And some percentage of LGB people are gender non-conforming by nature or by politics. I’ve heard repeatedly, however, a huge sense of uneasiness from both gay as well as straight people, a visceral, negative reaction to the idea of someone disowning their own body. We’ve advocated for people to be free to follow their call to the ministry. We’ve stood up for people to be free to love whom they love. What would it take for us to stand up, unquestioningly, for the boy-born child to be free to wear a dress and wear nail polish and lipstick? What would it take for us to support a genetic girl to be free to use a boy’s name and frequent the boy’s bathroom, where he believes he belongs? What would it take for us to really “get” that gender diversity is part of normal human experience? My request is that we do the homework with the transgendered community, extend to transgenders the love and deep listening we’ve been doing within the gay and straight communities, listen to children and adults with gender identity issues and consider what is required of us as a faith community to celebrate them as children of God. It’s time. Ann Thompson Cook, longtime leader and ally in the Reconciling Congregation Program within the United Methodist Church, is currently developing a book based on correspondence with a transwoman in transition. Resources Open Hands, Fall 1996, Theme: Transgender Realities. Available only in church libraries and, if needed, by xeroxed copy from the RCP office (see masthead for contact information). True Selves: Understanding Transsexualism, Mildred L. Brown and Chloe Ann Rounsley (Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1996). Trans-sister Radio, a novel, Chris Bohjalian (Harmony Books, NY, 2000). Ma Vie en Rose, French language film (with English subtitles), 88 minutes (1997). www.ifge.org International Federation for Gender Education www.isna.org Intersex Society of North America Excerpted from Coming Out Young and Faithful, edited by Leanne McCall Tigert and Timothy J. Brown, to be released in the Spring of 2001. Used by permission of The Pilgrim Press. Matthew Seeds, Age 20, Philadelphia United Church of Christ It was a cold winter morning during 12th grade and I was sitting in English class trying to learn something amidst my raging hormones. I rolled up the sleeves of my heavy shirt as my eyes began to wander around the room. I came to realize something this very day that would change my life forever. My eyes stopped when I came to two individuals who were sitting together sharing a textbook. Although Lauren looked attractive in her sweater and dress, there was something about Jeremy that really caught my eye. Was it his bright blue eyes or his broad shoulders that made me so attracted to him, or was it the way he smiled, or his warm personality? I was feeling something that was leading me into forbidden territory. This was not the first time I had looked at other guys and found them desirable, but this was the first time that I began to understand and know that the feelings I had were strong and needed to be addressed. During my senior year of high school I began to stop denying my sexual orientation and let go of “my secret” for the very first time. At times I did not know what to do or who I could talk to. I did not even know if I was gay—maybe I was just confused. Maybe I just needed to experiment a little. Was it that I lacked a significant relationship in my life, since everyone else around me seemed to have a boyfriend or girlfriend? While interviewing my high school counselor for a story on “troubled youth” the words slipped out of my mouth at long last. My hands were shaking as I told her what was so deep within my soul and it took everything for me to receive her knowledge and guidance that day. I know God was with me in the office and encouraging me to seek the truth through understanding myself better. I told her I thought I might be gay, but I think I already knew in my heart what the truth really was. The word “gay” was used as a weapon against me for years and so I related it to something sinful and awful. In turn, I needed to find a way out of the mess I was creating for myself. Could I be changed? The counselor was the first person who told me it was okay to have these feelings. It was “okay to be gay.” How refreshing and reassuring those words were to hear. One night in 1997 my mother asked me why I was not doing well in school and why I seemed so distracted. I was so frustrated by my parents’ inability to understand me, and I thought it was about time to tell them what was on my mind. I did not expect a warm welcome from my mother after I told her I was gay, but I had to be honest and truthful no matter what the consequences. After the words slipped out of my mouth she ran upstairs and told my father, who was sleeping, that her son was gay. The bomb had hit. Over the next few days every picture of me came off the wall and I was called every name in the book. I was told that what I said couldn’t be true. I didn’t walk like a girl, have earrings, or talk feminine. Being gay was all about wild sex and partying. My parents’ reaction was probably to be expected but it proved to me that love can be very conditional. Things eventually quieted down and we went back to pretending that I was straight. I know my parents love me and that one day they will understand what I have been feeling all these years. Life is fragile and short and I need to do what makes me happy, and they will see in time that loving another human being is not all bad. There may even be grandchildren! I hope God can help them know that their son is always the same as he always was. A loving, compassionate, and truthful individual who desires the same from others. It is very difficult to form intimate relationships when parents disapprove. The sneaking around, the quiet conversations, and the feelings of guilt do not help to build healthy relationships. The only connection I had to the gay community at the time that I graduated from high school was on the internet. I found people I could talk to and relate to in a safe environment without giving away any personal information. It was wonderful to be talking and sharing with others who were feeling like I was. I believed that there was no way that the church could be a source of support, but what I thought was wrong. I now know that God has been following me on this journey since day one. My home church is friendly but not welcoming. I believe that if most people knew the real me I would not have the same relationship with the church. I was able to talk about my sexuality with my church pastor and the difficulties I was having with college while home on spring break in 1998. Never in my life did I think that I would hear loving and compassionate words about being gay coming from my church pastor. In my journey, I view this as a crossroads because the church and my inner being became reconnected at this point. I knew I was a child of God no matter whom I loved and that left me feeling content. Being gay has recently affected my home church involvement due to my feelings of becoming more comfortable with who I am. I feel like I am hiding something at times and would like to open up, but it is very difficult depending on the leadership in the church at the time. The pastor whom I felt so comfortable with is now gone and replaced with someone I cannot relate to. Even pastors who are comfortable with gay issues face extreme opposition from their congregations. My image of God used to be rooted in fear and condemnation, but now it is one of salvation, understanding, blessings, and love. Our churches need resources, guidance, and stability to serve those in need. Change and the end of homophobia will only happen through education and positive examples. My spiritual journey and faith in God has been strengthened through all of my struggles. I feel the joy and love of 26 Open Hands Coming Out Young A Prayer for Coming Out as Lesbian, Gay, or Bisexual Creator God, I am learning things all the time. It is a gift to be young and to get to know you and your world, your beautiful creation. I am also getting to know myself, and I’m discovering that sometimes I am attracted to members of my gender— other girls (or boys). Sometimes the things I feel are strong and deep. Sometimes it even feels like love. Sometimes I feel scared about these feelings. Sometimes I feel wonderful about them. I know that I am your creation, and you have given me a wonderful gift in my orientation. I pray for your supporting presence as I become more comfortable with my feelings. I pray for your guidance, that I may know when it is the right time for me to let other people know about this part of me. I pray for your supporting presence if I should be rejected, knowing that you, God who created me, will not reject me, that you will affirm me as part of your beautiful creation. In you I trust. Amen. From Coming Out Young and Faithful by Leanne McCall Tigert and Timothy J. Brown (Pilgrim Press, Spring 2001, used by permission). God in the person who I am today. I plan to be a teacher one day and want to help others understand that it is okay to be the person that God intended, no matter what others say. I am “just me” and that is all I can say. There is no mold into which I need to fit. God has blessed me with a gift, the ability to love another man in a way I never thought possible. Thanks be to God for the power of love and its ability to change lives. Amy Huff, Age 19, Portland, Maine Church of the Nazarene Unitarian Universalist Association My name is Amy, sometimes I go by Dylan. I’m 19, I live in Maine and I’m a lesbian and I also identify as transgender. I was baptized at my family church, the Church of the Nazarene. When I hit the age of thirteen I started thinking there was something wrong with me because I really lost interest in the boy next door, but man, was his sister something! At the same time, I rediscovered my faith and started attending church with my papa and grandpa. They’d pile all four of us kids into the van and we’d take a 10-minute ride down the road to a “Little Church in the Woods.” The pastor and his wife were good friends of my pa’s. I went through the normal routine of Sunday School, sermons, picnics, pot lucks and watching the babies. He’d be talking about how we would be saved if we put our love and trust in Jesus. I tried so hard to pay attention, but I had so much running through my head. I thought about talking to my pastor because I trusted him and it really started to get to me, but I didn’t. I think the reason for that was, I just didn’t feel like being criticized and going through a replay of The Exorcist. I stopped going to church again when my papa passed away because I was angry at God, and then I started thinking that this was God’s way of punishing me for being gay. With my faith in question and my sexuality following closely behind, I went on with life as usual and retreated more into my own little world. I figured that church couldn’t help me—so nothing or nobody can. I met my boyfriend Shawn three years later. He came from a fairly religious family. His family got me going back to church and this time it was really interesting. The pastor from this church was a big Bible-preaching man. He came up from down South and he really showed it. I went just about every Sunday and sat next to Shawn and held his hand, pretending to be happy. His dad talked to the pastor about this, me and Shawn holding each other’s hands. So one day the pastor pulled us into his office and talked about it. He kept saying that we should wait till we were out of church and stuff. He then went on talking to me about my home life. He kept saying, “I know things aren’t all that great and if there’s anything you want to talk about, you can talk to me anytime.” I started getting really paranoid. “Oh no. I think he knows I’m in so much trouble,” I kept repeating in my head. He finally let us go and life went on as usual. All that week I kept thinking, “Oh no, he knows—I’m caught and I’m in big trouble.” The next Sunday service, it was really funny how he worked the whole gay discussion into his sermon. They’re disgraces and are going to hell, I heard. That really got me not wanting to be there or go back. I stuck it out for a couple more weeks and finally broke down. I first told Shawn about my sexuality, who was pretty okay with it. “Well, that would explain a lot,” he said. I told him that I was going to go to church anymore and we’d be better off as friends. I jumped back into my hole. When I was 16, I met Beth. We were together for a couple of weeks and within those weeks she got me going to church again. This time it was a Unitarian church. The reverend was a woman, and the whole congregation was really open-minded. I talked to the pastor a few times and I brought up my being gay. She was totally okay with it. She helped me realize that being gay and loving God were totally cool. I finally had found some acceptance within a faith group and also within myself. Ryan Derek Gonzalez, Age 17, California United Methodist The coming out process for many gay and lesbian people is usually agonizing and painful. I like to compare it to vomiting: you know that it’s coming; you dread it to no end; you try to postpone it for as long as possible; but eventually you just can’t hold it in any longer and you puke. Once it’s out of your system though, you feel one hundred percent better. This is the exact same way I felt towards coming out to my family. In retrospect, coming out to my family was probably one of the best things that ever happened to me. Coming out was like a rebirth of my soul. I know this sounds cheesy, but it’s the truth. After I came out, I was free to be exactly the person God had created me to be. When I started sexually experimenting with my male best friend at the age of fourteen, the thought that I was participating in an “abominable sin” never once entered my mind. In 27 Open Hands fact, up until I was about fifteen, I didn’t even know that being gay was thought of as a “crime against God.” I did, however, feel some guilt within me after I would experiment with my friend. The guilt I felt was caused by the thought that I had become a “faggot.” Eventually I overcame that guilt because it just felt right to be with another boy. A year later, I met the boy that I would spend the next ten months in a relationship with. At this point we were both about fifteen and in the closet. Two weeks into our relationship I decided to come out to my family. It was a few days before Thanksgiving and I was busy preparing the individual letters that I would give to my parents and siblings explaining to them how much I loved them and how I was gay. My plan was to give them the letters the day after Thanksgiving so that I wouldn’t ruin the holiday. Somehow my plan blew up in my face and I ended up telling them Thanksgiving night. It was definitely the most emotional Thanksgiving I’ve ever had, but it was also quite successful. The role of homosexuality in religion was never really discussed with me during the next few months. It wasn’t until my boyfriend came out to his family that I realized how much Christians despised homosexuality. It was a huge shock to me to see how my boyfriend’s mother tried relentlessly to make her son straight. I couldn’t understand nor believe that Christians felt justified in hating homosexuality. I painfully watched my boyfriend suffer from his mother’s constant pressure to be “normal.” I felt so guilty that I had never been put through that kind of trauma. It seemed like there was absolutely nothing I could do for him except to tell him that it would all work out someday. I contacted the local PFLAG president and she invited my family and me to one of their monthly meetings. She also recommended that I contact the minister of the gay welcoming, Wesley United Methodist Church. My mother and I met with this minister shortly after that. The minister, Jan Everhart, explained to me that the Bible can be interpreted in many ways and that you can be gay and Christian at the same time. My meeting with Jan made me re-evaluate my theories on religion and God. I decided to attend a service at Wesley with my mom. I expected to feel incredibly uncomfortable and out of place. Instead, the people there made me feel right at home. I sat down and listened intently to Jan’s sermon. I remember towards the end of her sermon she said, “And we are all God’s children—and he loves each and every one of us.” At that point I felt something within me that I had never felt before. It was such a beautiful feeling, but it hit me like a ton of bricks. I realized at that miraculous moment that there was indeed a God, and that he loved me very much. At this realization I began to cry uncontrollably. After getting in touch with my spirituality, I’ve realized that no one can interfere with or judge my relationship with God. I also know now that God has been and always will be in my heart. I am thankful to have come to these realizations at such an early age. I wish that more of my gay peers could have these beautiful, life-saving realizations. I trust that God is Love and that he will always be there for anyone who opens their heart to him. Bill of Rights for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Questioning Youth and Young Adults in the Church I. The right to fair and accurate information about sexual orientation and gender identity in church school materials, youth group materials, church publications, and textbooks. II. The right to unbiased information about the historical and continuing contributions of lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender people in the church, in Christianity, and in other religions. III. The right to positive role models, both clergy and laity, both in person and in the curriculum; the right to accurate and nonjudgmental information about themselves which is delivered by training people who both inform and affirm lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning youth and young adults. IV. The right to attend all churches and events free from verbal and physical harassment, where religious practice, not survival, is the priority. V. The right to attend churches where respect and dignity for all youth and young adults, including lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning youth and young adults, is a standard set by the denomination, supported by respective national and regional youth and young adult ministries groups, and enforced by every national and regional staff, lay worker, and clergy member. VI. The right to be included in all support programs that exist to help youth and young adults deal with the difficulties of adolescence. VII. The right to be included in all social and other support programs specifically for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning youth and young adults. VIII. The right to representatives at all levels of the church who advocate for their freedoms, rather than reinforce hatred and prejudice. IX. The right to a heritage free of crippling self-hate and unchallenged discrimination. X. The right to the sustaining and nurturing love of God. From Coming Out Young and Faithful by Timothy Brown and Leanne Tigert (Pilgrim Press, Spring 2001, Used by permission). Special thanks to Dr. Virginia Uribe and Project 10 of the Los Angeles City School District. Winter 2001 28 Winter 2001 29 From: RevChipVA To: Pat “Q” Sub: Its OK! You’ll survive and probably have fun! Hello Pat “Q”—Thanks for your e-mail and your MANY questions. Glad you were referred in my direction. Not sure I can answer them all, but want to let you know you’re asking ALL the right questions—of me and of yourself. And, you are asking all the same questions that other young persons who are discovering their sexual orientation ask too! How can you really know if you’re gay? When and how to come out to friends and family? How do you find the right person? Even—can you still be a Christian if you are queer? You are on-target and I’ll try to give you some clues and direction. I may not get it all into this email—but I’m sure you’ll have more questions, too. I couldn’t tell from your email whether you are in junior high, senior high or college—but that doesn’t really matter. People begin understanding themselves as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender at different points in their lives. Sexual orientation and gender identification are not choices—but gifts from God that we discover and learn about all through our lives. Some of us grow up knowing we are “different” from the heterosexual majority early in life—others seem to be late bloomers. For about 8 years I was a volunteer facilitator at a youth group in Washington, DC for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning (lgbt?) youth. “Questioning” refers to those who might not be ready to name their sexual orientation—but knew something was going on that they wanted to explore. On a typical Saturday we would have between 20 and 40 young people, between 14 and 21, drop in for organized discussions, guest speakers, special social activities, and support groups. With so much information out on the internet, in the media and in the schools about being gay or lesbian—I met lots of youth who were beginning to claim and name their sexual self-understanding as teenagers. We even had a couple kids who came into the group when they were 12 or 13 years old. And they were very clear about being attracted to youth of their own gender—even though they had never dated or had any physical relationship, yet. That’s one of those strange things about knowing “if you are or if you aren’t.” You know. And until you are clear and comfortable with what you know—don’t feel forced to label yourself or do anything you are NOT comfortable with doing. OK? Hey, before I go I want to give you a resource to check out. If you can go to www.gaylesteens.about.com on your computer—there is a whole section on YOUTH and lots of links to great websites. Some are created by other q-kidz to tell about themselves and friends. Fun stuff. And you’ll get to read about other youth asking some of the same questions that I hear you asking. TTL —Chip E-Mails to a Young “Q” Assurance and Information for a Questioning Youth Chip Aldridge, Jr. 30 Open Hands From: RevChipVA To: Pat “Q” Sub: Finding a Queer Youth Group Well P-Q! You have been checking out the links for youth from PlanetOut. Thanks for pointing me toward the section on Youth Guardian Services (YGS at www.youth-guard.org). It’s great to know that there are adults who are helping try to make the internet safe for young lgbt persons. Sort of a “Queer—Safe Surf of Approval”! <grin> So you think you might want to visit a youth group. The one in Washington, DC is called SMYAL (for Sexual Minority Youth Assistance League—that’s a mouthful). I think there are more than 200 of these groups across the country. Most are located in good-size cities or towns—and are usually privately run by professionals with the help of volunteers from the lgbt community. Of course you’ll find these Q-Youth groups in big cities like New York, Miami, DC, Atlanta, Denver, Chicago, LA and San Francisco—but, there are also groups in lots of places like: Nashua, NH; Tulsa, OK; Charlottesville, VA; Schofield, WI; Birmingham, AL; Indianapolis, IN; and Albuquerque, NM. After your last email, I was looking at current magazines and spotted a resource put out by XY (a guy-oriented q-youth publication) called “The XY Survival Guide—Everything you need to know about being young and Gay” by Benjie Nycum. Like I said, it is guy-oriented, and some of the writing is pretty blunt (I haven’t Youth Sites on the Internet All begin http://www. advocatesforyouth.org For developing programs and policies which help young people make informed and responsible decisions about their sexual health. doe.mass.edu/lss/gsa/ MA guide for setting up gay/straight groups in schools. gaylesteens.about.com Hosted by a youth services librarian in NYC, links to personal homepages of glbtq teens. glsen.org Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network. nyacyouth.org National Youth Advocacy Coalition advocates for LGBT youth. oasismag.com Oasis monthly online LGBT youth magazine. outproud.org OutProud, The National Coalition for GLBT Youth. <about_outproud.html> Wide range of resources available for youth and educators pflag.org Homepage of Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays with links to local chapters. queeramerica.com Database published by OutProud. safespaces.org Information in both English and French on youth groups in Canada. youthresource.com LGBT Youth Resource, library, peer chats, and resources. spotted a similar publication that is girl-oriented, yet), but it has lots of great information—like contact phone numbers and email addresses for youth groups all across the country. Keep in mind—EVERY group is different and will have a different style of helping youth. But, the main thing to look for is a SAFE place to be who you are—and to meet other young people who are like you! If you are in a rare but not unheard of situation, the high school you attend may have a “gay/lesbian and straight alliance” club. One resource on starting a school group is GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network and Student Pride, www.studentprideusa.org). And, I did want to let you know that it is now really common for colleges and universities to have lgbt groups that offer support and social activities. Sometimes there is even a staff person in charge of lgbt activities on campus. So, depending on how comfortable you are with being “out” on your college campus, that’s one of the things you might look for if you are checking out particular schools. Speaking of being “out of the closet” about being lgbt—I want to remind you that it is OK to take your time, don’t feel pushed to publicly identify yourself before you are ready. There is still lots of risk associated with being a young person who is queer—and I don’t want you to be one of those front page stories about “fagbashing” or “dyke-killing” that prove the need for lots more education and protection for folks like us. Got to run. More later, Rev. C. Shaping An Inclusive Church Quarterly magazine of Welcoming congregations in the U.S. and Canada Annual subscriptions $20 ($25 outside U.S.) Mail to Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Ave. Chicago, IL 60641 Phone 773/736-5526 Fax 773/736-5475 www.rcp.org/openhands/ index.html Winter 2001 31 Sample homepages of the 200+ youth groups across North America: cafepride.com Café Pride is Chicago’s coffeehouse for GLBT youths 21 and younger. “We are a youth outreach of Pride Ministries.” lyric.org Community Center for LGBTQ Youth 23 & Under in San Francisco, CA (415/703.6150). projectyes.org Project YES is an educational organization whose goal is to ensure the healthy development of GLBT youth (Project YES, 5275 Sunset Drive, Miami, Florida 33143. 305/663-7195, E-mail: communicate@projectyes.org). smyal.org Sexual Minority Youth Assistance League provides support groups and resources for lgbtq youth (SMYAL, 410 7th Street, SE Washington, DC. Phone: 202/546-5940). smyrc.org Drop-in center for LGBTQ youth and their allies, 21 and under in the Portland, OR area (424 East Burnside 503/872-9664). timeoutyouth.com To give support to LGBTQ youth, 13-23, in Charlotte area (1900 The Plaza Charlotte, NC, 704/344-8335). From: RevChipVA To: Pat “Q” Sub: Love at first sight? Well friend Pat! So you have found someone. Does that person know you’ve found them? Not stalking are you! <grin> Oh, I know I’ve had “crushes” before and the guy never knew it—but I bet I put off some signals I didn’t even know about! Here is one clue and a caution. Remember that when you are attracted to someone your heart, head, gut and instincts get all messed up—so that it is very easy to imagine the other person is sending you non-verbal or verbal “messages” that lead you to think that person is equally attracted to you. Be careful! Proceed with caution. Time! When I led group discussions at SMYAL—there were some groups that were separated by gender. I would facilitate a free-flowing discussion among the MGG (Male Gender Group)—and often the topic was dating, romance, broken hearts and new love. Sigh. Sometimes we return on a Saturday to find that a half-dozen new romances had bloomed and died on the vine in the previous week. But the thing I learned in listening to the young guys was the clarity with which many of them could name what type of relationship they were looking for—and also what they WERE NOT looking for. The guys sometimes talked about different kinds of “dates”: Friend-Dates, Hanging Out-Dates, Dancing-Dates, Romance-Dates, Serious-Dates, Sex-Dates, etc. (I don’t remember all the categories). A 14- or 15-year-old who was just coming out as a queer teen was looking for a very different kind of friendship and depth of interaction than an 19- or 20-year-old who had been out for three or four years. And even if you are the same chronological age—how long you have been self-identifying as lgbt weighs heavily on what you need and want in your dating or friendships with other queer youth. I don’t know what all was discussed in the FGG (Female Gender Group). The women adult volunteers facilitated those groups. There was one day when it got REALLY loud in the room in which the FGG was meeting. Roaring loud. And, the only word that clearly came through the wall was “PENIS!”—then great laughter. The guys in my group could sort of guess what was going on in there. No one said being queer couldn’t be fun. And PQ—I was just thinking. If you want a good way to test yourself in this new found romance with someone of the same gender—treat it with all the same rules and measures that you previously did when you dated persons of another sex. You’ve already grown to understand what is comfortable and correct for you when dating. Don’t throw all that out the window just because you’re queer. Use all that experience to make sure you are asking the right questions, understanding your feelings and treating that person with the same respect and caring that you would if your were in those previous “boy-girl” situations. Am I giving you too much advice? Well, you keep asking me more questions like you are hungry for answers. Late night, early tomorrow —Chip 32 Open Hands From: RevChipVA To: Pat “Q” Sub: God loves us queer folk, too! Way to go Pat! You visited a youth group and had a great time! I’m proud of you. And you actually ran into someone else from your school. Too much! It’s a small queer world. Every youth groups run differently—so enjoy the special opportunities yours offers. At SMYAL we encouraged the new youth participants to attend “Support One”—where a series of discussion topics was covered in about an eight-week rotation. We talked about: coming out (to family, to friends, at school); bisexuality and transgender issues (since these are less familiar areas for most youth); drugs and alcohol (along with other health concerns); “the blues,” depression and suicide; safer-sex, negotiating and communicating (yes is yes and no is NO!); dating, romance and relationship; glbt culture and history—and other topics were added (like self-defense and safety on the street) as we had guest speakers available. You might not know it yet, but some of the youth involved in your queer youth group may be exploring issues of being transgender — and there are good resources available for them at the homepage of the International Foundation for Gender Education (www.ifge.org) and American Boyz (www.amboyz.org). Because the staff at SMYAL knew I am involved in the United Methodist Church, they often asked me to lead a regular discussion with the youth on religion and spirituality. When we hit the topic of religion, almost without exception, every young person had some example of where a church or church leader had been hurtful or really hateful about glbt persons. Often the nasty church discussion or the vicious preaching went on without recognizing how it personally touched someone in the pew—but, other times it was directed at the young person—attacking their queerness in a painful way. The message I tried to leave with the youth at SMYAL is that religion is yours to value. Ignorant or bigoted church people, even if they are clergy, have no right to take away your option to be faithful followers of your religion. The resources of scripture, spirituality, and religion are the possession of glbt youth to claim—not to be given up simply because someone attempts to use them against you. God loves us queer folk, too! When you get to the point that you are ready to talk with you parents about your new understanding of yourself, be VERY ready for their reaction—and prepare for the worst. Even the best parents can find this a difficult issue to accept and understand. Give them some credit for the fact that you’ve struggled with it for a long time—and they are usually being hit cold with a pretty hefty new understanding of their child. One clue about parental response to a child “coming out” is the understanding that parents have to “grieve” a whole understanding of who they thought their child was—the life and relationship they anticipated for you (marriage, in-laws, grandchildren). Some of those pieces might still come to pass—but, it still won’t be the same scrapbook of memories they assumed. I want to encourage you to seek some resources for your parents. There is a wonderful organization called PFLAG (Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays). They have a homepage (www.pflag.org), a national office, and regional chapters. They have some great advice about the “do’s and don’ts” of coming out to your family. Contact information from PFLAG also helps a parent understand that yours in NOT the first family to experience this new information. Well, when you get around to that conversation—I will pray for you and your family that it goes well. That’s all for now. Your friend in Christ —Rev. Chip ▼ William D. “Chip” Aldridge, Jr., is a clergy member of the Baltimore-Washington Conference of the United Methodist Church. He is active at Dumbarton United Methodist Church in the Georgetown neighborhood of Washington, D.C., and a member of the board of the Reconciling Ministries Network, formerly known as the Reconciling Congregation Program. Reading suggestions for professionals working with LGBT youth: Lesbian & Gay Youth: Care and Counseling, Caitlin Ryan & Donna Futterman (Columbia Press, NY, 1998). Recommended by National Education Association. Queer Kids: The Challenges and Promise for Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Youth, Robert E. Owens (Harrington Park Press NY, 1998). 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 Open Hands Vol 16 No 3 - What about us kids? Children & Youth Share Our Struggle https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/568e676c2189d2ee0d06ba16f2752f6c.pdf cd8074a2a159b55b4c5fd6f2eff01844 Issue An issue of a recurring publication. Volume Number The volume number of the issue 16 Issue Number The number of the issue (within a volume) 4 Publication Year The year the issue was published 2001 Publication Date The date the issue was published Spring Text Any textual data included in the document 2 Open Hands Vol. 16 No. 4 Spring 2001 Shaping an Inclusive Church Affirming Congregation Programme More Light Presbyterians Open & Affirming Ministries Open and Affirming Program Reconciling Ministries Network Reconciling in Christ Program Welcoming & Affirming Baptists Executive Publisher Marilyn Alexander Editor Chris Glaser Designer In Print—Jan Graves Marketing Manager Jacki Belile Editorial Advisory Committee Vaughn Beckman, O&A Daphne Burt, RIC Ann Marie Coleman, ONA Chris Copeland, W&A Bobbi Hargleroad, MLP Tom Harshman, O&A Alyson Huntly, ACP Bonnie Kelly, ACP Susan Laurie, RCP Samuel E. Loliger, ONA Ruth Moerdyk, SCN Caroline Presnell, RCP Paul Santillán, RCP Julie Sevig, RIC Kelly Sprinkle, W&A Kathy Stayton, W&A Margarita Suaréz, ONA Judith Hoch Wray, O&A and Program Coordinators Open Hands is the quarterly magazine of the welcoming movement, a consortium of programs that support individuals and congregations in efforts to welcome lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, and transgenders in all areas of church life. Open Hands was founded and is published by the Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. of the Reconciling Ministries Network (United Methodist), in cooperation with the six ecumenical partners listed above. Each program is a national network of local congregations and ministries that publicly affirm their welcome of LGBT people, their families and friends. These seven programs, along with Supportive Congregations (Brethren/Mennonite [www.webcom. com/bmc], Oasis Congregations (Episcopal), Welcoming Congregations (Unitarian Universalist), and INCLUSIVE Congregations (United Kingdom)—offer hope that the church can be a more inclusive community. Subscription is $20 for four issues ($25 outside the U.S.). Single copies and back issues are $6; quantities of 10 or more, $4 each. Subscriptions, requests for advertising rates, and other business correspondence should be sent to: Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 openhands@rcp.org www.rcp.org/openhands/index.html Member, The Associated Church Press © 2001 Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. Open Hands is a registered trademark. ISSN 0888-8833 Printed on recycled paper. DOWN ON THE FARM Addressing Rural Issues A Rural Indignity 4 CHRIS GLASER A city boy goes country—briefly. Down on the Farm 5 JAN GRIESINGER “We love it out here in the country.” We’re Family 6 HAROLD BROCKUS Family is in the eye of the beholder. A Thanksgiving Conversation 8 GENE E. MILLER “Can a homosexual be a Christian?” my stepfather asked. On the Farm “Down Under” 10 VERA BOURNE Hostility in the Australian countryside. More Light in Timber Country 12 BEN DAKE How a small church in a timber town became welcoming. Anonymous Rural Stoles, Anonymous Rural Ministries 14 MARTHA JUILLERAT “Sacrifice is living in a small faith community where it is assumed I am heterosexual.” –From the stole of an anonymous gay minister. Welcoming Conversations 16 Suggestions for Small Town and Rural Congregations STANLEY N. OLSON “Bishop, this is a small town. How can our church share the gospel?” Bringing the Conversation Home to Rural America 18 Welcoming Conference in Montana JEAN LARSON-HURD “The bishop had come after all. Picketers didn’t. No one stomped off in rage.” Urban Legends 20 Deconstructing Urbocentrism BRIAN WATSON “Instead of thinking with urbocentric logic of city/farm, we would be wiser to think of people living in insulated communities…” Spring 2001 3 Publisher Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (UMC) Reconciling Ministries Network Marilyn Alexander, Coordinator 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 773/736-5526 www.rcp.org Ecumenical Partners Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada) Ron Coughlin, Coordinator P.O. Box 333, Station Q, Toronto, Ontario CANADA M4T 2M5 416/466-1489 www.affirmunited.org • acpucc@aol.com More Light Presbyterians (PCUSA) Michael J. Adee, Coordinator 369 Montezuma Ave. PMB #447 Santa Fe, NM 87501-2626 505/820-7082 www.mlp.org Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ) John Wade Payne, Interim Coordinator P.O. Box 44400, Indianapolis, IN 46244 941/728-8833 www.sacredplaces.com/glad Open and Affirming Program (UCC) Ann B. Day, Coordinator P.O. Box 403, Holden, MA 01520 508/856-9316 www.UCCcoalition.org Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran) Bob Gibeling, Coordinator 2466 Sharondale Drive, Atlanta, GA 30305 404/266-9615 www.lcna.org Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (ABC/USA) Brenda J. Moulton, Coordinator P.O. Box 2596, Attleboro Falls, MA 02763 508/226-1945 users.aol.com/wabaptists SUSTAINING THE SPIRIT God’s Apology 23 A short story set in the South Dakota Badlands PAUL MCCOMAS MINISTRIES RETREATS Taking a Chance on God for Us: John J. McNeill 26 RALPH WILLIAMS FAMILY Gay Godparents—“What’s the Big Deal?” 27 JAN, ANNE, AND REBECCA THOMAS CAMPUS What Is It Like Being Gay at Calvin College? 30 BENJAMIN P. MCCLOSKEY WELCOMING COMMUNITIES ........... 32 MOVEMENT NEWS ............................ 32 Next Issue: YOU ARE THE BELOVED! Call for articles, litanies, rituals, and columns for Open Hands Winter 2002 Singing God’s Song In A Foreign Land Stories of Resistance in the Church Theme Section: How do we resist the “powers and principalities” of the church? What are the ways that we have declared to ecclesiastical councils, “It is neither safe nor prudent to do anything against conscience. Here we stand! We can do no other!” What “theses” or expectations have we nailed to the door of the church? In what ways do we proclaim and celebrate God’s love and reign anyway? How do we negotiate without compromising our integrity? How do we resist being co-opted or selling out? How do we oppose without becoming what we abhor? 900 to 2500 words per article. Ministries Section: Columns may include: Welcoming (the process of becoming welcoming), Connections (with other justice issues), Worship, Spirituality, Retreats, Resources (books and videos), Outreach, Leadership, Marriage, Health, Youth, Campus, Children, and Family. These brief articles may or may not have to do with the theme of the issue. 750-1000 words. Contact with ideas by September 1, 2001 Manuscript deadline: November 5, 2001 Chris Glaser, Phone/Fax 404/622-4222 or e-mail at ChrsGlaser@aol.com 991 Berne St. SE, Atlanta, GA 30316-1859 USA www.ChrisGlaser.com 4 Open Hands IIn February, on a missionary journey of sorts, I suffered an indignity of which not even the apostle Paul could boast. I was spat on by an alpaca, a relative of the llama. It was preferable to the usual scriptures about homosexuality expectorated on me. The broader context was a trip with lesbian evangelist Janie Spahr and others on behalf of her outfit, That All May Freely Serve (TAMFS), to the small towns and countryside of South Carolina. The narrower context was a visit to an alpaca farm run by the spouse of the chaplain of Presbyterian College in Clinton, a campus described by those who came to hear us as an unsafe place for LGBT people. The trip had begun at a high-steepled church in a large town, where a retired physician (whom we thought would know better) insisted on inextricably linking homosexuality with AIDS. To show his “openness” he mentioned living next door to a gay couple. When we came home from the event, my host looked up the doctor’s address in the phone book to see who the gay couple was. The town is small enough that my host could thus name the couple! The trip also included a visit to a goat farm and folk art studio owned by a lesbian couple who are members of the largely straight but very LGBT-positive North Anderson Community Church, Presbyterian. At worship that morning two literal “kids” were present: goats born the day before. We drank coffee from mugs shaped and fired by another member who crafts ceramic art, and is on an unconventional spiritual quest, recently returned from a visit to a guru in India. He is also an active participant in Mel White’s group, Soulforce. The spectrum of attitudes, ignorance, information, resistance, acceptance, and advocacy represented in this non-urban area could as easily be experienced where I live, Atlanta, or where I grew up, Los Angeles. Quick estimations of the nonurban psyche are foolhardy. On a similar missionary journey “Feed my alpacas.” Glaser along with the Rev. Patti Snyder, Christian educator Mardee Rightmeyer, and the Rev. Janie Spahr do a variation on Jesus telling Peter to “feed my sheep.” through the countryside of Iowa sponsored by the regional UCC conference years ago, I was struck by the depth of those clergy who attended our “dog-and-pony show.” One minister wanted to know, if the church was changing its attitudes toward homosexuality, “Where’s the repentance?” In other words, shouldn’t the church first offer its mea culpa to the GLBT community before moving on to welcome it? Another explained that the smallness of his community assured that homosexuality would be less “an issue” than a person everyone knew and cared about. Jesus took his ministry from the rural regions of Galilee to the city of Jerusalem, with images of sown seeds, awaiting harvest, weeds mixed in wheat, forgiving farmer father, lilies of the field, fallen sparrows, mother hen with her brood, lost sheep, good shepherd, and so on. The first “least of these,” the first marginalized people he addressed, were in non-urban areas. The first disciples he called were fishermen. The first evangelist, a woman at a village well. Those from urban areas, longing for simpler lives, may sentimentalize rural life, just as those in rural areas may either “fab-u-lize” (yes, my own word) or demonize urban life. The truth is, the truth may be found in either place, or even in between— suburban life. Jesus shared his truth on a mount in Matthew, on a level field in Luke, and in a city in all four gospels. So should we. No matter what alpacas do to us. “Ewe.” Author at the moment “impacted” by alpaca. Photos by Janet Henley Spring 2001 5 This is one woman/pastor’s reflections on rural life in southeast ern, Appalachian Ohio in the hills along the Ohio River near West Virginia. I do campus ministry at a large public university of 20,000 in a county whose total population is 60,000. The university makes our community somewhat more cosmopolitan than many rural areas, so I don’t want to claim that my perspective is somehow typically rural. I grew up in a rural area becoming suburban. My parents’ roots and many of my early years and summers were in Iowa/Nebraska farmland. I have lived here more than 24 years, most of that time on a 150-acre ridgetop 10 miles out in the country from our county’s biggest town of 10,000. When I use “we” in what follows, I am speaking for many long term area residents though certainly not all. We love it out here in the country. We love the slower pace, the lower cost of living, the lack of traffic, the fresh air, the brilliance of the stars at night without city lights to obscure them, the wondrous beauty of forest and field, of rushing creek and steep cliffs, the voices of owls and hawks. We don’t always have to have a calendar date to meet because we see each other at the post office, the grocery store, the farmers’ market, church and school. If there is a death or serious illness, you will hear about it from someone within hours. Not all GLBT folks want to live in the big city. Yes, we go there monthly to get our urban fix— the concerts, the hard-to-find part for our vacuum cleaner, the diverse restaurants, a place to dance, an art film, a good bookstore. And yes, it makes our eyes light up when we see the variety of organizations and events available in urban GLBT newspapers. But the grass seems greener here. We wouldn’t trade what we have, our roots in the land where we live— the apples we eat from the trees we planted, the asparagus from the patch nurtured over many years, the grape vine planted decades ago by the folks who lived there before us, the rocks we hauled to the gully for erosion control, the pine seedlings we planted that are now 30 feet tall, the knowledge of how the hillsides look so differently in the winter, spring, summer, and fall. I have a very faint glimmer of how native people in this country feel about land on which their roots are very deep, indeed sacred land. I feel good that I know my neighbors’ names and can count on them to pull me out of the ditch or warn me when something is amiss on our dirt road. Some of us are raising children or grandchildren; some are caring for parents or relatives. Family ties are very strong and most local folks’ social lives are one with family and/or church, with possibly the Elks Club or the Grange thrown in. Country lesbian friends of mine have joined their local Grange and saved it from the disintegration that has happened to so many rural institutions when old people can’t sustain their past level of activity. (If you don’t know, ask a country person in your life what The Grange is.) Our dinners out are often at the small town senior citizens centers, volunteer fire department monthly fundraising smorgasbords, or church ice cream socials. Parents and families are as welcoming as those most any other place. A small town dad who has no higher education drives his high school age son 15 miles to attend a Gay Straight Alliance meeting. The Athens water treatment plant manager is an African American lesbian raising 2 bi-racial daughters with her white lesbian partner. They live way back in the country and have had few hassles. Challenges in Paradise There are, of course, many rural realities that constrict our lives. We are in Appalachia, where the natural resources would make us wealthy if only we owned them. Huge logs, natural gas, oil and coal are shipped out daily for someone else’s profit. The poverty rate here is the highest in the state of Ohio. Is this connected to the outside ownership of resources noted above? Most of my neighbors’ adult children want to stay here but are frequently forced to the cities for employment. Many people would like to farm but can’t support themselves on the land and must work in town. There are no GLBT bars, clubs, community centers, sports events, news media. If we want a social event, we create it. How do we find each other, you wonder? The old fashioned way: by word of mouth, through mutual friends, the grapevine. Sometimes folks meet people from their rural hometown in the big city GLBT bars. The isolation can be tough. (City folks tell me this even happens to them!) I get calls from lesbians in neighboring counties wondering how they make friends or meet other lesbians. I usually don’t have much to offer them. There is no ano- We don’t always have to have a calendar date to meet because we see each other at the post office, the grocery store, the farmers’ market, church and school. 6 Open Hands How do we find each other, you wonder? The old fashioned way: by word of mouth, through mutual friends, the grapevine. nymity. Even if you live back in the woods, people will know what you are up to. In some cases you become a pariah and have to move to the city for survival. The stereotype about gays being rich can definitely be trashed. GLBT folks I know include a school janitor, a grocery clerk, a railroad engineer, a prison guard (need I mention that the prison industrial complex is a booming employer in rural areas), cab driver, assistants for disabled people. And yes there are professors, doctors, social workers, teachers, and a few closeted clergy, but we are a significant number only in small college towns like mine. Racism exists here, making life immeasurably more difficult for GLBT people of color than for white folks with privilege. (I hear that is true in cities too!) GLBT identity is by and large an urban phenomenon—a certain look, a specific neighborhood, bars suited to your preference. Here many of us have a strong GLBT identity and quite a few of us are out, but we more naturally divide along lines of our own interest, whether that be playing cards, hiking, singing, family, gardening, raising goats, collecting quilts. I think as our community matures and life in the big world is less homophobic, this pattern is showing up in urban areas as well. Most lesbians over 30 in our area seem settled into busy lives that don’t center around lesbian culture. I have spent some of my time over the last 20 years developing the Susan B. Anthony Memorial UnRest Home Women’s Land Trust as an intentional residential community and feminist education center. We have a women’s campground and have hosted potlucks, volunteer work days, Solstice celebrations, swimming parties, workshops, video discussion nights, and educational forums. These have been avenues for lesbians coming out, networking, and friendship, and have contributed positively to overcoming the isolation. What About Church? Since social life often revolves around family life which revolves around church life, it is a very tough decision to come out and risk losing the whole ball of wax. Some quietly stay with church; some just leave, grieving the community of folks that loved them so much as they were growing up in Sunday School. In our college town, several of the mainline churches have out GLBT members and welcoming pastors but none have been through an open and affirming decision-making process— not even the local Unitarians! The Quaker meeting stands out, having made a public statement of welcome almost 15 years ago. If you go out past the town limits, there are no churches who would speak a positive word unless you drive for a few hours to the big city. This is part of the reason United Campus Ministry where I serve decided to offer public worship services several times a year, usually in conjunction with Coming Out Week or Pride Week on campus. The hymns, litanies, prayers, sermons, and time for sharing church/ We’re Family Harold Brockus We all have our stereotypes. Some of us hold them in abashed public silence because we’re privately embarrassed by them. In the comfort of friendships they do pop up and out as we relax our guard and vent our prejudices. Happily, there are serendipitous moments when our personal stereotypes are exposed and confounded by life. I experienced such a moment while transporting our Open Hands editor to a tension-filled workshop held in a small town of the Presbytery of Tampa Bay. Many in our conservative presbytery had protested Chris Glaser’s presence in our dialogue about a constitutional ban on the ordination of lesbians, gays, and other “sinners.” On that day, we arrived in Lakeland, Florida, early in the morning. Lakeland had been chosen because it is the center of the most conservative section of the presbytery. After leaving the interstate, I pulled my car over when a tire went flat. I called the host church to arrange a ride for our speaker, put on the small spare, and found a garage nearby. I called Bill, an elder, to pick me up. I left the car with some trepidation. A miniature rainbow windsock hangs from my rearview mirror. The garage was the ultimate redneck, greaseball establishment. Unshaven, disheveled workers labored in a mass of dirt and discarded parts that made the neighborhood garage of my blue-collar childhood look spiffy by comparison. In a rush of paranoia, I imagined some act of vandalism on my beloved old Acura by the grime shop. As Bill and I returned to the workshop, he offered to pick up my car so I could stay at the meeting. After the formalities and lingering conversation ended, Bill approached with the keys to my Acura. I asked, “How much?” Bill responded, “They said, gesturing toward the rainbow windsock, ‘Tell him there’s no charge. We’re family.’” Harold M. Brockus, Ph.D., is pastor of Good Samaritan Church (Presbyterian/United Church of Christ) in Pinellas Park, Florida, and a longtime straight ally. Spring 2001 7 coming out stories are always very moving and people seem so grateful to have a setting to put all the pieces together. Participants get clarity and courage to live out their daily lives among the people who raised them. While this serves mostly students, faculty and staff, some born-and-reared local folks attend also. In recent services the following stories have been told: • A woman just divorced who has three children attended our service with her lesbian partner. She was thrown out of her Church of God congregation by her father, who is the pastor. • A 25-year-old man who has just finished college lives in the country with his parents who are not in good health. He has found a church he likes but is uncertain about whether to come out there. • A 35-year-old man, whose parents, siblings and extended family have lived here for generations has chosen a Presbyterian church in town to attend rather than deal with his family’s fundamentalist church nearby. • A 21-year-old woman just finished a stay at a cult de-programming center located in our rural area. She is struggling to come out against her upbringing in a patriarchal, physically abusive Pentecostal Apostolic cult. • A young lesbian who had grown up in a rural Presbyterian church was not permitted to be an elder, so she and her partner and her whole family eventually left the church. Our occasional worship services are not the same as having an ongoing church community but they fill in the gaps and allow people to find others who are struggling with what it means to be Christian as a GLBT person or an ally. Blessing Same-Gender Couples Union ceremonies often include family members and co-workers who for the first time get a glimpse of a non-heterosexual community. For many folks it is a “don’t ask, don’t tell, but everyone knows anyhow” situation. I have done many union ceremonies over the past 24 years I have lived here. Couples find their way to me through the grapevine. Most of them have been rural residents from Ohio or West Virginia, generally with a high school education at best. One such ceremony involved a man who lived next door to his parents, farmed on the family home place, drove a school bus and served as lay pastor of the church his family attended. His ceremony was held in a gay bar in a small city 40 miles away. His parents were not invited. What does being a gay man with a partner mean in such a situation? Somehow it feels very different to me than being a gay man in Chicago when your parents live 200 miles away and your livelihood is not dependent on your family’s land and church. We really like it here— I said that already but it’s worth saying again. We bristle at the idea that country folks or high school drop outs are necessarily more homophobic than other people. We don’t take kindly to hillbilly or red neck or West Virginia or Kentucky jokes. We urge other people to stop running their class and regional superiority attitudes on us. We ask that you go deeper than seeing our scenic attractions and breathing our pure air. Find out what impact the increasing concentration of corporate ownership and global economics have on this country’s rural areas. Join all the environmental activist groups you can. And ask God/Goddess to give you a good country friend. You will be truly blessed. Jan Griesinger is a co-founder of the Susan B. Anthony Memorial UnRest Home Women’s Land Trust near Athens, Ohio. She is also Director of United Campus Ministry at Ohio University and the National Coordinator for Christian Lesbians OUT (CLOUT). 8 Open Hands II grew up on a small farm in northwest Iowa. I was reared by my parents and great-grandparents. My great-grandfather, a German immigrant, owned the farm. I lived there until I went to college. I am the oldest of five boys and we have always been a close family. In fact, to this day on most major holidays we are together. Rarely does a Christmas, Thanksgiving, Easter, Memorial Day, or Labor Day go by that we are not with each other. In addition to these days we often spend the Fourth of July together, plus birthdays, anniversaries, graduations and confirmations as we are able. Mealtime is an especially grand time, as we love to visit. Over the years we have many times solved the world’s problems during dinner! Our children were reared in the same manner. One of my brothers recently remarked that the kids were brought up more like brothers and sisters, than cousins. I think he is right. Growing up we were all Presbyterians. Primarily because that was the only church in our little town one mile away. When I was growing up we had about 160 people and one church. When I left for college we had about 160 people and one church. Today there are still about 160 people and one church. Two of my brothers have remained Presbyterian. Two have become Roman Catholic. My spouse, who was raised American Lutheran, and I joined the United Church of Christ 25 years ago when we left college and I went to my first teaching position. Four years later I went to seminary, became a United Church of Christ pastor and the rest, as they say, is history. Four years ago as we gathered for our annual Thanksgiving dinner my stepfather asked me a question for which I was not particularly prepared. He has been a part of the family since 1987 when he married my mother, who was widowed in 1984. We were gathering in the living room. Families had arrived one by one. The tables were set. The food was almost cooked. Aromas were wafting throughout the house. I was primarily engaged in watching the Dallas Cowboys. We were assembling to eat when out of nowhere (or at least that’s what it felt like) my stepfather asked me, “Gene, can a homosexual be a Christian?” Please understand that this was not exactly the question I anticipated we would discuss over Thanksgiving Dinner. “Can a homosexual be a Christian?” My initial thought was, “Oh great, this is going to a be wonderful Thanksgiving conversation.” But I knew that I had to say something that portrayed my true convictions, was simple to understand, and yet hopefully did not set up a win/lose scenario. So very hesitatingly and in a soft, but deliberate voice I said, “Well, I’ve come to believe that homosexuals are created by God. It is not something that they choose. And so if God creates them, yes, they can be Christians.” Then I waited for the reaction. From everyone. Almost immediately my one brother who is Roman Catholic and an administrator in a Catholic School, said, “I agree.” Huh? “I agree.” He then went on to tell about how when he was working on his Master’s Degree in guidance counseling he had become friends with one of the other students who had revealed himself to be gay towards the end of their course work. My brother decided that this man was still the same man today that he had known yesterday and that learning about his sexual orientation hadn’t changed a thing. From there we proceeded, over Thanksgiving Dinner, to have a reasoned, philosophical discussion about homosexuality. I won’t try to tell you that everyone agreed with our position, but I will tell you that each person was heard and that every person was given the opportunity to express their opinion and understandings and ask questions. No argument ensued, no one got angry and I think some came away from the table that day with at least a slightly different perspective. All in all, for a bunch of farmboys from northwest Iowa it was a good, healthy conversation! That night as we drove home my spouse and I revisited the conversation that had taken place over dinner. She said, “You know Gene, most families, especially those in a small town, could have never had the conversation your family just had.” I said “Yes, I know.” Recently, when I told my wife and daughter one night at the supper table that I had been asked to write an article for Open Hands on how we talk about gay and lesbian issues in rural communities my 18-year-old daughter, without hesitation, said, “I’ll tell you how we talk about gay and lesbian issues in a rural community,” and she promptly pointed to the closet in our entrance way. “That’s how we talk about it.” These words come from a child who has been raised and immersed in the convictions and theology of the United Church of Christ. I wish this were not true, but in our experience it is, although I think it is becoming less so all the time. Because we are constantly being made aware of it by the media, we can no longer bury our heads in the sand. While in the past we would have ignored it, television now brings gay pride parades into our homes, newspapers tell us of the happenings in Vermont, and magazine covers confront us on every magazine stand. Some folks still quote the Bible and speak of sin. Others don’t even do that, they simply say it’s wrong without any reasons to back up their opinions. Yet, more and more, people are having seriSpring 2001 9 ous discussions. Are rural gay people coming forward more than they used to? A little, but not a lot. That is viewed as a major step by many. The environment still contains hostility. But people are also beginning to understand that this issue is not simply going to go away. Gay people are here to stay! In young people is where I see the most change and evidence of hope. Even those who are taught in their churches that homosexuality is a sin seem less hostile and more ambivalent, although this is not always good either. But perhaps we can take heart from the words of Jesus himself when he was at least able to say, “Those who are not against us are for us.” Increasingly, in the rural communities where I live and work, when a young person comes out, they are met by mostly a ho-hum attitude. Especially if they are already well-liked and respected in the community. People may not understand it. People may feel sorry for the parents. People may not like it. People may talk behind their backs, but at least they are not openly harassed or abused like they were a generation ago or even a few years ago. I would love to be able to tell you that all rural families are sitting around tables discussing this like my family did, but it simply wouldn’t be true. I can tell you however that more and more people are. Does hope spring eternal? Of course it does. But sometimes the spring only comes after a long and cold winter. In my opinion we are there. A long and cold winter has finally begun to see the first thaw. Gene E. Miller, Ph.D. is the Conference Minister of the South Dakota Conference of the United Church of Christ. He has authored three books and is contributing editor to The Five Stones, a periodical focusing on ministry in small churches. He lives with his spouse Elaine, an academic administrator for Yankton College, in Beresford, South Dakota. They have two children, one in college and one in high school. Shaping An Inclusive Church Quarterly magazine of Welcoming congregations in the U.S. and Canada Annual subscriptions $20 ($25 outside U.S.) Mail to Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Ave. Chicago, IL 60641 Phone 773/736-5526 Fax 773/736-5475 www.rcp.org/openhands/ index.html 10 Open Hands While I cannot guarantee that the same conditions apply in every country town and city, these are the facts relating to life for the GLBT community in the North Eastern region of New South Wales, an area with the largest number of gays and lesbians outside Australia’s capital cities. This is the region in which I have lived for over twenty years. Life in rural Australia is not easy. As in all farming communities across the globe, its people are shaped by the vagaries of climate, weather, and predators, along with the opinions and actions of others. Conservative in politics and religion, people in most country towns and cities are not interested in changing the status quo. To be gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender outside the capital cities is to discover isolation. There are no bars, nor is there opportunity to lose oneself in the crowds. Public transport outside rural towns and cities is non-existent. Private bus services take children to primary and secondary schools, but there are not even community transport buses available to take people from villages to work in the town and cities. Employment opportunities are very limited, and few businesses will employ openly gay people. Twenty years ago things were a lot worse for members of the GLBT community. In fact it was still the era of “bedroom busts,” when police were able to burst into people’s homes and charge with sodomy gay men found together in bed or a state of undress. Couples walking down the street were harassed by police and advised to leave town. Slowly things began to change. First, some local members of an Australiawide club decided to start a social group, and Northern Rivers Gay Group was birthed. Then came the era of Gaywaves, a program presented weekly on community radio 2NCR FM. From its inception this program was opposed by members of most Christian churches in the area (in fact not one denomination supported it), by elected members of local government, by the parochial straight media and various vocal groups fueled by such media reports. Had it not been that the community radio station would have lost its license if the program had been canned— due to the requirement of the Public Broadcasting Act that all community representative groups be allowed air time— the protesters would have succeeded. The Cost of Change The cost to the two programmers was high—constant attacks in the media including threats contained in published letters to the local newspaper and the reluctance of station officials to repair external door locks at the studio. Snide editorials suggesting AIDS could be caught by eating at a certain restaurant, the business of one programmer, resulted in its bankruptcy. One sponsor of the program was bashed so badly that he endured six months of reconstructive surgery. Police were swift to arrest the culprit, but the case was dismissed due to his allegation that a homosexual pass had been made at him and he was only defending himself. This was the first local case in which such a defense was employed. As the other programmer, I was to see each of my children targeted during their school years. A senior lecturer at a local college, who was also on the board of the radio station, continually marked down my eldest daughter’s assignments, and it needed an appeal to the Board of Studies to have her subjects re-marked. In the five years that my son traveled on the school bus from home to attend high school in the closest town, no one would speak or sit next to him. During the years of my second daughter’s marriage her husband’s family openly and constantly condemned my sexuality, thus creating an atmosphere of hostility. While garaged on my farm the brakes of my car were tampered with even though my surname and address were never broadcast. Hostility in the Country It was a time of terror that was matched only with our determination to keep the program on air. None of the mainstream Protestant churches in Australia will ordain openly gay persons. To be accepted into a church family in rural Australia one’s sexual identity must be concealed. In mainstream churches it doesn’t take long before you are asked if you are homosexual. Most organizations in the rural community are homophobic, so social functions are attended without one’s partner. Hostility in the country is stronger and more openly expressed, often with physical violence. Straight couples can walk down the street hand-in-hand, but lesbians and gay men cannot afford to walk down the street with a member of the same sex without jeopardizing that friend’s reputation. “Poofter” is still a derogatory term leveled at anyone who is a little different, or even perceived to be less “macho”— a very important identity trait of Australian men. There is a stereotype of the Australian male in the bush— shorts, tee shirt, thongs, beer swilling, and yarn-telling yobbo. Funeral directors are only now comfortable handling bodies of those who have died from AIDS-related diseases. In this region’s churches the Exodus program is but one of the recognized ways of “dealing with” our community. Charismatic churches regularly practice exorcism on those they believe to be possessed by the demons of homosexuality. The phone counseling service run by one Australia-wide Protestant church has no counselors trained to understand or offer advice to any GLBT persons in crisis. Even the broadest-minded Christians still hold to the patronizing “love the sinner, hate the sin.” Families ostracize Spring 2001 11 GLBT members who then move to the cities where they can be virtually anonymous and at the same time access GLBT community support. This denies even a modicum of support for those GLBT people who remain in the country. Access to community resources (funded by various levels of government) is very limited to openly gay people. There still remains the assumption that all gay males are pedophiles, which is reflected in the personal bias of juries. This bias still applies to the Supreme Court appeals where misdirection by a judge can be overlooked where gay males are concerned. The attitudes of staff in hospitals in this region toward our community have been unhelpful. For a period there was a marked resistance to nursing people with AIDS (and this included members of the cleaning and kitchen staff); however the Palliative Care ward in a nongovernmental hospital is now providing sensitive and loving care. There have been many recorded incidents in which family pressures have persuaded staff to refuse access to a patient’s same sex partner. Though in New South Wales recent legislation has been enacted to ensure that people in same-sex relationships are entitled to equal property rights as are enjoyed by de-facto couples and married folk, it is advisable for members of our community to draw up legally binding power of attorney and enduring guardianship documents so that the rights of each partner, in times of illness or accident, can be substantiated and consequently respected. There have been attempts to open facilities for our community, including a lesbian bookstore, a gay bar, a motel and the leasing of hotel space for monthly functions but, rather than risk being labeled as GLBT by frequenting these places, folk stayed away, forcing the businesses to close. Community and religious groups target churches perceived as “gay churches.” Services held in individual homes are poorly attended because of the fear that attendance will label worshipers as gay. There is, however, one church, Christ’s Community Church, which has developed an outreach ministry to all people who are unable to share in worship services held in any specific location. This ministry enables Christians across the world to identify as part of a worshiping community. Thus agrarian GLBT people share their spiritual journeys with other Christians in prison or hospital and those who, by distance, are disenfranchised from congregational worship. Vera Bourne farms a rural property called Green-Winter farm in northeast New South Wales. Through the Auris Ministry of Christ’s Community Church she pastors a congregation, spread across the world, of those who are unable to meet with others in communal worship. A staff writer with the online magazine, Whosoever, she has just won the annual Wellspring short story competition for Australian women writers. Shapiing Sancttuarry Proclaiming God’s Grace in an Inclusive Church A collection of essays, sermons, liturgies, and hymns from the Welcoming movement. Valuing Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender persons as an integral part of the Body of Christ. Exploring themes of embodiment theology, integrating spirituality and sexuality, and inclusive worship. Includes an eight-week group study guide. ISBN # 0-9701568-0-4 Order from your denominational Welcoming organization or from www.rcp.org Don’t miss this opportunity to “help the rest of the church rediscover its soul.” —from book review by James B. Nelson $14.00 12 Open Hands Nobody actually quit when the choir got new green robes to replace the black ones, but several threatened. It took more and longer meetings to decide not to replace the orange pew cushions than it did to rewrite the by-laws. Many things that happen in smaller rural churches, even if they aren’t inherently controversial, generally involve a great deal of discussion. Sometimes the discussion is heated. Often the church acts as if it is one large committee. Almost everyone knows what is going on, or thinks they do. However, one may not know where folks come down on the issue till the last minute. Resolution of conflict is frequently difficult, but it is impossible when people head out the door. It’s not that large urban churches don’t have their conflicts too, its just that having served some “associate years” in larger churches, one notices how much easier it is to have things happen that are confined to just one committee or one segment of the church. In the larger setting the pastor is less likely to become the focal point of whatever issue is up for debate. Here’s the story of how one small rural Presbyterian Church in Oregon survived the “disruptive grace” of God to become a More Light congregation, a welcoming church. Pastoral colleagues sometimes ask how it is that a church in a rather conservative timberbased economy small town can “get away” with More Light affiliation. It certainly is not without its challenges but in a phrase the answer is: by listening to and knowing each other’s stories. At every level of the Presbyterian Church the discussion was going on about the authority of the Bible, whether certain texts are to taken literally, or understood as time-conditioned ethnocentric metaphorical narratives, and about the merits or lack of merits of our Book of Order’s proposed Amendment B [limiting ordination to the heterosexually- married and chaste singles, which was ratified] and its intended substitute, Amendment A [calling for integrity in all relationships, which was not ratified]. First Presbyterian Church Cottage Grove, having a long tradition of paying attention to denominational issues, held Bible studies, forums and discussion groups. Members and elders attended presbytery-sponsored events. They heard both sides of the debate. Articles were published in the newsletter. The session (governing elders of a congregation) had retreats and wrote letters and position statements. Family Proved the Turning Point But more importantly, at one point in the rotational life of the session, we had two elders with gay children and one elder with a lesbian twin sister. In our congregation there were also three other families, that we knew of, with gay children. Out of nine elders sitting on the governing board, that particular one-third would feel especially affected by anything our denomination decided. It is certainly true that if you want to get someone’s attention, ask about their family. If you really want to get their attention, contemplate denying their child a basic human right, inside or outside the church. The twin sister was an ordained UCC pastor serving a church. We heard stories of an effective and exemplary ministry. Some of us knew her personally. Some of us had heard family stories. She had published a book of prayers through the Presbyterians. Knowing these sisters, and knowing the seriousness with which they study the faith and engage in the work of Christ, we knew it to be ludicrous to question the validity of God’s call to ministry in their lives. In addition, the local United Methodist Church, which for many years was an ally in ministry with the Presbyterians, hired a new pastor. Things changed. This pastor and some of the leadership were decidedly in favor of ballot measures in Oregon which were intended to limit the rights of gays and lesbians who worked in the public sector. In search of a resolution to their faith conflict, a few Methodists began to migrate. One was a long time leader and choir director, a well-respected member of the business community. She has a son who First Presbyterian Church Cottage Grove Spring 2001 13 is accomplished and she is proud of him and he is out. Although church is not central in his life, it is in hers. It is one thing to be part of a denomination that votes to exclude her son, but she could not be part of a local church that was vociferous in its denial of him. In our small church, many knew her story. After years of work in worship, choir, Christian Education and bookkeeping among the Presbyterians, she came to be an elder on session. Her story was heard not only with ears but also with hearts. Labels are always awkward. One characteristic about being the only somewhat liberal church in a town of 8000 is that the congregation is delightfully diverse. We have white- and bluecollar workers. We have very wealthy and fairly modest income levels. We have all ages and levels of education. We also have folks who, for lack of better categories, are thought of as “establishment” and people who are deemed by some as “alternative.” Our former Methodist elder would probably fit the mainstream model pretty well. Our third elder is respected as a champion of mission activity, environmentalism, and human rights. In addition to a marvelous sense of humor she brings a plethora of printed information and life experience on every social issue to every Mission Committee meeting, session meeting, and coffee hour. Her son is gay. She loves him and we love her. Three members of session voted not to join the More Light Churches Network. They didn’t vote that way because they were not in favor of the ordination of homosexuals who were living and loving in relationship. They voted against the motion to affiliate because some other long time members were making it clear that they intended to leave the church if the session did. It was very painful for everyone. As pastor these were people with whom I had celebrated in worship for over 15 years. These were families with whom we had all shared weddings, funerals, anniversaries, and birthdays. Some members of the session and myself as moderator felt inordinately pressured by the opposition. Five members who had probably been members for near to thirty years did leave. Two left being frank about why, the others offered other reasons for leaving, but we knew. If asked why the session made the decision to do what they did, in spite of the conflict and threat of loss, I would have to say, retrospectively, they did it for the children. We listened to people talk passionately about their children. They are grown children, but for these elders they represented the future. At some level I think all of us knew that perhaps our greatest contribution to the future is our children, and they are, thank God, who they are. Our faith tells us that the future belongs to God. In this congregation, we lost a deeply loved part of our past, and even yet I feel a lump in my own throat as I write about it, but we made a choice in favor of a future without conditional love and exclusion. We chose to stand with those who hope that all of God’s children can live and love all of God’s gifts. Ben Dake took his seminary training at New College, the University of Edinburgh. He is a trustee of the Presbytery of the Cascades and on the Board of Directors of Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon. He has served the church he writes about for eighteen years. The proud father of two daughters, he enjoys climbing mountains, most recently summiting Cerro Aconcagua in Argentina. If asked why the session made the decision to do what they did, in spite of the conflict and threat of loss, I would have to say, retrospectively, they did it for the children. Second Edition by Chris Glaser 14 Open Hands When I first met my partner, Tammy Lindahl, she was a Presbyterian minister serving three small churches near a town of 1,000 in South Central Missouri. I was in the ministry, too, serving two churches in the neighboring county. People who were “different” were not well tolerated in this area; the Ku Klux Klan and white supremacist survivalist groups still thrive there at the edge of the Ozark Mountains. The fact that Tammy and I met at all and were able to come out to each other in such a place just proves that “the Lord works in mysterious ways.” Like most small towns, everyone around us knew everyone’s business, including ours. The woman who lived across the street from Tammy often could be seen surveying the block with a pair of binoculars stuck under her living room blinds. To afford ourselves some privacy Tammy and I established a “100 mile rule”: if we wanted to see a movie or go out to dinner together we would choose a theater or restaurant in a larger town at least 100 miles away from home. Two years after we met, we carried this rule over to our Holy Union service, celebrating it in a Presbyterian church near Kansas City. Even this remote site didn’t feel completely safe, however, so before we began the service we taped construction paper over the windows to prevent anyone from looking in. The Shower of Stoles begun by Martha Juillerat and Tammy Lindahl is an ingathering of ordination stoles that ecumenically celebrates the ministries of LGBT folk and their allies. The only grocery store in this town is marked by a large wooden cross, its white paint peeling in chunks that scatter across the parking lot: “Christian Discount” inscribed in black. I wonder if I could get this discount or if I want to. You judge a Christian by the number of tires on his truck, how many kids he’s got rolling around his trailer, and the thirteen stars that form an X on his t-shirt. You like my necklace. I finger the colored beads as you say this, knowing that for you my rainbow is a symbol of God’s promise of redemption after the cleansing flood. I close my eyes and thank God for putting a couple of lesbians on that ark. —Words painted on an anonymous stole from rural Ohio From a gay ordained minister: “To my beloved parishioners: You turn to me for comfort with your hurts, your fears, your needs. I give until I am drained. I hurt, I fear, I need. I turn for comfort to my life partner. I am strengthened, renewed, refreshed, to serve you once more. If you knew of our love, you would reject me. I couldn’t be with you for your hurts, your fears, your needs. What would Jesus want?” —A minister serving a small town church in the Great Plains Spring 2001 15 Serving five churches between us while maintaining a carefully choreographed life in the closet began to wear on us. We often felt that we were living under a magnifying glass, and we began to question whether we could stay in our small town. This conversation was particularly difficult for Tammy, who had grown up on a dairy farm and envisioned living in rural America forever. But as time went on, we looked more and more towards larger cities for safe space, welcoming churches, and a community of support. I am a clergy person beginning my ministry in the state of Wyoming. I have sacrificed a piece of my life by answering God’s Call to be in ministry in the United Methodist Church. This sacrifice is living in a small faith community where it is assumed I am heterosexual, knowing full well I cannot freely pick my friends or fall in love when that opportunity arises. —From the stole of an anonymous gay minister Although we knew of a few other gay and lesbian folks living in the county, they tended to keep very quiet about their lives and were the constant subject of snide remarks by folks in town. They also didn’t go to church; there wasn’t a church for many miles (including our own) that would have welcomed and affirmed them. Although a few of our parishioners must have suspected that we were more than just “roommates,” and at least one couple made a point of inviting me along whenever Tammy joined them for dinner, the truth remained unspoken. We longed for affirmation, to be able to share our whole lives— our anniversaries, our home, and our vacation photos— with people who could share our joy. I am currently serving as a pastor of a church. I am quite certain that most of the members know that I am lesbian. Still, we continue to tip-toe around the question of identifying who I am. As a pastor, it sometimes feels as if I am crossing a bridge to meet someone and, just as we are about to embrace in the middle of the bridge, the center falls away… —From a letter sent to us by an anonymous lesbian minister Eventually Tammy and I decided that if we were truly to be free— to be completely invested in our church and community as “out” lesbians— we were going to have to give up our parishes and our small town life. Reflecting on this decision Tammy said, “The things I loved most about small towns made it impossible to stay: the close-knit community, knowing what everyone’s up to. I worried about someone seeing something in the mail because the letter carrier always looked through the mail and knew what you were up to. Letter carriers just do that in small towns. I worried that someone might see a gay newspaper or something in my car, because people in small towns have a habit of glancing inside cars as they walk by.” We have many friends who continue to thrive in rural communities throughout the country. I think of our friend Carol. She now lives with her partner in a small town in the southeast. They own a successful business and have a few good friends in the area. But the one piece missing from their lives, as with so many gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people in rural areas, is the church. In the end, this was the most important piece missing from our lives, and the thing that finally led us away to the city. What can make the difference in a small town? •One “straight ally” can make an enormous difference. Although your church may not be a welcoming place, you can create a safe space of your own. Come out as an ally. Use the words gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender in your church, at a school board meeting, with your friends. Be a friend to someone who has a GLBT child. •Be willing to take risks to stir up the status quo. Don’t tolerate gay jokes or derogatory remarks. Counter stereotypes with the truth. Remember that homophobia persists when it goes unchallenged. •Network with other supportive people in your area. While you may be alone in your church or even your town, there may be many others in the county or neighboring towns who would welcome the opportunity to meet and work with like-minded people. Be willing to advertise your network and make your presence known in the area. •Finally, whether you are gay or straight, find ways to keep your faith and your spirit alive. Create intentional spiritual community, long-distance if necessary. Start an on-line prayer circle, reading group, or even a virtual “house church.” If there is a welcoming church in a nearby city, create a partnership with this church through periodic activities that might draw in other rural folk. Network with national welcoming church movements. Most important, feed your spirit through personal study and prayer. Speak the truth. Speak the truth. Speak the truth. Please. Your friend in Christ. —Anonymous Martha Juillerat travels the country with displays of the Shower of Stoles Project, which has collected 800 stoles from 16 denominations and five countries. There were 96 displays across North America during the past year. Visit the Project’s website (www.showerofstoles.com). Schedule a display of stoles (either a portion or the entire collection) by e-mailing StoleProj@aol.com 16 Open Hands Acongregation member asks me, “Bishop, this is a small town. We know that there are homosexual people here. Some of them are our friends, some not. How can our church share the gospel with them, welcome them? It’s all so controversial!” Christians have always faced tough questions. In smaller towns and rural areas, as in the whole country, questions about welcoming homosexual people bring challenging conversations to families, friends, congregations, and communities. Congregations sometimes struggle to welcome their own members and those who are not members. The rural context has an impact on these conversations. Community strengths often include a problematic aspect. In small towns, we know each other well but often not quite so well as we think. In many ways we remain strangers to one another because in rural communities one works hard to protect his or her privacy. Thus, we may make false assumptions, such as assuming there are no gay or lesbian people in our congregation because we cannot name any. There is a “sanctified gossip” that helps us be aware of one another and care for one another. But, gossip’s darker form builds walls that are strong, though often not openly acknowledged. In small towns there are intricate networks of relationships. The people with whom we worship almost always are linked to us in several additional ways— as neighbors, co-workers, customers, competitors, relatives, classmates, distant in-laws, etc. These networks of relationships are essential to the functioning of the community and to one’s comfort in it, so each must be respected. Thus, one can never converse just as a church member or make a decision as though it affected only the congregation. One also has all the other connections to consider. These multiple links often make us more compassionate and foster at least some tolerance among us, but they may also make us dangerously cautious and keep us from being candid. These community networks are all at least partially closed. That keeps them predictable and functional. It takes small town and rural folk a while to integrate newcomers, sometimes a long while. This caution has helped our communities and cultures stay strong for generations, but it is also an obstacle to receiving the gifts an outsider brings. If the newcomer is different in some way— he or she is gay, doesn’t speak English well, isn’t ostensibly Christian— the welcoming can take even longer. On the other hand, almost every small Christian community has a deep sense that newcomers are to be welcomed and received. Welcoming is a commitment intrinsic to our identity, but we move carefully. In small towns, our conversations about big matters are seldom abstract. Almost always we see the question through the lens of knowing particular people and knowing their places in the community networks. Discussions will be filled with anecdotes and aphorisms, the accumulated wisdom and grace of the community. This may seem strange to people accustomed to dispassionate academic debates and literate discussion, but it is the main way we can do things in small towns. And, it is good. This tendency always to keep real people in mind helps us be faithful in our conversations. Shared Assumptions When we talk about matters relating to our gay and lesbian friends, family members, neighbors and strangers, we Christians will not agree on answers to tough questions. However, I believe we can and should agree on some shared assumptions and on some approaches to our conversations on these matters. First, the assumptions: •God’s love is for every person. •All the baptized are brought into the church of Christ. •Christians have not always treated one another with love and respect. Relations between heterosexual Christians and homosexual Christians offer many examples of these failings. •All people are sinners for whom Christ died. •Scripture and the church’s teachings are the guiding norms as we discuss our experiences and understandings. Approaches to Conversation As members of God’s family, we need to talk about homosexuality and about our responses. The conversations will continue to be hard, but as Christians we have ways to make them possible. I believe that the following approaches can help us talk and live faithfully with one another: Begin with repentance: In small towns, we usually know some of the sins of every other person! It is tempting to assume the position of virtue and want to talk only about the sins we see Spring 2001 17 in others. It is more faithful for each of us to acknowledge to ourselves and others that we all come to every discussion as sinners. Whether we are gay or straight, bisexual or transgender, our sexuality is infected by sin. Sin also infects our ability to think, to understand the Bible, to express ourselves, to forgive, to hope. Repentant, we can live in God’s forgiveness and draw on the Spirit’s guidance, courage and persistence. Watch your language: Language can serve or undermine Christian purposes. As parents of a beloved gay daughter, Nancy and I are often made uncomfortable when someone makes a joke about homosexuals or uses a harsh stereotype. Such language is hard for us to hear but far worse for our daughter Christa who may instantly feel unwelcome, even unsafe. Similarly, words like “homophobic” can become weapons of disrespect that exclude and reject, stopping conversation. In a small town with its webs of relationship, random comments, even those overheard, can damage many relationships and damage them for a long time. Many lesbian and gay young people have left their rural hometowns for places that seem safer. Often a major factor in their decision is the careless comments and vulgar jokes that made them know they were unwelcome or deemed strange. Perhaps the comments were not even directed against them personally, but the words were sharp swords, cutting them off from their community. Such careless and unloving language should not be used or tolerated by Christians in public or private, in the church or out. It weakens Christian community and conversation and it undermines faith. We can bridle our own tongues, object when others mis-speak, and teach children and youth to use respectful language for all God’s people. It will be necessary to talk explicitly about language that speaks harshly of homosexual people and about language that speaks dismissively of those who may be seen as hostile. In Christ, we owe one another respect even though we may not accept another’s opinions or actions. Conversely, in preaching, teaching and ordinary speaking we can remember to include gay and straight people in our lists of grace. We can name gay and lesbian people among our examples of those God loves, of those facing challenges, of those serving God, of people we know and care about. Speak the invitation and act on it: General invitations to be part of a congregation or a particular church activity are always less effective than personal, specific invitations. This is even more true when inviting people who know they are part of a group that is often unwelcome. So, when you know a gay man, invite him to worship with you. When you know a lesbian woman, ask her to come to the church supper. When one of your high school classmates is being shunned because kids suspect he’s gay, ask him to sit with you and your friends at lunch and join you for the youth Bible study. It can be welcoming to see an announcement in the local paper that the adult class will discuss Christian hospitality to homosexuals. Congregations can seek out the gifts of their lesbian and gay members and encourage their use for Christ’s mission. Of course, it is a strong welcome to become an officially “welcoming” congregation, as in the welcoming programs from the variety of denominations that sponsor Open Hands. Christ breaks down dividing walls and invites us to do the same. Study the Bible: It is obvious and important that the Scriptures have a central place in our conversations. This acceptance of the Bible is in church constitutions and confessions, but it is also personal and deeply ingrained in most of us. I am convinced we will not have good discussions or change any minds if we do not take seriously the whole witness of Scripture. The Bible has much to say about human relationships and sexuality. It celebrates marriage between a man and a woman and warns against divorce and other abuses of that gift. There are no references to homosexuality as an orientation. However, there are verses where specific types of samesex behavior or associated actions are condemned as sinful (e.g., prostitution, pedophilia). In Romans 1, same-sex behavior is mentioned as an evidence for the sinfulness of all humanity. The Bible also overflows with the conviction that God’s love is for all people, that all are sinful, that there is no hierarchy of sins, and that God surprises the church with the inclusiveness of Christ’s love and its human manifestations. We must hear all of these texts and hear them in their biblical and historical contexts. We who are Lutheran understand the Scriptures to be God’s living Word, meant to be interpreted and proclaimed evangelically, graciously. The Bible is always more than the sum total of its stories and statements. It is God’s effective tool for bringing new life to every person. Thus, we dare not assume that we have already grasped everything the Bible says to us as we live together as straight and gay Christians. We dare not use Bible verses as loveless weapons to destroy or exclude those for whom Christ died. So we study and listen and speak graciously. Talk together about Christian living: A Christian never works in isolation to interpret God’s Word for himself or herself. We need each other. Each of us, gay or straight, needs other believers for deep conversation and counsel about Christian living. These soul friends help us struggle for clarity about Law and Gospel in our own lives. You can be such a friend and you can seek such friends. Always, it is important that soul friends maintain confidentiality. This respect and trust is doubly essential in rural communities where there are many interlocking connections. The church of Christ should never lightly change its interpretations of Scripture or its teaching and moral guidance. Nevertheless, we always need to be in conversation about how to understand Scripture for our own time and our individual lives. And, we know the church has sometimes changed its understandings when Christ has led us to new insights. One may strongly believe that the church will not change what it says about homosexuality. Nevertheless, a Christian will come to the discussion in humility before the living Word. Congregations can design discussions that model both acceptance of the church’s norms and willingness to hear the experiences and insights of many. These gatherings should intentionally include homosexual people and people who care about them. If you are not sure who might be asked in your small congre18 Open Hands II knew it would be a good conference. I just never dreamed it would be so much fun. With great satisfaction and a huge sigh of relief, I tucked myself in bed and had my first good night’s sleep in months. The bishop had come after all. Picketers didn’t. No one stomped off in rage. The planning team was relaxed and happy. We had enough money. Best of all, people actually came! “Gay and Christian: Bringing the Conversation Home to Rural America” was over. That is, the conference was over. The conversation, we knew, had to continue. Planners and participants could only hope that it would continue with the passion, thoughtfulness, and joy we had come to know over the previous four days together. A little over 100 people gathered in Missoula, Montana, in June of 1999 for this venture— a brave and lively bunch: two Lutheran bishops, college students, a few pastors of various stripes (one of them had been outed and defrocked), church musicians, university professors, youth workers, moms and dads, church ladies, a transgender Vietnam vet, a non-Christian straight person who didn’t quite know why she came, Californians (graciously ignoring “Don’t Californicate Montana” bumper stickers), Midwesterners, and a wonderfully supportive gaggle of gay and lesbian locals. The money and institutional support came through Lutheran channels: the gation, there are good resources on tape and in print that can give you first-person stories from gay and lesbian Christians and those who care about them. Accept the journey, be honest about differences There is no consensus about homosexuality in our society nor in most of our churches today. Rural communities and congregations have the same spectrum of opinions as the rest of American and Canadian culture. We differ, but homosexuality is not a theoretical problem waiting for one brilliant sermon or an inspired compromise. Rather, we are all finding our way as people for whom Christ died. We are talking about the attitudes, perceptions and relationships of forgiven sinners. Perhaps in small towns and congregations we have the best possible context for acknowledging this and having a truly welcoming conversation. I have not intended here to give final answers to the questions facing the church. It seems God is asking us to wrestle longer. I urge congregations and church bodies not to take actions now that will deepen the divisions among us. The divisions are already sharp and painful. Instead, let us be patient with one another and acknowledge our differences on thoughts, actions, and policies. Let us together seek God’s reconciling guidance. We are on a journey. It is not clear where this road will lead us, but we know whom we follow and to whom we all belong. Let us use often the old prayer, Lord, you have called your servants to ventures of which we cannot see the ending, by paths as yet untrodden, through perils unknown. Give us faith to go out with good courage, not knowing where we go but only that your hand is leading us and your love supporting us, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. Stanley N. Olson serves as Bishop of the Southwestern Minnesota Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. This article, written at the invitation of Open Hands, will also be published in briefer form in the March, 2001 Southwestern Minnesota Synod News. Philip N. Knutson Endowment, the Northern Rockies Institute of Theology, and Lutheran Campus Ministry at the University of Montana. Yet Christians of differing denominational orientations came and spoke. The planning team had envisioned this conversation around a very big table, where scholars, experts, rural gay and lesbian people and their families, and church leaders would learn from each other— all to help the church become more hospitable and safe for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) people. After all, our Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) bishops had issued a charge: “Our congregations should reflect our Lord’s invitation to all by being safe places for those who are persecuted or harassed in our society. We repudiate all words and acts of hatred toward gay and lesbian persons in our congregations and in our communities, and extend a caring welcome for gay and lesbian persons and their families” (March, 1996). We wanted to make it real for us in the towns and cities of the rural west. But we knew it would be tough, because most of our churches were mute. The conference had outstanding leadership: New Testament scholar Dr. Arland Hultgren (Luther Seminary, St. Paul), moral theologian Dr. Patricia Beatty Jung (Loyola University, Chicago), author Will Fellows (Farm Boys: Lives of Gay Men from Spring 2001 19 The planning team celebrates: Pastors Carl Rohr and Jessica Crist, student Perryn Pomatto, psychotherapist Andy Laue, Pastor Jean Larson-Hurd, student Steve Jerbi. Information on applying for a grant from the Philip N. Knutson Endowment is available from Lutheran Campus Ministry, 8765 West Higgins Road, Chicago, IL 60631. the Rural Midwest, of Madison, Wisconsin), and singer, worship leader, community-builder Judy Fjell (directing Honey Pie Music in Big Timber, Montana). Workshops on becoming a welcoming congregation, parenting GLBT kids, being a GLBT youth, a social-cultural history of homosexuality, plus smallgroup conversations with the speakers gave us plenty to digest. Some fine preaching by Pastor Arne Bergland (now in Spanaway, Washington) and Bishop Paul Egertson (ELCA Southern California West Synod) gave us hope. A gay man was astonished to hear Patricia, a Roman Catholic, make a stronger case for the blessings of same-sex unions than he would. Arland was gently effective in teaching how the Bible’s seven “bullet” texts on homosexuality really don’t address committed, consensual sexual relationships. And the rural folks nodded knowingly when Will Fellows spoke of the isolating effects of not having a strong and visible gay community for support—but also of the satisfactions of rural life which avoid some of the pitfalls of big city gay culture. After all, small towns know their sons and daughters, and sometimes they know them so well that fears or discomfort with sexual orientation, known or suspected, can’t hold a candle to longstanding community ties. Missing in Conversation However, with Matthew Shepard’s death not far behind us, and certainly not far from us in neighboring Wyoming, we all knew what was at stake. Some people didn’t come to the conference because they were afraid— parents of gay and lesbian adult children so anxious about what their smalltown neighbors and pastors would think or say or do that they were in the closet, too. Nevertheless, with each speaker, each prayer, each song, we began to relax and trust and soon we knew: this was a blessed event. It was all the worse, then, that part of the conversation didn’t happen at all. (If it had been a mediocre event, the missing participants wouldn’t have missed much. But they missed such good stuff!) The planners had hoped that smalltown pastors would come and learn and be encouraged. But none of them showed up—not a one who wasn’t already part of the program. Was it fear, lack of interest, hostility? Sure. A young man in his first call whose brother is gay sadly decided he couldn’t come. He was too new and he feared his congregation would eat him for lunch. Another pastor tried to punish Lutheran Campus Ministry financially for its sponsorship. It didn’t work. (With remaining funds though, we did mail all Montana ELCA pastors the presenters’ tapes.) So, our hope to gather in the rural clergy fell on its face. Another conference, another time. Nor did we have any outright opponents, so those conversations didn’t happen, either. But the Spirit was afoot and we all learned a lot and several church members were planning to work on their congregations from the ground up. The sweetest surprise of all, though, was in the sharing of stories, because through them, through brave public responses to speakers and informal conversation alike, we became church—safe, funny, singing church— for in- and out-GLBT people and their supporters. “Worshiping together was wonderful! Being able to BE who I am as a person of faith who is not out in my congregation was a very affirming experience,” said one woman. Another said, “I was looking for help for our church to become reconciling. Not only did the conference help with that, I got a great sense of the spirit moving the church in this direction.” And Saturday night’s barbecue, in the glorious twilight of a Montana summer evening, surrounded by flowers and greens and wondrous food and a new community—well, that was church, too. We might have been preaching to the choir, but as Pastor Jessica Crist noted, “the choir can use some good preaching now and again.” “Gay and Christian” couldn’t have happened without the generous spirit of Pastor Philip Knutson. Phil served the Lutheran campus ministry community for many years with creativity, courage, and humor, despite his struggle as a gay man in the church, and later as one who lived with AIDS. Before his death he established the Philip N. Knutson Endowment for the purpose of funding conferences related to big issues facing Christians in higher education. And get this: at least every four years the endowment is required to fund a conference on sexuality. With Phil’s generous heart, the conversation can continue. With all our unfinished business, it must. Jean Larson-Hurd is Lutheran campus pastor at the University of Montana in Missoula. She received an M.Div. from Yale Divinity School, an M.Th. from Luther Seminary, and is currently on sabbatical as a Merrill Fellow at Harvard Divinity School, catching up on recent developments in feminist theology. 20 Open Hands Back in the ’70s, it was easy to imagine a gay person fantasizing that “life would be better if only I were in The Castro or The Village”— especially if that person were on a farm or in a small town. For proof, think only of your annual visit to the Gale farm and Dorothy wishing to be happy “somewhere over the rainbow.” Significantly, her journey from farm to Oz and back offers contemporary lessons to the American church seeking postmodern ministries that welcome all people regardless of sexual orientation or residence. Over the rainbow, it’s clear that location is not determining. You can take the girl out of the country, but you can’t take the country out of the girl. In Sam Shepard’s Curse of the Starving Class, mother Ella tells daughter Emma of a plan to escape their unpleasant family life by relocating to a better location. Emma: You mean just you, me and Wes are going to Europe? That sounds awful. Ella: Why? What’s so awful about that? It could be a vacation. Emma: It’d be the same as it is here. Ella: No it wouldn’t! We’d be in Europe. A whole new place. Emma: But we’d all be the same people. Ella’s misguided fantasy is so common that counselors and therapists call it the “geographic solution.” Suspicious as Emma, they learned Dorothy’s lesson: trouble and evil are everywhere, whether as Miss Gulch or the Wicked Witch of the West. While Shepard’s characters are always dreaming of a better life somewhere else, sexual minorities long fantasized a better life in San Francisco or Chicago or Manhattan (New York— not Kansas). The trouble, as Ella knows, is that you’re still you— only you’re in a bigger, more expensive place. Wherever you live life’s adventures, you experience loss and wounds that need healing. Dorothy loses Toto, her Kansas farm home, her dream of returning home, and her sense of security to the sporadic terror of the Wicked Witch. Like so many American pop-culture heroes, she has lost her parents and lives as an orphan with her Aunt Em and Uncle Henry. When her hopes of returning to them in Kansas are dashed by the escaping balloon, the Tin Man touchingly weeps with Dorothy at her sadness. To prevent him from rusting, Dorothy dries his tears until he’s done crying with her. Both are wounded by life’s disappointing losses and shared dreams, and each embodies to the other Henri Nouwen’s idea of the wounded healer. Reconciling is nothing if not a ministry in which dreams are shared along with wounding losses— accepting grief and tears while preventing sadness from inflicting additional pain. Dorothy doesn’t tell Tin Man he’s “co-dependent” or “enmeshed.” She doesn’t teach him to be empathetic instead of sympathetic. She doesn’t tell him to toughenup and get over it. No. She lets him feel a consequence of being on the journey together, each sharing a grand dream of a heart and a home. While the specter of malevolent evil terrorizes Dorothy, she is perhaps most wounded by the one at the heart of The City in whom everyone advised her to place complete trust. In the film’s final scene, though, Professor Marvel/The Wizard is among the extended Gale family on the farm— each person now revealed as a human with limitations, yet none the target of Dorothy’s anger for the pain she’s endured. Consider that this climactic forgiveness occurs only because others helped acknowledge and heal her wounds along the way. Dorothy’s return home isn’t merely a psychological lesson about one girl obtaining insight; it teaches us that whatever is There and Here is ultimately and fundamentally the same. When we focus on “the farm,” then, we should expect to discover primarily aspects of ourselves that urbocentric logic (thinking and operating from the perspective of a city with an international airport) leads us to ignore in our models of ministry. Avoiding a City/Farm Dichotomy In Will Fellows’ book Farm Boys, gay men from rural America: …describe how they perceived and responded to a variety of conditions that existed in many of the farm communities and families of their boyhoods: rigid gender roles, social isolation, ethnic homogeneity, suspicion of the unfamiliar, racism, religious conservatism, sexual prudishness, and limited access to information. While none of these conditions is unique to farm culture, they operate in a distinctive synergy in that setting. (Fellows, p. ix.) The stunning thing is that it’s impossible to specify the “distinctive synergy” that makes those factors “rural,” and that’s the takeaway message in Fellows’ postscript: “Really, these stories are all of our stories,” said a gay man who grew up Jewish in Chicago. A man in Minneapolis said the experiences of gay farm boys resonated with his ethnic urban upbringing. It has become evident to me that, except for the often greater social isolation of farm life, city boys growing up gay in tightly knit ethnic communities have much in common with these farm boys. (Fellows, p. 318.) Instead of thinking with urbocentric logic of city/farm, we would be wiser to think of [1] people living in insulated communities, [2] minorities within those communities, and [3] those migrating Dorothies seeking happiness somewhere. Ministries for all people must therefore shift focus from zip codes to each person’s sense of comSpring 2001 21 munity and belonging: making sense of the world from the other person’s perspective, paying attention, and dedicating effort to the other person’s wounds and desires. Urbocentric logic is prone to assert that The Farm exists, partly because focusing on location justifies our refusal to focus on people and on the variety of actual farms. In the postmodern culture of global capitalism and corporate farming, the monolithic notion of The Farm is increasingly false and nostalgic. Visit someplace like Garden City, Kansas and you won’t see the county seat of family farms from decades past; you’ll see the huge ConAgra hog farm and immigrant labor shipping pork to the Safeway in the Castro and the Publix in South Beach, faithfully lining-up at Dillon’s customer service counter every payday to wire money home to their families in Mexico. Perhaps we imagine American farms from The Wizard of Oz or Places in the Heart, but the reality is the pretext for Field of Dreams—an impressively slick film because it makes Americans feel good about the corporate takeover of the family farm by shrouding it in the religion of baseball and fatherson sports bonding with women far in the background. Minus that baseball miracle, The Farm is bankrupt and we’re left with the reality that capitalism is systematically transforming American culture. Fellows notes the rapidity of technological change. As gas-powered tractors and rural electrification enabled greater mechanization and efficiency (1920s- 1950s), fewer farmers were needed. Farm size, wealth, and machinery grew to meet the needs of urban markets; small farms and tight-knit, neighborly communities began to disappear. One “farm boy” from southeast Nebraska said that: …Where I was raised, the old patterns of farming are disappearing year by year. You don’t see nearly as much pasture and livestock. All you see is corn and soybeans anymore. I don’t like the direction that farming has taken, the increased industrialization and reliance on corporate power and corporate structure. Bigger farms might mean more production, but the cost in human lives is far too great to be a good thing. We’ve lost a lot of the independence of small communities. For the most part, they continue on a blind descent into some kind of modern hell. The patterns of rural life have disintegrated into a cheap imitation of suburban life. The kids are involved in the same shit that the urban and suburban kids are. They don’t have much of a sense of community anymore. They lose their grocery store, they become just a collection of old people living off what years they have left and wondering what their kids are up to a thousand miles away. There’s a center of life that has disappeared, and I’m not sure what anybody can do about it anymore. (Fellows, p. 168.) Postmodern ministries that welcome all people— regardless of sexual orientation— need to hear this guy’s sense of loss and discomfort with the suburbanization of rural America because he speaks for many, many people. Our ministries must fundamentally attend to the losses, wounds, and quest for wholeness in others— something we were never very adept at, and now we’re obliged to do it regardless of residence. Toto, We’re Not in Kansas Anymore Our ministries must anticipate the multiple losses of those in agricultural areas whose ways are becoming increasingly outmoded, and whose dominant experience (like Dorothy) is one of loss. It’s more than daughters and sons who leave for college and never return. It’s the awareness that your town is dying, its autonomy yielding to the life-support of “regional communities” and regional institutions. It’s the guilt of shopping at WalMart, knowing you’re killing Main Street. It’s the erosion of “community values” because everybody has cable, commutes to The City, and increasingly has access to the world via the internet. It’s the advent of segregation-as-a-problem in rural America now that Latinos are doing the work. For 52% of students in Dodge City public schools, English is not their first language. With cultural diversity, theological hegemony crumbles. There is a pervasive sense of loss and grief throughout the land, though it’s sometimes masked by fervent nostalgia to “take America back,” albeit to “the way we (never) were.” Many opponents of welcoming ministries operate from this sense of loss and grief. Reconciling ministries that are true to their calling must care for those complex wounds, heal those losses and love those communities in pain. It doesn’t matter if you disagree with their pain; if pain is their dominant experience, it is all they know and you must minister to it. Our ministries must also anticipate the reverse migration of “ex-rural” lesbians and gays who flocked to urban gay ghettoes and now return to “the midwest”— which is apparently anyplace “far” from an international airport. The trend has already started, so look for it in towns near you. The Dallas Morning News reported the phenomenon in May 1999 rather positively under the headline “Out in the Country.” So accustomed were we to thinking homosexuals were dependent on The City that the subhead trumpeted the real news: “more gays and lesbians are feeling at home away from the big cities.” After 13 months, the Advocate acknowledged the trend, borrowed Dallas’ headline, but changed the subhead to send a different message to predominantly gay readers: “life in rural areas can still be dangerous for gay men and lesbians, but it’s not without its rewards.” For those— like the Advocate—heavily invested in the urban gay ghetto, reverse migration signifies a triumph of the gay liberation movement of the past 30 years, yet registers as dissolution of the insular gay community and its clout. Ironically, it will register as the same loss that small towns have known for a century, except among urbanites who believe they share nothing with those beyond The City. Embarrassingly for them, The City will find its best emotional ally in farm folks it has often disregarded, though it will often shield its awkwardness at that unexpected intimacy through defense mechanisms (like alerting us to the dangers beyond The City). Like Michelangelo Signorile, who tells all queers to come out of the closet unless “trapped in a homophobic town or a rough city neighborhood where they beat up on queers” (Queer in America, p. 363.), we shouldn’t focus so much on geography, but on the ignored losses, unhealed wounds, and 22 Open Hands unaffirmed lives that fuel the tension and violence between straights and gays, between The City and Everywhere Else. Families and Capitalism My Reconciling group in Kansas hosts a video series every year. Typically, we include films that represent sexual minorities, church, and society. Unlike older films like Mass Appeal and Priest, newer films like Beautiful Thing, The Truth About Jane, and In the Gloaming teach us that families are the primary site of cultural change when it comes to welcoming sexual minorities. Today’s films teach American culture that the church is irrelevant in the area of ministering to the human and communal emotions surrounding sexual fulfillment and belonging. Family, though, is a vexing thing in America precisely because, in the view of John D’Emilio: …The relationship between capitalism and the family is fundamentally contradictory. On the one hand, capitalism continually weakens the material foundation of family life, making it possible for individuals to live outside the family, and for a lesbian and gay male identity to develop. On the other, it needs to push men and women into families, at least long enough to reproduce the next generation of workers. The elevation of the family to ideological pre-eminence guarantees that capitalist society will reproduce not just children, but heterosexism and homophobia. In the most profound sense, capitalism is the problem. (D’Emilio, p. 474, “Capitalism and Gay Identity.” See full citation at the end of the article.) Ideologically, capitalism drives people into heterosexual families; each generation comes of age having internalized a heterosexist model of intimacy and personal relationships. Materially, capitalism weakens the bonds that once kept families together so that their members experience a growing instability in the place they have come to expect happiness and emotional security. Thus, while capitalism has knocked the material foundation away from family life, lesbians, gay men, and heterosexual feminists have become the scapegoats for the social instability of the system. (D’Emilio, p. 473.) Some scholars date the American advent of postmodernism and global capitalism to 1973, which coincides nicely with urban gay liberation movements and reactionary church efforts to re-enslave us. Similarly, pop culture responded to the terror of post-national global realities (like OPEC influencing gas prices), which are implicitly to blame for any difficult reality that follows them, with the nationalist nostalgia of American Graffiti, Laverne & Shirley and Happy Days—life before the ’60s. In so many ways, we revel in romanticism, nostalgia, and scapegoating in order to deflect any critique of our economic choices that create the instability we fundamentally dislike. Reconciling City and Farm We can experience cultural instability on the farm, in the city, or in the suburbs which increasingly overtake the entire country. We embody welcoming ministries when we acknowledge the varied ways that instability wounds, in the process welcoming each person regardless of where they call home or their sexual orientation. Dorothy triumphed not by attacking her enemy, but by embodying compassion to a flaming Scarecrow and attending to his immediate wounds, only accidentally melting evil away.* As boundaries continue to erode between city and farm, ministry must involve seeing the world from The Other’s perspective, and ultimately by engaging The Others as if they were Me. The more that urbocentric logic indoctrinates us, the more difficult it will be to see the world from The Farm, to set aside our urban concerns for wounds from smaller places a continent wide. It is already so. The reverse migration of lesbians and gays into the heartland marks a deconstruction of the city/farm opposition. Deconstruction teaches that, in any oppositional pair, the first term is privileged and does violence against the second term— even when that term is unspoken and merely implied as in our movement’s urbocentric focus. Deconstruction tells it the way it is, reminding us that— wherever we live— thinking with The City does violence to The Farm as surely as straight culture does violence to gay cultures. The advent of this “farm edition” of Open Hands some 30 years into the gay liberation/welcoming church movement exposes the fundamental urbocentrism of that American movement, signals the end times of The City’s hegemony, and hints at what must eventually become an act of confession and contrition for our own apartheid. Reverse migration will also stage reunions for small town America like the one in Jesus’ parable of the so-called “prodigal,” elder sibling, and welcoming parent with welcoming people, morally-indignant people who stayed responsibly put, and the sexual exile now returning successfully and proudly home. Will there be complete welcome? Or resentment about comparative mobility and success, about dreams pursued and dreams deferred, about the inexorable suburbanization of America we all experience amid the global economy and global culture? You need not look Somewhere Else—to Sherman, Texas or Burlington, Kansas or Alpine, Arizona— to answer these questions. Like Dorothy, look in your own backyard for the way you and your community treat the person from the Other Place. Notes *Ed. note: Remember when Dorothy threw water on the Scarecrow, it hit the wicked witch, who melted. Dahir, Mubarik. “Out in the Country: Life in rural areas can still be dangerous for gay men and lesbians, but it’s not without its rewards.” The Advocate, 20 June 00. D’Emilio, John. “Capitalism and Gay Identity” (467 - 476) in The Gay and Lesbian Studies Reader (New York: Routledge, 1993.) Fellows, Will. Farm Boys: Lives of Gay Men from the Rural Midwest. (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1996.) Precker, Michael. “Out in the Country: More gays and lesbians are feeling at home away from the big cities.” Dallas Morning News, 16 May 99. Brian Watson lives in Wichita, Kansas, thinks all over the place, and works with the Reconciling Ministries Network through Viceroy and Reconciling Kansas. His take on Field of Dreams is temporarily on-line via http://community.webtv.net/ reconcilingkans/RK Spring 2001 23 GOD , S APOLOGY A short story set in the South Dakota Badlands Dayna Clay, a young bisexual woman recovering from major depression, has been drawing strength and gaining insight from the region—the South Dakota Badlands—to which she recently relocated, as well as from a budding relationship with Kayla Drake, a lesbian student at Black Hills State who grew up in the area. Invited to accompany Kayla to a Sunday morning church service, Dayna reluctantly accepts. To her passenger’s surprise, Kayla steered not toward town but in the opposite direction. Dayna glanced back the other way. “We’re not going to that little church in Interior?” “Nope.” Kayla shifted gears. “An even smaller church in an even smaller town.” “Smaller town?” Dayna laughed. “That hardly seems possible.” Kayla accelerated. “You’ll see.” They rode for a while in silence, the road twisting and turning with abandon; then, her tone one of practiced nonchalance, Kayla spoke again. “I take it you’re not much of a churchgoer.” “You could say that.” Dayna rolled down her window: it was shaping up into another warm, if windy, late-October day. “I do remember my last time, though. Distinctly.” She looked off toward some faraway formations. “Didn’t exactly make me want to join the flock.” “What happened?” “A friend invited me. Kind of…like today.” Dayna paused, lost in thought. “And?” “And…and the minister,” she continued, calling his image to mind, “this tall, young guy— good-looking, I guess, in a white-bread way— he had a little chalkboard up there next to his whatchacallit, his…his lectern. And at some point during his sermon, he walked over to it and wrote the word PRAY, vertically, in capital letters. And then he said, ‘The word itself tells you how to do it. P is for Praise: always begin by praising the Lord. Next, R is for Repent: beg for His forgiveness. A is for Anything else. And finally, after you’ve done all of that, you may talk about Y: Yourself.’” “Interesting,” Kayla said. “But kind of patronizing.” “I was all of thirteen, and I felt talked down to. Oh, and then he told us, ‘A lot of folks do it the other way around. But those people aren’t PRAYing, are they? They’re YARPing!’” Dayna shook her head. “He thought he was really funny, really cute.” “There is no ‘right’ way to pray,” Kayla said, her manner diplomatic. “I mean, I’m sure a system like that works fine for some, and if it does, more power to them. But there’s no need to go…enforcing it on others.” She started to slow down the car. “God meets us wherever we are.” It was, as promised, a smaller town than Interior—so small, in fact, that Dayna didn’t realize they were in it until the vehicle had come to a complete stop. There were eight buildings in all, none more than a story tall. The term “onehorse town” came to mind, but the place appeared to be a horse shy of qualifying. And as for the church, not only was it minuscule— the size, roughly speaking, of a larger-thanaverage work shed— but everything about it was abbreviated: the door was barely taller than Dayna, the sole stained-glass window was no bigger than an old LP album cover, and the truncated symbol atop the short, squat steeple looked more like a plus sign than a cross. Perhaps, Dayna thought, that last detail was a good omen; where organized religion was concerned, she was overdue for a positive experience. They entered the church, sat down on the second of three long benches and waited while the room continued to fill. The congregants greeted one another with a kind of restrained familiarity, though no one, Dayna noticed, bothered to approach Kayla or her. Setting aside the photocopied program— a single white sheet, folded in the middle—Dayna looked up at the white candles, the velveton- felt dove banner and the simple, wooden altar, and she silently vowed to keep an open mind. Soon the minister, a round-faced man of about fifty, stepped up to the front and bid the twenty-some worshipers welcome. He then led them in a “Call to Awareness,” an Sustaining the Spirit An excerpt from Unplugged, a novel Paul McComas opening prayer and a hymn, sung a capella by the choirless congregation. The hymn— something about following in the footsteps of Jesus— was pretty; if not for her sore throat, Dayna would have joined right in. She relaxed a bit. So far, so tolerable. The pastor sat down, and a slightly younger woman stood to read aloud three passages of scripture. The first, from Psalms, was a kind of fan letter to God, praising this, that, and the other thing about the Almighty. But it was a verse of a different nature early in the passage— “My tears have been my food, day and night”— that caught Dayna’s ear; reflecting, she heard little else until the psalm had ended. The second reading, from Paul’s epistle to the Something-or-others, failed to impress; its rhetorical structure was so confusing and its syntax so convoluted that by the end, Dayna was left wondering what, precisely, had been said. The piece could have used a good editor. The third and final reading, from Luke, chronicled a rather poignant encounter between Jesus and a naked, raving man possessed by demons. Christ found the wretch in a graveyard, “living amongst the tombs.” When he asked the man his name, the demons, speaking through their host, replied, “My name is Legion, for we are many”— a nice bit of writing, Dayna thought, divinely inspired or not. The story rang a bell; she had either heard or read it somewhere before. More to the point, she understood it, felt it. Dayna didn’t believe in demons, but she certainly knew the experience of being seized and tormented and robbed of her true self by internal forces beyond her control. As the lector described Christ’s successful effort to heal the man, Dayna picked up a pencil, scrawled across her program the words MENTAL ILLNESS? and showed it to Kayla, who considered it before nodding in assent. Another hymn was sung and an offering taken (Dayna and Kayla each tossing a couple of bucks onto the plate), and then the pastor began to preach. His style was quasicharismatic; he didn’t pace— he hadn’t the room—but rather stood in place, arms alive and fingers flying in earnest accompaniment to his words. He spoke with such intensity that he sometimes seemed to be shouting, although in truth, not once did he raise his voice. Expounding upon the passage from Luke, he stressed the ability of “each and every one of us” to change, by the grace of “God through Christ Jesus,” no matter “how far gone, how damaged or despairing, how wayward, misguided or lost.” As a few congregants began to chime in with the occasional “Amen,” Dayna’s mind drifted yet again; staring at the worn, planked floor, she contemplated the recent changes in her own life….the healing and, yes, the grace that she had received. “The Lord provides us such a firm foundation that no one is beyond hope, no problem beyond help. Through Him, the alcoholic will put down his bottle and drink no more; the addict will forsake his drugs and make pure his body’s temple…” But what was the source of this healing, this grace? Was the force at work in her life God, or simply nature? For that matter, was there even a difference between the two? “…the adulterer will learn fidelity; the belligerent will practice peace…” Maybe that was the answer; maybe it was just that simple. Maybe… “…the homosexual…” Dayna’s head snapped up. “…will renounce his base corruption and sin no more.” She glanced over at Kayla, whose own disappointment, though muffled, was apparent. Seething, Dayna stood, moved to the edge of the bench and looked at the pastor, whose eyes, like everyone’s now, were riveted upon her. “Love your neighbor,” Dayna all but spat at him, then turned and stormed out the door. With anger to burn, she stalked past Kayla’s car and across the parking lot of a long-defunct Tastee-Freez, finally coming to a stop in the middle of an old dirt road, the Photos: Paul McComas 24 Open Hands closest thing to a main drag this piddling burgh had. Hands in her pockets, she glared down at the earth under her boots, the wind blowing her short bangs to and fro. Spotting a rock, she stooped to pick it up; glancing over her shoulder, Dayna found herself wondering whether that stupid plus-sign cross was within her range. Instead she spun on one heel and, as hard as she could, cast the stone into the ground. Dayna squinted into the wind. Part of her wished that, like the Dayna Clay of old, she’d stayed in the church and shouted the man down; another part of her wished she’d stayed away. She wasn’t welcome there; never had been, never would be. What on earth had made her think…? “Dayna.” Kayla, too, now stood in the road, perhaps ten yards behind. Her arms hung at her sides; she looked shaken, unsure. As they peered at one another across the dead space between them, Dayna couldn’t shake the notion that Kayla and she were characters in some western movie. There was no denying that this place looked like a ghost town… and all the more so with every one of its two dozen citizens tucked away in church. The crowning touch— as the wind picked up and the women began walking toward one another, showdown-style— was the lone tumbleweed that, behind Kayla and off to the right, began bumpily rolling by. It was almost enough to make Dayna laugh. But not quite. “I’m as shocked as you are,” Kayla said, stopping just in front of her. “Oh, I’m far from shocked.” “He’s never talked that way before. At least, not that I’ve heard.” “Was it because we were there? Together?” “I…don’t know.” Kayla moved to place an arm around her. “Someone might see.” “Let them.” “God might see.” Kayla held her at arm’s length and looked Dayna dead in the eye. “God,” she said, her chin quivering but her voice steady, “put you in my life.” Equal parts moved and confused, Dayna softened. “That’s sweet of you to say.” “It’s true.” “Guess I’ll have to take your word.” “You believe in God…don’t you?” Dayna sighed. “I don’t know. Maybe. I try…but they don’t make it easy. The Almighty’s PR people are doing a piss-poor job of representing their client, y’know?” “I know.” Reaching out, Kayla took Dayna’s hand; they left the road and headed back across the lot. “There’s this church in Rapid City that’s…better,” she said. “Guess I’ll just go there from now on.” Then, softly: “Kind of a trek from here…” “I believe in something,” Dayna went on. “Sure; call it God. Yeah, I guess I do. It’s just that the two of us, God and me—we’re not exactly on speaking terms.” Kayla turned toward her. “Why’s that?” “People always talk about how we ought to repent for our sins, tell God we’re sorry.” She kicked a jagged stick out of her path. “And I suppose I see some point to that; it’s good to be held accountable for your actions. But I also think that every relationship ought to be a two-way street.” “What do you mean?” By now they had reached the car. “This is probably some kind of blasphemy,” Dayna said, “but as far as I’m concerned, God ought to repent to me.” Kayla opened the driver’s door and got in. “What for?” Sitting down beside her, Dayna closed her own door and stared at the dashboard, trying to decide how much to reveal. She wasn’t used to having someone with whom she could talk like this. “I don’t want to go into any detail; not here. But it involves something that happened to me when I was a child. Something…God-awful. Something I prayed would end, prayed for weeks— for all the good that did me.” “But God didn’t cause it.” “Didn’t stop it, either.” She turned away. “This may be pride talking, but I can forgive someone who lets me down. I can focus on the good and excuse the rest, as long as they say, ‘I’m sorry.’ She looked back at Kayla. “But God’s never said anything of the kind.” Kayla stuck the key in the ignition. “Not in so many words.” “What do you mean?” She started the car. “Look at how you’re feeling— I mean, compared to before. Look at the…the hope and the healing you’ve received.” Kayla grabbed her companion’s leg and gave it a shake. “Dayna, look at who you’re with! If all of that doesn’t add up to an apology, then I don’t know what does.” As Kayla shifted into gear, Dayna began to reply but then stopped, reconsidered, remained silent. Kayla’s was a novel, even off-beat way of looking at the world, quite different from Dayna’s own. But the girl did seem to have her shit together, so maybe there was something to what she’d said. Maybe she had a point. The thought lingered, potent and persistent, as Kayla turned her car around and drove them away from church, out of town, and back down the winding road home. Paul McComas is a fiction writer and writing instructor whose acclaimed book of short stories, Twenty Questions (1998, Fithian Press), is in its second printing. The novel from which this excerpt comes, Unplugged, will be published next year. Paul and his wife, Chris, an M.Div. student at Garrett Evangelical Theological Seminary, are members of Wheadon United Methodist Church, a Reconciling congregation in Evanston, Illinois. Spring 2001 25 26 Open Hands A few months ago I agreed to write a tribute to the work of John McNeill on the occasion of his retirement from conducting retreats at the Kirkridge Retreat Center in Bangor, Pennsylvania. For 25 years John has been conducting Christian retreats for gay and bisexual men in January and, alongside Virginia Ramey Mollenkott, for gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgenders in the summer at this retreat center in the Poconos. As the deadline rapidly approached—and passed—for me to complete this tribute, I thought about researching John’s life and his contribution to our community. I began to worry about my tendency to over-commit. I became anxious. This morning I realized that if I had any contribution to make in honoring John’s legacy, it would not come through researching his life, but through a reflection on the tremendous impact he has had on my own life and what I suspect is his much larger impact on the spiritual growth of the GLBT movement over the past 25 years. I first took part in John’s ministry at Kirkridge in January 1987. My ex-lover had died from what was reported as viral encephalitis the previous year. I later learned that the cause of death was AIDS-related. I went to get tested— perhaps the good news was that I only needed to be tested once. I believe my friends— those who knew of the results— thought I was handling it very well. I continued to go to work and do all the normal things I did on a daily basis. However, I was actually in a state of depression as I tried to sort out my life and my recent discovery of my mortality. During this devastating period, one friend who was aware of John’s ministry at Kirkridge suggested that we go there for the January gay and bisexual men’s retreat. I, like so many others, came to the mountain at Kirkridge wounded and troubled and not sure what to do at that point of my life. I don’t remember much about that weekend. I know that I did share with my small group that I recently learned I was HIV-positive. There were others at the retreat struggling with the same diagnosis. It was, however, the first time I had been able to say those words in relation to myself. As my denial subsided, I began to acknowledge the reality of what I was experiencing. The climax of the January retreat at Kirkridge is the “fishbowl,” when men selected by their small groups tell that part of our life story that often goes painfully unexpressed. I did not enter the fishbowl that first year. It took another year before I was able to tell my story, feel its pain, and reflect upon its meaning. However, I knew that something had changed at that first retreat and that a process had begun changing my despair— to hope, to action. I have seldom missed one of those winter retreats at Kirkridge since. They are always full to capacity of the largest meeting hall there, just over 100. During these times, upon the mountain, I have witnessed so many others who came there as I did— feeling broken by life, unsure of their direction, weighed down by the stigma associated with being gay, battered by religious or secular communities or families as they tried to come to terms with the very nature of their being and their spiritual and moral selves. For 25 years John McNeill has provided a place and space for GLBT people to mend from the scars and wounds of a homophobic culture. The retreats at Kirkridge have become for many of us an oasis on this often lonely journey. Through the dialogue of small groups, the sharing of the stuff of our souls, and the gentle and profound life example of John and other leaders, we began to see new possibilities for our lives and realize new visions of our transforming mission. We began to develop a new understanding of our place in the cosmos and of God’s gracious love for the world. From year to year, John brought his manuscripts to the mountain and blessed us with his journey. These writings were later published as Taking a Chance on God: Liberating Theology for Gays, Lesbians, and their Lovers, Families and Friends (1988), Freedom, Glorious Freedom: The Spiritual Journey to the Fullness of Life for Gays, Lesbians and Everybody Else (1995), and his autobiography, Both Feet Firmly Planted in Midair: My Spiritual Journey (1998). We who were with John on the mountaintop at Kirkridge were privileged to journey with him to new realms of freedom as we began to unravel new understandings of a God who so loved us and a Christ beyond the dogma of a Church too often lost in its institutional processes and rules to give witness to that love. John forged for us on the mountain at Kirkridge a community of Catholics and Protestants, and frequently of the overchurched and un-churched, where we could come to see how Taking A Chance on God for Us The Legacy of the Reverend John J. McNeill Ralph Williams For information on Kirkridge retreats, see ad on page 13. RETREATS John J. McNeill at Kirkridge Spring 2001 27 the Christ was greater than the denominations and religious organizational structures that attempt to influence and control through hierarchy and fear. John’s first book, The Church and the Homosexual, published in 1976, had set him on an inevitable collision course with the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church. In this work he not only questioned the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church on homosexuality, but also began to suggest a possible positive purpose for homosexual orientation within the created order. As a result he became one of the first gay Christian voices of this modern era to be silenced by the church and later kicked out of his religious community. Since then, many other gay and heterosexual persons have also felt the wrath of their denominations for making the simple assertion that GLBT people are neither intrinsically evil nor incompatible with the teachings of Christ. In relating his story at Kirkridge retreats, John describes his struggle between obedience to the Jesuits, his religious order, and the need to heed the personal call of God to pursue his ministry with GLBT persons. For John, as for many of us, this was no easy decision, for we find that our religious communities and traditions are the places where we first come to a knowledge of God and are spirituality nurtured. In his story, John tells of his years in silenced obedience to the Catholic Church and his eventual decision to be faithful to God above the dictates of religious structures. As a result he was dismissed from the Jesuits. This rejection, however, resulted in his freedom to pursue his priestly ministry of a God who often calls us to go beyond the bounds of religious institutions. From Jan (I’m the mom.) It all began in the summer of 1975. My husband Wayne had just graduateed from seminary and received his first pastoral appointment. I went to volunteer at the United Methodist camp near our home. I had been a camper and staff member there for many years and it had always been a place of ministry and refuge for me. Bob, the new camp director, and I got along well from the start. I liked the way he was running the camp. We both had an affinity for the children, the environment, and John Denver music. But even more, we had common understandings about the nature of the church, Christian community, and how our faith should be lived in the world. Bob and I soon became good friends. I met his “friend,” Rick, who was a Christian educator at a church in our conference. I quickly came to appreciate the emotionally intimate nature of their relationship and wasn’t too surprised when, soon after the summer camp season was over, Bob told me that, in addition to being his friend, Rick was also his life partner. John’s courage to openly and publicly reject the stigma and prejudice fostered by many contemporary church organizations against GLBT persons has been a model for many in the Christian community. For those of us who have been lucky enough to meet John on our journey— even for the brief period of a weekend retreat— our journey has been enriched by his courage, integrity, wisdom, and vision. John has inspired an awakening of our spiritual and sexual wholeness and holiness which has not only led to personal transformations but has provided necessary fuel to the movement for full and unconditional acceptance of GLBT persons within the larger religious community. John’s vision helped us as GLBT people to realize that we can fully and completely claim our birthright as people of God. John’s witness—encouraged by his partner of more than 30 years, Charlie Chiarelli— has helped us move from our initial struggles with self-acceptance toward affirmation of our spiritual gifts as gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender peoples. With these gifts and the lessons from our own struggles, we must now reach out more deliberately and intentionally to the poor and dispossessed and bring the enlightened love and acceptance of God to our own often-rejecting religious institutions. Ralph Williams is currently the Lay Leader at Foundry United Methodist Church in Washington, DC and is founder of its GLBT Group. FAMILY Gay Godparents— “What’s the Big Deal?” Jan Thomas, Anne Thomas, Rebecca Thomas Left to right: Rick Sawyer, Wayne Thomas, Jan Thomas, Annie Thomas, Bob Galloway 28 Open Hands The relationship of Bob, Rick, Wayne and I grew over the next few years. We went camping together, celebrated holidays, and saw each other through a lot of changes. I went to graduate school and got my first camp director job at a seasonal United Methodist camp in northern Michigan. Wayne was moved to new ministry assignments. Bob’s mother died. Rick was fired from his Christian education position when some people in the church figured out that he was gay. Bob decided to follow what he knew was God’s call to the ministry, even though that meant leaving the United Methodist Church which had been his spiritual home for his entire life to that point. When our daughter Anne was born a few years later, it didn’t take Wayne and me long to decide that we wanted to ask Bob and Rick to be the godparents of our child. We thought that the most important job of godparents was to help us impart our faith understandings to Anne and any other future children. There was simply no one else who shared those understandings to the same degree that they did. We asked them and they readily agreed. In the next few years we had another daughter, Rebecca, and they and we moved several times, but we again found ourselves living near Bob and Rick in east Tennessee during most of the girls’ growing up years. We had visited and kept in touch while we were apart, so we easily resumed our friendship. The times and experiences we shared over the next few years immeasurably broadened, enhanced and blessed the growing up experiences of our girls. When Rebecca was a toddler, Bob and Rick had a guy with AIDS living with them for awhile. He and Rebecca immediately bonded. She crawled all over him and he liked her. Rebecca was quite timid when she was young, and it was wonderful to have her form an attachment with someone else. And Rebecca’s unconditional acceptance of him was a blessing to one who had been rejected by many of the people in his life. The summer that Rebecca was seven years old there was an arson fire at the offices of the Metropolitan Community Church in Knoxville, where Bob was the pastor. Before we went to help with the cleaning up, we had to explain to her that there had been a fire and that someone had set it on purpose. “Why would someone want to do that?” she asked. So then we also had to explain to her that some people believe that it is bad to be gay and that they do mean things to gay people. I will never forget the incredulous tone in her voice when she said, “You mean that some people think it is bad for Bob and Rick to love each other? That is the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard!” All of us were part of a group that started the Community of St. Ninian, a small intentional Christian community with a special ministry of hospitality. We bought a house where people in transition, mostly gay and lesbian, could stay for up to three months. We had a weekly dinner and worship, as well as some social events. The girls were exposed to so many interesting people through this group! We also participated every year in the Gay Pride and the Martin Luther King Jr. Holiday marches. Anne loved to be part of those events. She always wanted to help carry the St. Ninian banner, even though in the early years she was only a few inches taller than it was. Bob and Rick were involved in confirmation for both of the girls. Rick was Rebecca’s mentor (part of the United Methodist confirmation program). Most of the Community of St. Ninian were present to witness Anne’s confirmation. At the last Detroit Annual Conference session there was a quiet demonstration during the General Conference report, in solidarity with those who were hurt by the actions of the General Conference pertaining to homosexuality. I was really proud that Rebecca (all on her own; we didn’t even discuss it) chose to participate, carrying a brightly-colored sign that said “equally incompatible.” As I think of the people we’ve met and the experiences we have shared over the years, I cannot express the immeasurable richness that Bob and Rick have brought to all of us. It has been a blessing to see the girls grow and blossom over the years. But what I really am thankful for is that Anne and Rebecca have made their own decisions about their spirituality and the positive Christian values they want to live by. Bob and Rick were an integral part of that. They are truly soul friends to all of us. Jan Thomas is Director of Outdoor and Retreat Ministries in the Detroit Conference of the United Methodist Church, the mother of two remarkable young women. Her husband, Wayne, is associate pastor at First United Methodist Church in Royal Oak, Michigan. Left to right: Bob, Rebecca, Anne, and Rick at Rebecca’s 10th birthday party. Rebecca and Anne with Rick at Lake Powhatan Spring 2001 29 From Anne When asked, “What was it like growing up with gay godparents?” I am never quite sure how to respond. How can I say what it was like when I don’t know any other way? To me it was a normal occurrence. So they were two guys who love each other—so what? That doesn’t make it any more or less right; it just is. I can still remember the first time that I realized that to some people it wasn’t a normal thing. We were cleaning out the offices of the church where Bob was a minister after someone tried to burn it down. I didn’t really understand why it had happened other than it was because the church served a predominately homosexual congregation. To me it seemed like a rather stupid reason. After that I was more careful about whom I told about my godfathers. Most people didn’t care, but some did and they treated me differently. It bothered me at the time. I couldn’t understand why people would stop talking to me because they were gay. For a while I was mad at my parents for choosing people outside the box of normalcy that is so important in middle school. However, it only took me a little while to realize that if friends had problems with who two very important people were in my life, then they weren’t really my friends and I shouldn’t care if they liked me or not. After that I became less and less concerned with how people reacted. While it still bothered me a little, it was not because they weren’t comfortable with me. It was because they were so hateful and closeminded about something that really doesn’t matter. There are so many happy memories with Bob and Rick that I hardly ever think of the friends that started treating me differently because of them. My most outstanding memory, or actually group of memories, is that of our yearly camping trips. We would pick a location convenient to all of us and meet for an extended weekend. During these vacations we would go hiking, sightseeing, listen to typical Appalachian music, make music of our own around the campfire, cook the biggest, sweetest s’mores I’ve ever eaten, but mostly just enjoy each others’ company. I also remember numerous trips to the East Tennessee Fair. The fair usually coincided with my parents’ wedding anniversary, so, in order to give them a night out, Bob, Rick, Becca, and I would make a trip to the fair. There we would ride the rides and usually gorge ourselves on funnel cake, snow cones, and a number of questionable culinary delicacies. All in all, my memories of life with gay godparents don’t seem to me to be any different than life with heterosexual godparents, other than the fact they have taught me to be more open-minded, accepting of others, and generally more sure of who I am. From Rebecca I have often asked this question over the years as I got older. So what if my godparents are gay? It does not mean that they are less worthy of being called my godparents. While I was growing up, I just thought of this as my normal lifestyle, and as I look back on it I would not trade my life for anything. I also would not be the person that I am today if it were not for my godparents. They helped me, along with my family and friends, to shape my value system and what I believe in. Some of these values include getting to know people for who they are on the inside, honesty, trust, faith, and forgiveness. My godparents were an important factor in my life while I was growing up. Some of my best memories are when I was with them. Some are when my family and my godparents would go camping together. Others are Saint Ninian get-togethers—a fun night where we played games, chatted, ate, and had good fellowship. While I was growing up, I just thought that this was normal because I did not know anything else. Even though I am older now, as I look back on it I still do not see what the big deal is. My godparents are just like everybody else. They have feelings just like everyone else, work just like everyone else, and do the same basic things that everyone else does. The only thing that is different is their sexual orientation, and no, it is not a disease or something to be avoided. What is so wrong about that? Why can’t we just look at people for who they are on the inside and what they believe in instead of getting caught up in things that do not really matter? It seems that, if people could just learn how to do this, instead of making assumptions about things they have no clue about, then it seems like this world would be in a lot less trouble than it is. Who knows? You may be missing out on a great friendship. Are you willing to risk it for some “stereotype” that is out in the world? I sure am glad that my parents did not listen to it because I cannot imagine what my life would have been like if I did not know nor have my godparents in it. The only thing that I can say for certain is that it would have been a lot different, and I like my life just how it is now. If there is one thing that I would like to get across, it is this, what’s the big deal? I sure am glad that my parents decided to get to know my godparents for who they really are so that I did not miss out on getting to know a couple of really neat guys. The only question that I have left to ask is this: Are you willing to take that chance? Anne Thomas is a junior at Baldwin-Wallace College Conservatory of Music. She is 20 years old and is a music therapy major. She was a reserve delegate to the United Methodist jurisdictional conference from the Detroit Conference. Rebecca Thomas is a senior at Farmington High School. She is 17 years old and her hobbies and interests include dance, church activities, cooking, and the Detroit Conference United Methodist Youth Council. 30 Open Hands Our academic year opened with Neal Plantinga speak ing on truthfulness. Why is truthfulness important? One reason is that it provides freedom, freedom to both the truth-teller and the truth-hearer. It is in order to promote this dual freedom that I write. This year’s first issue of our campus paper Chimes featured an article by Jeremy De Roo speaking about homosexuality. Why is it important to talk about homosexuality? One reason is that real people, people in this campus community, struggle with their sexuality every single day they choose to breathe. It is in order to create more space to breathe that I write. The debate on homosexuality and God’s plan for relating to people of all sexual orientations rages on within the church and on my campus. Sometimes there really is rage, there is stubbornness and yelling. Sometimes the debate is carried on in a quiet, subtle, whispered way. Regardless, the debate always seems to favor a battle scene of sorts rather than a civil dialogue. Every time “gay” is used to insult someone, new darts are thrown. Every time someone quotes a scripture verse to condemn, rather than listening to the stories of those around them, arrows fly through the air. Part of the difficulty with this issue thus far at Calvin College has been that the environment here discourages honesty and dialogue and storytelling. We Christians who are supposed to be recognized by our love harbor hate and mistrust for those who think differently than us on this issue. This hate and mistrust is felt by all, but especially by the homosexual members of the community. This breeds fear, which in turn encourages non-heterosexuals to hide and keep their mouths closed. I write to be honest, to promote dialogue, and to make my story available to those who want or need to hear it. What is it like being gay at Calvin College? It is not a fun ride, full of support and encouragement. Being gay at Calvin College is walking down the hallways, wondering if you pass anyone who has the same feelings you do. Being gay at Calvin College is fear of rejection if anyone were to know your secret. Being gay at Calvin College is hearing the subject of homosexuality debated year after year on a purely theological level. Being gay at Calvin College is waking up each day and wondering if God made a mistake when he made you. Being gay at Calvin College means struggling with serious depression. Being gay at Calvin College sometimes makes a person wonder if life is worth living. Being gay at Calvin College is the most unpardonable, the most untouchable, the most unspeakable thing to be. My first year and half at Calvin found me agreeing with the traditional, evangelical view of homosexuality as sinful. I believed, as the church wanted me to believe, that I could either change my sexuality or repress it. I prayed, read books, attempted to change my desire, and prayed some more. The only change that manifested itself in me was that I became progressively more depressed. Every waking hour I told myself that I was wrong and sinful. Every time I recognized the beauty God placed in men around me, I told myself that I shouldn’t think that way. Imagine the effect of beating yourself up inside every time you see someone who is attractive. Now imagine not having people to talk to about your internal conflicts. When I was at my breaking point, God provided. Christian friends and counselors told me that it is okay to be gay. I came to realize that my sexuality is an integral part of who I am. I would not be Benjamin Paul McCloskey if I were heterosexual. I did not choose to be gay. How God made me gay, I don’t know…but he did. This gay creation of God is the same creation he loves dearly and sacrificed himself for. That must make me pretty darn special, I came to realize. Not more special than any other of God’s children, but special nonetheless. Even by the most conservative estimates, there are at least seventy-five students, faculty, and staff in our community who are not heterosexual. Every year, we lose some of these people. CAMPUS What Is It Like Being Gay at Calvin College? Benjamin P. McCloskey “It is Christian heroism— a rarity, to be sure— to venture wholly to become oneself, an individual human being, this specific individual human being, alone before God, alone in this prodigious strenuousness and this prodigious responsibility.” —Soren Kierkegaard, preface to The Sickness unto Death Spring 2001 31 Gay student after gay student, both male and female, has left this place feeling alone. Some leave to seek counseling. Some leave just to get out of this place. Some gay students graduate every year and continue to deal with this issue outside of our community. Each person in this community has the right to live their lives the way they hear God calling them to live—and to live that life without fear. The fear of abuse and misunderstanding of every kind is real to every person who is not heterosexual. Replacing fear with honesty can create a safe place for people to exist and be happy. This community has a moral obligation to create a safe space for me and for every other gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender person in the community. If that space is not created for us, we become obligated to create our own space in the community. I have sincerely struggled with this issue alone with God. Now, I am a walking example of the fact that one can sincerely love God and still be homosexual. My personal relationship with God has actually improved and blossomed and grown since coming to accept my sexuality as being a part of who I am rather than as something to be fixed or changed. Although I could, I do not want to debate the ethics of accepting homosexuality. I want to be able to tell my story and help to create that safe space for honest dialogue, rather than argument. Lorrie Menninga wrote in Chimes that we can do better thinking about the issue of homosexuality when a human face is attached. I write that you may attach my face to this issue. Benjamin P. McCloskey is a senior civil engineering student at Calvin College, a Christian liberal arts school in Grand Rapids, Michigan. He hopes to attend graduate school in the fall to work towards a master’s in city planning. This article first appeared in Chimes, the campus student paper, and subsequently the WOW website. “This is a photo of two of my housemates and me putting up the sign for our intentional Christian community house. Left to right is Ryan Vander Haak, Laura Hofman, and myself. I know, I look too butch for a gay guy, but what can you do?” 32 Open Hands Welcoming Communities Movement News OPEN AND AFFIRMING Euclid Avenue Congregational Church, UCC Cleveland, Ohio This urban church, 50% Euro-American and 49% African American, has as its stated mission “to welcome all people, to be a multiracial, multicultural, open and affirming congregation. To provide an active witness of God’s love and justice as followers of Jesus Christ.” This year’s new outreach ministries include: tutoring, substance abuse prevention (using the disciplines of Kenpo martial arts), a prayer and meditation group for women, and a support group for the “sandwich generation” (those who care for both their parents and children). The church offers a presence for and with the LGBT community and is a PFLAG meeting site. RECONCILING Gobin Memorial United Methodist Church Greencastle, Indiana Gobin Memorial is located on the campus of DePauw University, 35 miles east of Indianapolis in rural, westcentral Indiana. The congregation has a proud history as a progressive voice in a conservative community. The church’s decision to become Reconciling is in keeping with the congregation’s long history of progressive advocacy for justice and peace. This bold church of 400 members has sponsored prayer vigils to spotlight racism at local correctional facilities, hosted community-wide forums on racism in Putnam county, and was instrumental in founding a health clinic and a food pantry in Greencastle.The congregation’s Reconciling statement takes the United Methodist Book of Discipline’s language on the sacred worth of all individuals as the foundation for its Reconciling ministry. WELCOMING & AFFIRMING Old First Church Middletown, New Jersey Old First Church, a 312-year-old church, originally Baptist, became dually aligned with American Baptist Churches of the USA and the United Church of Christ in 1963. On October 1, 2000, the 75-member congregation voted to amend their church constitution to reflect the approval of the “Welcoming and Affirming/Open and Affirming” statements of the two denominations. The Rev. Dr. E. Kenneth Nichols saw the vote as one more link in a three-century-long chain of support for social justice causes, such as the church’s early involvement in the anti-slavery and temperance movements, with black members included as early as 1800. Through the years they have also had a public presence working for civil rights, peace, and the environment. The moderator for the voting meeting explained, “The statement will confirm our congregation’s already manifest commitment to and love for all people, including those who are homosexual.” PEOPLE AND RESOURCES Marilyn Alexander has been confirmed as executive director of the renamed Reconciling Ministries Network, as well as executive publisher of Open Hands. She had been serving as interim since Mark Bowman’s departure in 1999. More Light Presbyterians has launched a new national outreach and educational project for LGBT/Q Youth and Young Adults. Mt. Auburn Presbyterian Church in Cincinnati, Ohio, has adopted a policy which calls same-gender partnerships “marriage” in defiance of a Presbyterian ruling that such unions not be construed as marriage. Amendment O to the Presbyterian Book of Order, which would have banned church leaders from blessing same gender couples, failed to be ratified by the required majority of presbyteries. The Open and Affirming Program (UCC) will now be listing UCC-related ONA campus ministries. The Lutheran Volunteer Corps has affiliated itself with the Reconciling in Christ program. St. Paul Reformation Lutheran Church in Minnesota has called out lesbian Anita Hill as pastor, ordained April 28 and installed the following day. She began serving its Wingspan Ministry for LGBT people in 1983, then became the church’s pastoral minister in 1994. The Other Side, a progressive Christian magazine, will feature transgender Christians in the May-June 2001 issue. Visit its website: http://www.theotherside.org. UPCOMING EVENTS May 25-27. More Light Presbyterians annual meeting, “Open Minds, Open Hearts, Open Hands,” University of Texas, Austin. Visit the website for details: www.mlp.org. June 10-29. CETLALIC, an Alternative Spanish Language School in Cuernavaca, Mexico, is again offering programs for gay men and for lesbians this summer. For information, visit its website: www.cetlalic.org.mx or contact coordinator Antonio Ortega at infor@cetlalic.org.mx. July 25-29. Reconciling Ministries Convocation 2001-Revival!, University of Puget Sound, Tacoma, Washington. Phone 773/736-5526 or e-mail RMN@rcp.org for information. August 9-12. Christian Lesbians OUT (CLOUT) gathering, “Your Silence Will Not Protect You: Celebrating Spirit, Seeking Racial Justice,” Black Mountain, North Carolina. For information, e-mail clout@seorf.ohiou.edu. September 20-23. 2001 Conference of the National Association of Catholic Diocesan Lesbian and Gay Ministries, Charlotte, North Carolina. Contact Kevin Campbell at kcnewman@worldnet.att.net or 704/334-5128. JOB LISTING The Other Side, a progressive Christian magazine, is seeking a full-time outreach coordinator for its Philadelphia office. Call 800/700-9280 or e-mail search@theotherside.org for details. 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 Open Hands Vol 16 No 4 - Down On The Farm: Addressing Rural Issues https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/f0eb8d8e9251a9aa58c30a83a9f44b51.pdf 40995292094c0301054b0fda8d760092 Issue An issue of a recurring publication. Volume Number The volume number of the issue 17 Issue Number The number of the issue (within a volume) 1 Publication Year The year the issue was published 2001 Publication Date The date the issue was published Summer Text Any textual data included in the document 2 Open Hands Vol. 17 No. 1 Summer 2001 Shaping an Inclusive Church Affirming Congregation Programme More Light Presbyterians Open & Affirming Ministries Open and Affirming Program Reconciling Ministries Network Reconciling in Christ Program Welcoming & Affirming Baptists Executive Publisher Marilyn Alexander Editor Chris Glaser Designer In Print—Jan Graves Editorial Advisory Committee Jeff Balter, RIC Vaughn Beckman, O&A Daphne Burt, RIC Ann Marie Coleman, ONA Chris Copeland, W&A Gwynne Guibord, MCC Bobbi Hargleroad, MLP Tom Harshman, O&A Alyson Huntly, ACP Bonnie Kelly, ACP Susan Laurie, RCP Samuel E. Loliger, ONA Ruth Moerdyk, SCN Caroline Presnell, RCP Paul Santillán, RCP Julie Sevig, RIC Kelly Sprinkle, W&A Kathy Stayton, W&A Margarita Suaréz, ONA Judith Hoch Wray, O&A and Program Coordinators Open Hands is the quarterly magazine of the welcoming movement, a consortium of programs that support individuals and congregations in efforts to welcome lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, and transgenders in all areas of church life. Open Hands was founded and is published by the Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. of the Reconciling Ministries Network (United Methodist), in cooperation with the six ecumenical partners listed above. Each program is a national network of local congregations and ministries that publicly affirm their welcome of LGBT people, their families and friends. These seven programs, along with Supportive Congregations (Brethren/Mennonite [www.webcom. com/bmc], Oasis Congregations (Episcopal), Welcoming Congregations (Unitarian Universalist), and INCLUSIVE Congregations (United Kingdom), as well as the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches—offer hope that the church can be a more inclusive community. Subscription is $20 for four issues ($25 outside the U.S.). Single copies and back issues are $6; quantities of 10 or more, $4 each. Subscriptions, requests for advertising rates, and other business correspondence should be sent to: Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 openhands@RMNetwork.org www.RMNetwork.org/openhands/index.html Member, The Associated Church Press © 2001 Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. Open Hands is a registered trademark. ISSN 0888-8833 Printed on recycled paper. YOU ARE THE BELOVED! Healing Self-Rejection The Denial of Love 4 A Non-Heterosexual Interpretation of Peter’s Denial “GEORGIA POWERS” Denying our love and the ones we love. Belief and Belovedness 9 ROBERTA SHOWALTER KREIDER Naming and claiming a brother. Coming Home to Myself 13 My Not So Private Jubilee NANCY L. WILSON “If we knew we were going to live this long, we would have taken better care of ourselves!” Pride is Faith in Our Belovedness 19 CHRIS GLASER “Pride is faith in the idea that God had when God made us.” SUSTAINING THE SPIRIT Meditations: Text, Reflection, Prayer or Affirmation Escape for Your Life CRAIG WASHINGTON 4 Jesus Found Me ANN AMIDEO 6 God Says, “I Love You.” BOB JOHNSON 8 My Ordination DIANN NEU 10 Out of Fundamentalism DESMOND K. PARSONS 12 Love Made Personal SANDRA BOCHONOK 14 The Power of Grace BOB LODWICK 15 “I Have Called You by Name.” JOANNE CARLSON BROWN 18 Fear is Such a Hassle MARY HUNT 20 Errata for Winter 2001 issue (Vol. 16, No. 3): In the sidebar of sample homepages of youth groups on page 31, timeoutyouth.com should be timeoutyouth.org. And the Welcoming churches insert incorrectly lists Central United Methodist Church of Ann Arbor in Detroit. We apologize! Summer 2001 3 Publisher Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (UMC) Reconciling Ministries Network Marilyn Alexander, Coordinator 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 773/736-5526 www.RMNetwork.org Ecumenical Partners Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada) Ron Coughlin, Coordinator P.O. Box 333, Station Q, Toronto, Ontario CANADA M4T 2M5 416/466-1489 www.affirmunited.org • acpucc@aol.com More Light Presbyterians (PCUSA) Michael J. Adee, Coordinator 369 Montezuma Ave. PMB #447 Santa Fe, NM 87501-2626 505/820-7082 www.mlp.org Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ) John Wade Payne, Interim Coordinator P.O. Box 44400, Indianapolis, IN 46244 941/728-8833 www.sacredplaces.com/glad Open and Affirming Program (UCC) Ann B. Day, Coordinator P.O. Box 403, Holden, MA 01520 508/856-9316 www.UCCcoalition.org Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran) Bob Gibeling, Coordinator 2466 Sharondale Drive, Atlanta, GA 30305 404/266-9615 www.lcna.org Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (ABC/USA) Brenda J. Moulton, Coordinator P.O. Box 2596, Attleboro Falls, MA 02763 508/226-1945 users.aol.com/wabaptists MINISTRIES Family When Our Son Came Out of the Closet, We Went In. 23 DALE MERKLE Youth Saved Twice 24 BRIAN CAVE Children All Kinds of Families 25 LIZ ALEXANDER Connections Scotland 2000 26 DONN CRAIL Welcoming A Welcoming Strategy for Your Denomination 27 BOB GIBELING Outreach A Call to the Church: Open the Door! 28 HARRY KNOX MOVEMENT NEWS ............................ 30 WELCOMING COMMUNITIES ........... 31 NEXT ISSUE: OUR COAT OF MANY COLORS Creativity in the Face of Oppression Call for articles and columns for Open Hands Spring 2002 How I Changed My Mind Profiles in Grace and Courage Theme Section: Like Jesus’ parable of the laborers of the vineyard, each of us came to the Welcoming “vineyard” at different times, yet we share the same blessing that inclusivity offers. Church leaders and congregations, denominations and parents, children and siblings (in faith and in family) have experienced conversions galore that have transformed them into Welcoming activists. Open Hands is looking for personal (first person and third person), congregational, and denominational stories of those who have reversed their positions on lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, and transgenders. Please include author photos, self-descriptions, and addresses, as well as any photos relevant to an article. Any length up to 2500 words per article. Ministries Section: Columns may include: Welcoming (the process of becoming welcoming), Connections (with other justice issues), Worship, Spirituality, Retreats, Resources (books and videos), Outreach, Leadership, Marriage, Health, Youth, Campus, Children, and Family. These brief articles may or may not have to do with the theme of the issue. 750-1000 words. Contact with ideas as far before deadline as possible. Manuscript deadline: February 1, 2002 Chris Glaser, Phone/Fax 404/622-4222 or e-mail at ChrsGlaser@aol.com 991 Berne St. SE, Atlanta, GA 30316-1859 USA www.ChrisGlaser.com 4 Open Hands “ Escape for Your Life Much biblical interpretation done in the name of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender persons has focused on “correcting” traditional interpretations, or on celebrating same-gender love, i.e., David and Jonathan, Naomi and Ruth. But when we read the Bible, we bring our whole selves to the whole text. So what can any text say to us? I write as a middle-class, middle-aged woman who is a lesbian bisexual of Western European descent born in the United States. I believe that what I write about here can be applied to most persons who are in same-gender, physically intimate relationships. I do not believe I write for every person who is non-heterosexual, and I dare not begin to speak for transgender persons. But I hope this proves helpful, sparking others to interpret the Bible from their own perspectives. Matthew 26:69-75 All four Gospels include the prediction and episode of Peter’s denial of Jesus. All have the prediction preceded by Peter declaring that he will follow Jesus anywhere. And only John does not note that Peter wept after realizing that he had denied Jesus as predicted. Gay and lesbian persons, and bisexual persons in same-gender relation- The Denial of Love A Non-Heterosexual Interpretation of Peter’s Denial “Georgia Powers” “Run Mourner Run.” Traditional arranged by Bernice Johnson Reagon from the album “Live at Carnegie Hall” by Sweet Honey In The Rock. aren’t getting the plea, the exhortation infused in them by Bernice’s voice or the swelling refrain “bright angels above” as sung by those other bright angels that accompany her. I got it. And that is what helped me make it over. As fleeting spring gave out to an oppressive summer last year, my road got more than a little rocky. In May, just before Mother’s Day, I had ended a long distance relationship that had lasted for about a year. I had eventually accepted that I was not getting the love I wanted from him and that he was no longer interested in our relationship and was waiting for me to “get it.” A month later, the board chair of my organization offered me a choice of either accepting a lower position with substantially lower pay or submitting a letter of resignation and getting a severance package. My take on it is that they expected more than they prepared me to give. I chose the latter—that is, the letter and the package. For the rest of that dreamslow summer, I smoked and drank strong coffee every morning while looking out over the lake behind my apartment. I wrote terse, cryptic entries in my journal. I could not bear such reflection for more than two or three sentences at a time. I searched for codes of inspiration etched in the sun-sprinkled ripples that slid toward my terrace. The twofisted blow was more poetic than brutal. Both “relationships” Run, Mourner, Run” is a stirring hymn that in many ways exemplifies the transformative power of African American spiritual music. Like several such classics, its lyrics are as simple as they are profound. As sung by Sweet Honey In The Rock, a five-woman a cappella ensemble, this hymn is at once brooding and uplifting, laden with layered messages and coded implications. “Oh run, run, mourner run, bright angels above,” lead singer Bernice Reagon beckons. The mourner, whom we can assume has experienced some tragic loss, is admonished to run—indeed, escape for her life. Though she may still be in mourning, she faces even more danger, most likely death, if she does not heed the song’s caution. Then the singer, we may assume as mourner, repeats three times “I would fly away to the kingdom, bright angels above,” then concludes the sentence by stating only once “if I had just had two wings.” Bernice augments the lyric “escape for your life” with improvisations that heighten the songs urgency, i.e, “you just got to escape for your life.” I have cried several times already in my attempt to convey to you what this song has come to mean to me. As with many African American spirituals, the power of the lyric is extrapolated, its meaning complicated, its mood repainted, by the singers’ delivery. And when you read the above quoted words, you Oh run, run, mourner run, bright angels above… If I had two wings, bright angels above, I would fly away to the kingdom, bright angels above, Escape for your life, bright angels above. Summer 2001 5 had been long-distance. I had never felt so isolated and such a longing for connection and support as during the course of both relationships. By summer’s end I felt inadequate, ugly, stupid and at 40, old. I had been listening to “Sweet Honey In The Rock” for 15 years but I’d never paid much attention to “Run, Mourner, Run.” The weight of my life and this new time on my hands pushed me back in my seat and made me listen. I could relate to the mourner as I had been grieving over the loss of several promises. The promise of love and companionship, a fulfilling job and steady income. Never mind that I was actually deeply dissatisfied with both relationships and was better off without them. I was mourning the death of illusions. The line “I would fly away to the kingdom if I just had two wings,” would trouble me hours after I had listened to it. I’d begun to realize that this is what I was telling myself. I would do this, if I just had that. I was making excuses for not moving, and marinating in my own tears. As long as I believed my life was raining down on me, I didn’t have to assume responsibility for it. By this time, “Run” had become my morning sun. It awakened me and illuminated my path so that I could rediscover my life. I would ponder Bernice’s declaration, “you just gotta escape for your life (bright angels above).” More a command than a warning, it said to me that I was letting my life drip out slow and steady and that I had to “run,” to “escape” the victim’s grave in which I had buried myself. Eventually I started dancing to this song naked in front of the mirrored wall in my living room. I would dance and cry, out of joy or pain or both. I would go about my day with the conviction that God wanted me to heal and forgive and let joy rush back in to my life. That I had to run, to escape the negative thinking that imprisoned my creativity. Escape for my life, which, like a forest burnt black by a long dry season, in time was restored. I began to see myself as one of those bright angels above, no longer wishing for the two wings I had all the time. I pushed myself to write at length in my journal at least every other day. I started writing goals for myself and taking measurable steps to build the kind of life I wanted. I found myself thinking less about the recent past and more about my present. My outlook and inner view started changing before any external changes (no new boyfriend or fab job) took place. These days, I find that I cry a lot less (at least out of pain), and I have more access to my private joy. A joy that is not contingent upon the events of the day or the words and deeds of others. A joy that burns quietly with a burnished glow deep inside me. “Run, Mourner, Run” reminded me of possibilities that allowed me to reconnect to the divinity within me. “Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward.” Jesus in Matthew 5:12 Craig Washington designed and managed HIV prevention programs for African Americans through AID Atlanta (1992-1999). He was the co-chair of Second Sunday, a Black gay men’s support organization and vice-chair of the Metro Atlanta HIV Health Services Planning Council. He currently serves as executive director for The Center, Atlanta’s LGBT Community Resource. ships, often have created a community of people with whom they can be “out.” Such a group becomes a chosen family with whom they can relax and feel comfortable and from whom they can receive support. There are also many published resources available to which they can turn for further support, though these publications are often not kept on a “public” book shelf in their homes, and may come through the mail in plain brown wrappers. Outside of large cities, the taverns or other gathering places to which they go are often referred to by pseudonyms in conversation and may not have entrances on the street, let alone signs to identify that they are even there. Understanding the sense of community that gay, lesbian, and bisexual persons try to develop is important. Jesus and the disciples, especially the “inner circle,” developed a similar community— they trusted each other, they confided in each other, they had their own patterns and rituals. So when, we1 encounter the text saying “they had sung the hymn” (vs. 30), we can imagine ourselves with our friends singing along to an Indigo Girls or a Cher CD. The stage is now set; please join me in the details. Denial Predicted As Jesus and the disciples are hanging out on the Mount of Olives, Jesus says something shocking: They will all run away from him when trouble comes (vs. 31). (He does assure them that he will wait for them in Galilee.) Peter’s words—“I will never desert you” (vs. 33)— are familiar to us. Peter is caught up in the emotions of the evening. He blurts out that he will never leave Jesus. We know what this is like. When we feel safe and secure in our community, we feel that it could never end, and that to introduce any doubt about that endurance is to ruin the moment, to let the sadness and pain win. Jesus however knows that this time will end— as wonderful as the time spent together has been, “reality” will interrupt it. He also knows that it is important to remember this so that the present time of community can be held more dearly. Thus, he gives them a sign by which to remember this special time: the cock crow. The disciple Peter is 6 Open Hands asked to remember this time when he hears the rooster crow. We too have signs that remind us of our time together: think rainbow flag or the pink triangle. But the sign of the rooster crow is followed by Jesus’ reminder of reality again—“you will deny me” (vs. 34). As wonderful as this special time with his chosen family is, Peter will still find himself denying Jesus to save himself. We recognize this because we know that at some point we may find we have to deny our feelings for the ones we love, or deny who we are, even though we are proud of our relationships and who we are. John’s Gospel has Peter responding “I will lay down my life for you.” Here are words that echo ones that we in same-gender relationships can never publicly declare, “till death do us part,” in a legal marriage ceremony. Like Peter, the readers will declare this in private, within their community. And it is within this setting that Peter often declares what he feels. He does not declare his feelings in front of strangers, and, as he does at Jesus’ first prediction of his death (Matthew 16:13-23), Peter speaks his most intimate fears to Jesus away from the others. The Denial Jesus is accused and on trial. Peter cannot stay away, but puts some distance between himself and Jesus (vs. 69). So he sits in the courtyard, a public place. In that context, we can suspect that he is trying to remain calm, to look nonchalant. There are several things that could be going through his mind: he has given everything up for this; he does not want to be “next;” and Jesus, one he loves, is in big trouble. Peter is truly frightened that he too will be accused and sent to trial. We may see in this our own situation if we are connected to someone who is very publicly “out” or someone who has been beaten or killed for being gay or lesbian. We closeted readers (whether closeted as LGBT, family, or allies) will be afraid that we will be publicly connected with this person and be asked to explain our relationship with her or him. We do not want to be the next one to be beaten or killed. So when Jesus Found Me When Jesus heard that they had thrown him out, he went and found him… John 9:35 Ibelong to a support group for Catholic families of LGBT people. Religiously, I hear a dire concern echoed by the mothers and fathers. “I worry my son/daughter will never return to church.” A harsh reality rears its ugly head. Institutionalized Church is still dangerous territory for LGBT people. For many Christians, leaving church is often equated with leaving God. The paradox of my Christian journey is that I did not meet the living, incarnate Word of God (Jesus) until I was rejected by my church and family. In the Gospel of John, the man born blind reveals his miraculous healing to the temple leadership and warrants expulsion because he challenges traditional beliefs and threatens authority. Similarly, when I announced God’s healing of my own shame-based homophobia, I was put out of both church and home. Utterly alone and wandering aimlessly, Jesus found me. He found me in the long and lonely car drive searching for a new home. He found me in my tear-soaked bed amid the darkness of midnight hours. He found me drifting in parks seeking solace in nature. He found me in the friend who believed in my worth and goodness as a beloved gay child of God. Ironically, it was outside the walls of institutional religion that Jesus became authentically manifest to me. He found me when I was most wounded and vulnerable. Hindsight reveals a silver lining to the cloud of rejection by the institutional church. Gay and lesbian Christians acquire a razor-sharp distinction between an all-loving God and a self-made religion. The two, after all, can be mutually exclusive. A wise friend of mine sums up human interaction in one sentence. “It seems to me there are two types of behaviors in the world. One says, ‘Come here’ and the other say, ‘Go away.’” I am still ambivalent about inclusion within religious institutions. However, if and when I am asked to “go away,” I am certain that Jesus will find me, wherever I am. Jesus, when the world around me shouts “go away,” may I rest in knowing you will search and find me in the ordinary places of my life. Ann Amideo holds a Master’s Degree in Theology from the Seminary of the Immaculate Conception in New York. She was instrumental in initiating a ministry for Catholic/Christian Parents of Gay/Lesbian Children in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Rockville Centre, New York. She continues to facilitate ecumenical prayer groups for gay/lesbian people and their families. Ann continues to write and speak on religious injustices toward sexual minorities. Summer 2001 7 someone, a stranger, connects us with the other person, as the servant-girl connected Peter to Jesus the Galilean, (vs. 69b-70) our first response may be a denial in the form of a feigned confusion at the question “Who? I do not know who you are talking about.” We may then, like Peter, move some place else to try to show our lack of concern for what is taking place nearby. Peter’s second denial (vs. 71) is preceded by a public accusation; the second servant girl tells the crowd that he is connected with Jesus of Nazareth, a more specific designation than Jesus the Galilean. Here Matthew and Mark record that Peter swore as he said, specifically this time, that he did not know Jesus (vs. 72). They also record that the third accusation came from the group, and it was an accusation with proof— the accent in his speech. We will fear this most— direct accusations with proof. If not accused and forced to lie, we can pretend that others do not know and then we can feel safe. Proof, for some, can be their speech patterns. For others, the proof could be that someone recognizes a sign or a gesture. Other proof could be that we were seen with the person at incriminating places (“This man was with Jesus”). Our denials would escalate, from feigned confusion to flat denial to fearful denial. (The NRSV translations of Matthew, Luke, and John end Peter’s third denial with an exclamation point.) This triple accusation is what we fear the most. If we have to deny who we are and with whom we are three times it means that we are likely not to be believed and therefore we are in great danger of being discovered, being out-ed, and at risk for the repercussions. The Sign Now, Peter hears the rooster crow (vs. 74b); he hears the reminder of the relationship that Jesus gave him, of the depth of feeling that he has. Peter needed that audible reminder to realize what he had done— that he had denied his relationship with the one person he loved the most. The same holds true for us in our own denials of those we love or the LGBT community to which we belong—we would suddenly realize what we had done and what it means to us and to the person and community we love. That person, that community, needs loving support, and we have just denied that love. The rooster crowing, or whatever sign we have of our love, would be a painful reminder of the shame that is laid upon such a relationship. We would realize that we are weak, that we have internalized the homophobia or bi-phobia (fear of bisexual persons) that the people around us exhibit. We might have to go away from that place, as Peter “went out,” (vs. 75b) and find ourselves weeping bitterly because of the pain we are feeling. This pain is for many things; for our shame at both the denial and the weakness, for the hurt done to the person and community we love, for the injustice of it all, for the feeling of the hopelessness of it all, and for the feeling of utter and irrevocable defeat. Redemption When we find ourselves in similar situations, we must remember that all is not lost. All was not lost for Peter in his act of denial. He was the only one of the disciples who followed Jesus to the point of danger. Thus, he kept part of his promise, as Matthew and Mark report: Peter did not desert Jesus; and as John reports: Peter did follow Jesus. Peter had the courage of his love of Jesus to even take the chance of being recognized. Thus, when the rooster crowed after he denied Jesus, Peter realized that his courage which brought him there was not enough to risk his life for the person he loved. We are likely to understand this. As much as we may love our loved one, the courage that this love gives us may not be enough when the loved one needs it the most. But the reminder that Peter has in the crowing rooster can also be a sign of hope. The rooster primarily crows to greet the dawn. It communicates strength and courage for another day. Signs such as the pink triangle, which was used by the Nazis to identify homosexuals who were later “exterminated” in concentration camps, are used today as symbols of pride. Thus, even though we may weep for our denial of love and connection, the sign is there to give us strength and courage. Christians in general use the cross for this purpose; what was once a sign of degradation and humiliating death is now a symbol of the gift that God has given us all through Christ. For Peter, what brings redemption is Pentecost. Prior to this, as John records, Peter was just simply going to go back to his former means of living: fishing Pentecost, for Peter, is when he is finally able, when he finally has the strength and courage, to speak in public what he feels and believes. Oh, Lazarus, you were four days in the tomb. Did you feel the decay of your body? Did you sense the loss of your spirit? “Come out!” he cried. And out you came. Your spirit returned. Your body restored. All you needed was to shed your grave clothes, the clothing of fear and loss. “Georgia Powers” God Says, “I Love You.” O Lord, you have searched me and known me. Psalm 139:1 (NRSV) Iwas 32 years old, attending an event at Tatamagouche Centre, a United Church of Canada educational/retreat centre in Nova Scotia. The weekend began with a devotional reflection on Psalm 139. One of the leaders invited us to follow along as the whole psalm was read to us. Then we were invited to relax, “get comfortable,” close our eyes and listen for what might be new, different, exciting as the psalm was read to us. Following a lengthy silence, we were invited to read the psalm, a third time, in unison. WOW!! Two unshatterable truths came upon me in that process. They have not been shaken since. First, God knows me through and through. God knows me better than I know myself. God has known me and will know me forever. There are no secrets about my self that I am able to hide from God. Scrap the theological term for this, said I, just know that you are fully known by God. Then, rushing in upon that intimate awareness, came an even greater truth: With all this knowledge of me, God still clearly and sincerely says, “I love you… I love you… I love YOU just the way you are!…just the way I made you, warts and all.” I had been preaching that “gospel” to others for over twelve years. I preached it quite convincingly. Now, I was finally, personally convinced. God loves the gay man he created, the gay man he called into ministry. Now I can love “me” too! God, fully aware of me, and all your children, loving us without limit and without condition, help us never to doubt or forget such love. Bob Johnson, an ordained minister of the United Church of Canada, has been on a journey of self-awareness and self-acceptance for the past twenty years. Presently he serves the newest Aff irming congregation, Centenary-Queen Square United Church, in inner city Saint John, New Brunswick. The congregation has welcomed him for himself so warmly and completely that his journey has been much enriched and greatly moved forward. (John 21:3 and following verses).2 This is often the way in which we respond. We may find ourselves simply going on as before, hiding in the “closet” and continuing with the double life we lived. This is a defeat. This is why there may be a higher rate of alcoholism and suicide for gay, lesbian and bisexual persons than for the rest of the population. To live a double life, to live with part of ourselves hidden away is to live as a broken person. If we are lucky, we can weave a seemingly “normal” appearance to present to the rest of the world and still maintain our closest relationships. But we are still hiding. Pentecost, for Peter, is when he is finally able, when he finally has the strength and courage, to speak in public what he feels and believes. That is the message for us. Christ is with us forever. Our relationships can survive a denial because Christ can give us the strength to go on. With Christ, we can find the courage to speak out and live through the worst of what we feared: loss of job, family, safety. The victory of Christ is a message of hope, a message that in this suffering there will be the joy of living as spiritually whole persons. There is hope that our worst fears may never be realized. The resurrection tells us that, even if our worst fears are realized, justice will be triumphant, that the defeat is not the end. Because of the act of speaking out, lives will be saved and new community will be formed. “Georgia Powers” is a United Methodist clergywoman who deeply desires to follow God’s call, even if it is from the closet. The author’s pseudonym is respectfully taken from Georgia Harkness and Jeanne Audrey Powers. Notes 1I am using we, even though I know I do not speak for everyone However, to say “they” makes it too impersonal. Please remember, when I say “we” I know gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender persons are not homogeneous. 2Ed. note: Franciscan priest Richard Rohr has pointed out that Peter’s three-fold denial is balanced by his three-fold affirmation of love for Jesus in this passage, in which the resurrected Jesus asks Peter three times if he loves him. 8 Open Hands Summer 2001 9 Gay people do not have a monopoly on feeling unloved and rejected. I suspect that one of the roots of bigotry and domination so evident in our churches and society today is a feeling of insecurity and fear of rejection. To make other people conform to our wishes gives us a feeling of power and control. Our self-worth is much dependent on “what will people think or say if I do this or don’t do that?” Those words, drilled into me from childhood, have hounded me all my life. I grew up in a home where my mother often sang of God’s grace with poignant longing. However, I didn’t receive a lot of grace. Favor was something to be earned, and no matter how hard I tried, I could never quite measure up to please my father. In retrospect, I have come to realize that he was probably never able to please his father either. I have not always succeeded in helping my own children to feel appreciated. I am slowly learning how to give compliments instead of criticism. By God’s grace I am making progress. I am grateful to witness the superb job of parenting our own children are doing. God’s gracious miracle of grace and love is breaking the cycle of emotional abuse and domination of generations. I grew up in a church that taught me about love and grace, but measured out huge doses of condemnation. One of those experiences of judgment happened to my family when I was one year old. As I grow older, I realize more and more the impact that experience has had on my life. My Father’s Sin My father had been a bridge builder, a farmer, and a schoolteacher. When he had an opportunity to become president of a bank in a small town, my parents moved about 45 miles to that new community. The town was so small that we jokingly referred to it as “a wide space in the road.” It was situated in an Amish and Mennonite community. In the Mennonite Church of that day it was customary to bring a letter of recommendation from the previous church when you wanted to transfer membership from one congregation to another. My parents were active in the church they had come from and they had “good” church letters to present. However, my father immediately ran into a problem. The policy of the congregation had been that insurance was not biblical. As a banker, my father wrote insurance policies. A great debate ensued as to whether he could be a member of the church and write insurance policies. The verdict was negative! I was a very sensitive child. I have always deeply loved God and wanted more than anything else to please God. It troubled me much that my father did not go to church with the rest of us. I was afraid he would go to hell! So, I prayed earnestly for my daddy. As I remember it, I prayed for him every day until he died. When he died, following a tragic accident at 67 years of age, it was a very traumatic experience for me. I believe that God is able to make all things work for good in our lives. That painful experience of rejection of my father by the church has enabled me to feel deeply the pain and rejection of the people the church calls “sinners” today. My Brother’s Shame I had three older siblings. They were all brothers. One of my deep desires was to have a sister. When I was threegoing- on-four years old, my parents told me that we were going to have a baby. My immediate reaction was to say very vehemently, “Well, if it’s a boy, I’m going to take him out and bury him!” When the baby was born, it was a boy! Probably hoping to relieve my disappointment, my parents told me that I could name him. I forgot all about my threat to bury him in the joy of naming and claiming my baby brother. I felt very responsible for him. We grew up in the usual way that siblings do. Ray and I were playmates, friends, and sometimes confidantes. On his wedding day, my husband and I were alone with Ray in his apartment for awhile before the ceremony. He said to me, “Oh, Roberta, I am so scared, so scared!” Of course, he couldn’t tell me the real reason for his fear. My reaction would probably have been very dramatic. When I was 58 years old, I received the shock of my life. My brother Ray became ill and was hospitalized for tests. He was in the hospital many weeks, and though I called him almost every Saturday, I could never find out the diagnosis or prognosis of his disease. Finally, it became evident to me that Ray wanted very much for us to visit him. The next weekend my husband and I drove from our home in eastern Pennsylvania to Chicago to comfort him and tell him good-bye. It is difficult to describe to you what it was like to walk into that hospital room and see the emaciated body of my brother. Another brother and his wife were with us also. After we all hugged him and sat down, there was an awkward silence. Then I, always the talkative one, said, “Ray, as we were driving through the mountains of Pennsylvania yesterday, the clouds were so beautiful. They reminded me of when we were children and used to climb up on the chicken house roof to talk and watch the clouds. Do you remember the time we saw a cloud that we thought looked That painful experience of rejection of my father by the church has enabled me to feel deeply the pain and rejection of the people the church calls “sinners” today. 10 Open Hands Wisdom [Sophia] has built her house. She has set up her seven pillars. … She has mixed her wine. She has set her table. She has sent out her women servants to call from the highest places in the town, “Come eat my bread and drink the wine I have mixed. Leave immaturity, and live, and walk in the way of Wisdom-Sophia.” Proverbs 9:1-3, 5-6 Twenty-one years ago another Jesuit ordination took place at the Cathedral in Oakland, California. After studying together for three years, my male classmates were ordained. The six of us women who were equally called, ready, willing, and able, were not. My feminist colleagues and I protested this action by educating the community of the Graduate Theological Union about the theology of feminist ministry. The week before the ordination we passed out fliers which stated the injustice of ordaining men only, named the varieties of ministries within the church that women and others marginalized do, and called the church to recognize renewed priestly ministry in its midst. We reminded the community that we are called into priestly ministry through baptism. On the day of ordination we stood outside the cathedral and offered everyone a daisy. Since daisies are everywhere in Berkeley we chose them as a metaphor for the many ministries communities need, call forth, and challenge churches to recognize. After the kyriarchal ordination, my community of women and men “ordained” me. Gathered on the rooftop of the building in which we lived, surrounded by the San Francisco Bay, they each gave me a shell to symbolize my gifts, blessed me with water, and sent me forth to minister with women and marginalized people. Looking back on this experience I know that I am called by my community to welcoming ministry. This foundational experience confirms for me that I am God’s beloved. Called by Wisdom-Sophia since birth to feminist, welcoming, renewed priestly ministry, I act on this call daily. Listening to the voices of the LGBT community, I respond by engaging in social justice work to make the world safe for all of us: serving the marginalized, teaching the young, counseling the confused, gathering the community for liturgy and Eucharist. Wisdom Sophia has called me, a lesbian, to image her in the healing of creation. Blessed are you, Wisdom-Sophia, Beloved on the Journey, for weaving my life with yours and calling me to do your work of social justice. Diann Neu, a remarkably inventive creator of liturgies, and her partner Mary Hunt are cofounders and co-directors of WATER, the Women’s Alliance for Theology, Ethics and Ritual in Silver Spring MD, 8035 13th Street, Silver Spring MD 20910, 301-589-2509; Fax 301-589- 3150; dneu@hers.com. My Ordination Summer 2001 11 like Jesus and his disciples in a little boat? We thought that maybe they were coming to take us home to heaven.” He answered, “Oh, Roberta, I’ve been thinking about that a lot!” The memory was probably more vivid for him than for me because he had such a remarkable memory. Then he was ready to tell us his story. He said, “I have a sad story to tell you. I have AIDS.” My mind was racing ahead, searching for what I knew about AIDS. Grasping for an acceptable reason, I thought, “He’s a nurse, that’s how he got it.” However, his next words, “I have no one to blame but myself,” quickly shattered that hope. Then he added wistfully, as if he really hoped we would understand, but doubted that we could, “My sexual fantasies have always been with men.” To this day, I can vividly remember the pain and shame in his face as he told us his story. It was very evident that he was going to die. We were allowed only two brief visits with him that weekend. We assured him of our love and care for him and he assured us that he was ready to meet God. The time together was too short. I talked to him the following Saturday on the phone for a few minutes; then, two weeks after we had hugged him last, he died. We flew to my home state of Kansas for the memorial service. A letter of condolence for my sister-in-law and her children from the governor of the state was shared with accolades for his excellent service, and colleagues in the nursing profession gave him high praise. The pastor’s sermon was built around the story of “The Prodigal Son” from the Gospel of Luke. This led into an account of the reason for my brother’s death. It was painful to sit among the people we grew up with and feel the shock waves as they heard this information for the first time. Once again our family was in disgrace and vulnerable to gossip behind our backs. It was comforting to return to my own home and feel the love of my own church family. I felt sorry for my siblings who still lived in Kansas. Yet I did not escape the pain and shame connected with my brother’s death. It dogged me for ten years. As I endeavored to cope with my loss and feelings of shame, I read much and questioned people. I tried to determine what changed my brother so drastically from the sibling I thought I had grown up with. Everything I read enforced the judgment that homosexuality is a learned experience, a chosen one. Consequently, I became a strong advocate to “keep the church pure” and allow no non-celibate gay individuals to be members. I was sure they needed to repent and change their ways. Then an event happened that began a series of experiences that changed my life forever. From Shame to Belovedness Delegates to our Mennonite Church District Conference discovered that one of its congregations had members living in same-gender committed relationships. Over two years of debate ensued and, as a result, the congregation’s membership in our conference was terminated. As a retired minister my husband still had voting privileges in the conference. When we realized that this controversy was coming to a head we both agreed that it is not fair to vote about other people’s lives when we have not listened to their stories and learned to know them. So, we began to diligently seek out resources that presented the “other side” of the debate and we visited the offending congregation to know the people there. Learning to know lesbian and gay people and listening to their stories brought a completely different perspective to the dialogue and we became convinced that we were wrong in our way of seeing biblical truth. In many ways the Mennonite Church of today had seemed to me to be much more caring and understanding of human needs than the church I grew up in. I had confidence that my church would never again allow anyone to be pushed out because they wrote insurance or wore a tie. In all my years I had never experienced a whole congregation being expelled from a church conference. I can no longer say that, and my confidence in my Mennonite denomination has been shattered. I am not certain when I became acquainted with Henri Nouwen’s books. Hand in hand with my searching to understand the homosexual situation was a longing to have a deeper relationship with God and I began to read books of contemplative scholars. When I heard quotes from Nouwen in a sermon, my interest was piqued and I checked my first Nouwen book out of our church library. After that, I read every book by my friend, Henri, that I could find, and purchased some of them for my own treasures. After reading Life of the Beloved, I was able to say with assurance, “Yes! I, too, am God’s Beloved and it doesn’t depend on my performance.” I believe that God’s love is al- Yes! I, too, am God’s Beloved and it doesn’t depend on my performance. 12 Open Hands Out of Fundamentalism When Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere, but that instead an uproar was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd. “I am innocent of this man’s blood,” he said. “It is your responsibility!” All the people answered, “Let his blood be on us and on our children!” Matthew 27:24-25 (NIV) ways with me and does not change no matter what I do. I can respond to that kind of love with joy and a deep desire to do only that which pleases the one who loves me so deeply. As my understanding of sexual diversity grew I intuitively felt that between the lines of Henri’s writings I could hear the heart cry of a gay man. After attending a retreat at Kirkridge Retreat Center in Bangor, Pennsylvania, that centered around the writings of Nouwen, I felt more strongly than ever that Henri was of gay orientation. In 1999, his biographer, Michael Ford, confirmed my intuition in his book, Wounded Prophet: A Portrait of Henri J. M. Nouwen. This knowledge was another affirmation to me of God’s leading in my life to become an advocate for GLBT people. In God’s great providence, one of the writers who influenced me most toward a deeper relationship with my Creator was a gay man! Ironically, the people I feared became one of the greatest blessings of my life. I am experiencing a freedom I never knew before of God’s Spirit moving in my life and connecting with others in life-giving ways. My circle of GLBT friends continues to grow. I thank God for the diversity of God’s creation and for the joy I have in being a part of the lives of such beautiful, sensitive, and loving individuals. They teach me much. I hug to my heart the good news that I truly am God’s Beloved and it gives me great joy to assure all people who so desperately need to hear the message, that they, too, are God’s Beloved. Roberta Showalter Kreider and her husband, Rev. Harold Kreider, are advocates for GLBT people. Roberta has edited From Wounded Hearts: Faith Stories of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgendered People and Those Who Love Them. This anthology of 49 stories told in 50 chapters is available from Chi Rho Press of Gaithersburg, MD. Order from the website: www.ChiRhoPress.com. In Canada, order from e-mail: mapenterprises@home.com As an undergraduate student studying religious studies, I struggled with my own fundamentalist background. Every time the professor explained that part of the text was historically improbable or that it related to events of the times of the writers and were not historically accurate, a voice in me protested. I knew that God’s Word spoke, and in my case condemned me for being gay. The sun was pouring into the windows of the temporary building which housed our class on the winter morning when our professor lectured on Matthew’s account of the trial of Jesus before Pilate. Even through the years of indoctrination, I could see that the cry “Let his blood be on us and on our children!” was an unlikely chant for any group at any time to take up. I started to listen to the theories that the writer was either antisemitic or was trying to make the Romans less responsible for the death of Jesus. And I started to think that the Jews had gotten a raw deal in that account. Realizing that the writer, and not God, was antisemitic, made me realize that those verses in the Bible that I thought condemned me were not about me. The parts of the Bible that tell us we’re wrong because we’re Jews, gays, lesbians, bisexuals, or transgender are about someone else’s fears or ambitions. And the parts of the Bible that show the agenda of certain writers help us to see that God does not hate us because of who we are. Although those passages can be painful, there is freedom in studying them; marvelously, the word can free us, even when it seems to be at its worst. Breathe Life into us through your living word and make us see your message through the mists of time. Desmond K. Parsons and his partner Dean Penney have been openly gay in their congregations in the United Church of Canada at Gower Street in St. John’s and at Memorial United in Grand Falls-Windsor for years. Desmond writes with humor, “I recently joined Aff irm [the LGBT group in the United Church of Canada], which was very lazy of me, because I’ve been gay for years.” Summer 2001 13 Last year I turned 50. All during my 49th year I wanted it not to be a big deal. But it was. I remembered the saying once popular among GLBT activists, “If we knew we were going to live this long, we would have taken better care of ourselves!” In my 49th year, that saying haunted me. Through years of overworking that sometimes bordered on the reckless, juggling the demanding life of a pastor of a Metropolitan Community Church in a very large city, which included the worst years of AIDS deaths, activism that included civil disobedience, an earthquake, national and international responsibilities for MCC, trying to write, and have a life, I had become the lesbian/ religious/activist version of a “super mom.” A cliché in some ways. People would gush at me and say “How to do you do it?” When I stopped long enough to figure out how I did it, it wasn’t a pretty picture, as those closest to me could testify. But thankfully, I reached 50! Exhausted, but I got there. Amazing. My only serious health problem continued to be lifelong, chronic asthma. But, I felt so much more fragile than I wanted to let on. I had been restless and depressed in my 49th year. Irritable and angry, and trying to cover it up and not notice. It is said that we replace our body cells every seven years. At 49, I was completing my seventh whole body, and about to begin my eighth. As a preacher for nearly 30 years, it occurred to me that my body was having it’s own Jubilee. But it was as if I could not dare to own that, or embrace it. My heart and mind and spirit were not prepared to walk with my body through this journey. There are lots of self-help books on turning 50, symptomatic of babyboomer self-obsessiveness, but I wanted to read none of them. I didn’t really want to deal with it. Someone pointed out to me that part of what happens to us when we turn 50 is that the phrase, “the rest of your life” suddenly has meaning and definition! “The rest of your life” is now more nearly quantifiable in a way it was not just a year before. We come up against limits— the ultimate limit, our mortality. We will not live and love and fight for justice forever. Three years before, while tidepooling at my favorite vacation spot near Morro Bay, California, I fell on the slippery, algae-covered rocks while walking much too fast (a lifelong habit!). I fell hard, and for the next year had to do physical therapy, having seriously aggravated a minor back problem into a major one. At the moment I fell, I realized that the day would come when I would no longer be fit enough to jump over the rocks and hike the trails near the Pacific that I love. It was a horrifying moment of grief and loss, anticipating the loss of agility, of physical and mental skills, of life itself. I experienced the foreshadowing of much greater loss. The loss of some dreams, ambitions. I pushed those fleeting, momentary thoughts way back, deep within me. That was the start of my journey toward 50. In some unhealthy ways I had become proud of my “super mom” resilience and workaholism: a secret cherished pride that for me, “went before a fall.” I had to do a lot of work healing my young, asthmatic child, who coped with mortal fear by “counterphobically” imagining myself to be, and even striving for, indestructibility. Thank God for my fall, which did not kill me, but slowed me down. Speed Leas of the Alban Institute has done some work with MCC leaders on the concept of “polarities,” that is, that there are ideas or needs that seem to be in opposition that serve us best if we do not collapse the tension between them, but allow that tension to keep us in dynamic balance. I have found three necessary polarities for “GLBT religious activists turning 50.” Sun City or Tahiti? Security vs. Risk-Taking I have found myself very conflicted in this time of my life between these two impulses. Is this the time I should be working hard to save for retirement (oops, most of us baby-boomer activists completely spaced that one!), paying down my mortgage (God! Who ever thought I would actually own anything!)? Or is this the time to totally remake my life, go for the unfulfilled dream, to have a genuine mid-life crisis? Go to Tahiti with Gauguin and paint? Or should I settle down, start looking into retirement options? Some of my best teachers in this have been friends and family in there seventies, my mother included. I can hear her saying to me “You think 50 is bad, wait until you turn 70!” Watching her survive widowhood, embrace retirement, take care of herself financially, learn to love travel, to brave new adventures is very heartening. My friend Malcolm Boyd, at a vigorous 78, talks in terms of wondering “if you have one more shipwreck left in you”! He has an eternally youthful mischievousness, while plung- Coming Home to Myself My Not So Private Jubilee Nancy L. Wilson Being a GLBT religious leader is not for sissies. 14 Open Hands ing into the tasks and challenges of each decade with courage and wisdom. That prayerful wisdom that sustained him in Selma during the civil rights movement now sustains him as a writer and teacher nearing 80. Part of the struggle that GLBT activists my age face who have been doing this all of our adult lives is that we sacrificed security to be in this movement. We have been underpaid, uninsured, with little or no job security. What we could get by with in our twenties and thirties we find we cannot put up with in our fifties and sixties. In our twenties and even in our thirties security didn’t matter so much to us. It was a dirty word. Bourgeois. We really didn’t expect to live this long, and, of course many of us didn’t. We were often psychologically exhausted as well as financially depleted. For many of us (I was fortunate enough to be an exception) it may seem there is no sabbatical, or possibility to let down, and limited professional options. We may have no pension, no savings, and no kids to take care of us. For many of us, some, most, or all of our male friends died in the 80’s and early 90’s. Many of our women friends in the movement dropped out, disappeared. Many paid high prices for activism, without recognition, and certainly without material rewards. A few months before going on sab- Love Made Personal I met love made personal on Holy Saturday 2001 through eight panels of the world famous AIDS Memorial Quilt. A Unitarian Church along with the County Health District, OUTKitsap, PFLAG, and the West Olympic Council for the Arts had sponsored the exhibit. I was invited to provide an indoor labyrinth for viewers. The labyrinth would provide a safe contemplative walking space for visitors to be with their feelings and thoughts as they gazed at the hanging panels of the Quilt made by friends, lovers and family members. I had seen the immensity of the Quilt when displayed in the Washington D.C. Mall in October 1996. It provided a dramatic testimony of the devastating and tragic loss of life in the HIV/AIDS pandemic. I remember being overwhelmed at seeing so many names, with so many endearing photos and other memorabilia which honored individuals who have died of AIDS. Yet I was also deeply touched with our local exhibit while lingering in the labyrinth and gazing closely at the Quilt. “He was born, he lived a little, and then he died.” “I am a better man for having known him.” “Beloved son, brother, grandson, uncle and friend.” “We cared about each other.” “He was our sunshine.”A grieving father later approached me and introduced me to his beloved son’s panel. I listened as he spoke of how much his son meant to him and how he still missed him years later. Later in the afternoon, a grieving sister introduced me to her beloved brother’s panel with tears glistening in her eyes. Through them, I met love made personal. I left that afternoon awed at all the love experienced. Love is the greatest life force the world will ever know. As long as we remember the names of loved ones, we honor their lives and belovedness in our hearts. Help each of us live his or her belovedness, O God. Amen. Sandra Bochonok, Ph.D., is a UFMCC minister serving an international community of seekers through the website www.soulfoodministry. org. She authored a daily devotional, Living as the Beloved: One Day at a Time. Her book is available through www.chirhopress.com beginning November 2001. For more details about the AIDS Memorial Quilt, visit www. aidsquilt.org. For more information about labyrinths, visit www.labyrinthsociety.org. Beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God; everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. 1 John 4:7 NRSV Summer 2001 15 batical, a life-saving event for me, I heard Rev. Jim Mitulski, then pastor of MCC San Francisco, describe the posttraumatic stress that GLBT leaders experienced during the 15 most intense years of AIDS deaths. He said, “Maybe some day we’ll actually have 15 minutes to process all that we went through.” Some piece of denial cracked open in me upon hearing that, and I took that “15 minutes” over the next year. During the same months that I was healing whole on sabbatical, I made two trips to Africa, both work-related, but with significant time to travel with my nature-loving, photographer spouse. I became a devoted bird-watcher, and I started writing poems. I eventually quit my job of nearly 15 years as pastor of MCC Los Angeles, while keeping another, part-time job, without having a real plan in place. Everyday I feel the pull of each side of this polarity of security and risk-taking. Risk-taking, up until now, seemed the only viable option, the only life worth living. But if I am going to be an ornery 80-year-old lesbian still occasionally walking on the beach and daring the tide pools, I had better start changing my ways. I have to repent of the ways I have not respected the limits of my mind and body and strength. I had better learn to lean on God in new ways, to strengthen the systems and relationships that will strengthen me. I have to of what others might think. I became whole that day and had a whole new insight into my ministry and appreciation for my beautiful gay and lesbian friends. I have never looked back. That very same year, 1974, my Dutch/English songwriter friend, Fred Kaan, wrote a hymn which became imbedded in my psyche and which enriches many of our hymnals. Help us accept each other as Christ accepted us; Teach us as sister, brother, each person to embrace. Be present, Lord, among us, and bring us to believe We are ourselves accepted and meant to love and live. © 1975 Hope Publishing Company Our God, who created us, says, “Have no fear. I have called you by name, you are mine. You are precious to me and honored and I love you.” Bob Lodwick is a Presbyterian minister who retired as the PC(USA)’s representative to the churches in Europe and the Middle East. He is the author of Remembering the Future: The Challenge of the Churches in Europe (NY: Friendship Press, 1995). He is married and has three grown children. The Power of Grace Help us accept each other, beginning with me! The days were dark and bleak. I knew I was gay but I did not admit it to myself. I thought the idea and the impulses for years. I hated the very thought of being gay. How could I be in ministry and seek to be a servant of Christ and be gay? The internal struggle was intense until one day, a beloved friend introduced me to Paul Tillich, the German theologian. Jim asked me to read Tillich’s sermons, “You are Accepted.” I did so and the Holy Spirit must have been in both his words and working in my mind. Tillich wrote, And in the light of this grace we perceive the power of grace in our relation to ourselves. We experience moments in which we accept ourselves, because we feel that we have been accepted by that which is greater than we. If only more such moments were given to us! For it is such moments that make us love our life, that make us accept ourselves, not in our goodness and self-complacency, but in our certainty of the eternal meaning of our life. We cannot force ourselves to accept ourselves. We cannot compel anyone to accept himself. But sometimes it happens that we receive the power to say “yes” to ourselves, that peace enters into us and makes us whole, that self-hate and self - contempt disappear, and that our self is reunited with itself. Then we can say that grace has come upon us.… That evening, I knew that grace had come upon me. I accepted this gift of my gayness as a gift of God. I was no longer filled with self-hatred or fear 16 Open Hands learn a new kind of accountability for my own health and well-being. I also have to learn how to relax, how to have more fun, how to pace myself, how to practice “risk management” in a personal and faithful way. A Sex Symbol— Like It or Not Public vs. Private I have lived a life very much in the public eye, “out there.” Despite my protestations, work and activism have come first, much of the time. I gave my life away, as women do, too readily. I loved my work, but I often did not value my inner life or my relational life. It rarely got the best hours of my day. I came to my lover, family and friends, to my prayer life, to God and spirituality exhausted and spent. When I left my pastorate, there was endless speculation as to why— speculation about my health, my 23-year relationship, my future in MCC, ad nauseam. No one wanted to accept the simple explanation that I felt that it was time to move on. That I was tired. That it was time to shift and change. Instead, people imagined that there had to be some great mystery, tragedy, or plot afoot. Being the object of public speculation, when doing something as ordinary and natural as leaving a job, is the price of being even a minor public figure. I love preaching and the public activism that expresses my values. However, sometimes it is very difficult to claim my personal, private boundaries. Being a GLBT activist also means being a sex symbol, whether we signed up for that or not. I have had to deal with the consequences, occasionally, of not taking that fact seriously. We GLBT activists, openly GLBT clergy and church leaders are the objects of endless projection. We have fought for sexual freedom while sometimes being un-free, or unhealthy in our own sexual lives. We have not always practiced what we have preached. For men, sexual addiction, greatly aggravated by drug and alcohol addiction, continues to be the number one killer. For lesbians, we do not know how to say yes or no about our sexuality and needs, we unnecessarily blur boundaries, we do not stand up for ourselves, we internalize sexism, we fool ourselves into thinking that serial monogamy is a lifestyle choice. Too many of us still do not know how to be happily single or passionately married. We have not been willing to embrace or understand the changes in our sexuality as we age. We are a youth-obsessed movement that neglects the actual I want to be “alive” for the rest of my life. Summer 2001 17 youth among us; and we are still terrified of aging. Activists are notorious for being difficult partners in relationship. Too much of our passion goes into our work, and not enough into our most important relationships. Whether we like it or not, if we are GLBT activists, pastors, teachers, and leaders, we are role models. We may be bad role models or good ones, better or worse, depending on the day, but we are role models. Very human and imperfect role models. But being a role model is the inescapable price of being a public figure. We are accountable in that way. We are not perfect role models, ever, but I think we have to be conscious not only of what we say, but how our lives reflect the values that we say we believe in. The authenticity of our leadership continues to be tested, sometimes brutally, when we are in the public eye. Being a GLBT religious leader is not for sissies. Prepare to have your feelings hurt, your covers pulled, your patience and ethics tested. Recovering from the wounds this process inflicts also has to be in our plan of self-care as we age. Recently I spent an hour on line with my niece, just because I could. We had never talked on the phone that long, and frankly, I don’t think I had ever been available for a spontaneous hourlong conversation in the middle of a workday. What a great gift! She even asked me to help her with some homework. I tasted the joy of that moment for a long while. My partner of 23 years is still my best friend. I remember the title of a very early “gay lib” book called I Have More Fun With You Than Anybody. I still hope that after 23 years, with whatever time remains for us, we can enjoy our fun and shipwrecks together. I want her to have more of the best hours of my day. And I want to enjoy hers as well. Sleepwalking and Wakefulness Rest vs. Productivity I have rediscovered “Sabbath” in this time of Jubilee, the Sabbath of Sabbaths. Jubilee means freedom from debt and despair and the burdens of a lifetime. I have learned, through friends, loved ones, mentors, and a good therapist, what space and rest can mean, can provide. Many activists, women and men, do not have a “room of (our) own” as Virginia Woolf called it, to pursue our bliss, our best craft, our inner life. We desperately need that space for renewal and the recycling of our skills and gifts and callings. In the past I prided myself on not needing much rest, on the boundless energy God had given me. But, some of that was a lie. I need plenty of rest in order to really thrive, and to produce what is really mine to produce. I am that “barren woman” with so many children that Isaiah 54 celebrates. I have many “children”— not from my body, but from my heart and soul— whom I have loved and mentored and pastored and befriended, and who have often done the same for me. I probably have another generation or two “within” me, if I will respect my need for rest and renewal. As I left the pastorate at MCC/LA, many people congratulated me on my “retirement.” I am old enough, I guess, that some assumed that that was what I was doing. I really resented it in some ways, as an indication of aging, or feeling as though people were writing me out of a future in ministry. And, I had to confess, it was another rude, reality check: You are aging! I am not retired! But I am in transition; I am praying that God will help me re-invent myself in this new millennium. That I can learn to live a life blessed with rest and Sabbath, so that my work will have power and energy and creativity. As I began to take my well-deserved break several months ago, a colleague of mine said she looked forward to experiencing me “awake” again. I had been sleepwalking a lot, I guess, on the treadmill of my own and other expectations. To be alive, fully conscious in the present moment, says engaged-Buddhist teacher Thich Naht Hanh, is to come home to your true self. I want to be “alive” for the rest of my life— alive to beauty and mystery and to all that is worth my time and passion. The week of my 50th birthday, some friends lovingly teased me; a group of MCC clergywomen surprised me with a gorgeous bird book and lunch; at a class I was attending with friends, 40 people prayed for me and blessed me; I went bird watching; and a group of friends wrote prophecies about where I would be ten years from now. Since then and not unrelated, a former lover bought a horse; another friend was given a piano; others have also quit jobs, gone back to school, gotten clean and sober; some went to the doctor for their first annual actual check-up of their lives. How are we going to create an ethic and a community that help us thrive and grow as we age, as we “Jubilee?” How are you preparing for your next adventure? Nancy Wilson is the author of Our Tribe: Queer Folks, God, Jesus and the Bible, newly revised and updated and published by Alamo Square Press (New Mexico, 2000). Formerly pastor of MCC Los Angeles, she now pastors the Church of the Trinity MCC, Sarasota, Florida. Her partner is therapist and artist Paula Schoenwether. Many activists, women and men, do not have a “room of (our) own” as Virginia Woolf called it, to pursue our bliss, our best craft, our inner life. But now thus say the Lord, the one who created you, O Jacob, the one who formed you, O Israel: Do not fear, for I have redeemed you; I have called you by name, you are mine. When you pass through the waters, I will be with you; and through the rivers, they shall not overwhelm you; when you walk through fire you shall not be burned, and the flame shall not consume you. For I am the Lord your God, the Holy One of Israel, your Savior. “I Have Called You by Name.” Joanne Carlson Brown, Ph.D., is a long time member and former board member of Aff irmation, a Reconciling United Methodist, an adjunct faculty member of Seattle University School of Theology and Ministry and pastor of United Church in University Place, a joint United Methodist and United Church of Christ congregation. She lives with her beloved fur person, Ceilidh. The phone rang. The voice on the other end was crying. Between sobs he choked out the terrible words, “Jamie is dead. She killed herself.” I stood holding the phone for the longest time, not really in disbelief, more in rage. How many more Jamies will it take for people to see how destructive exclusionary, homophobic attitudes and actions are? When people vote to bar lesbian and gay people from ministry, when “they” bar two people from pledging their love to each other before God and God’s people, when “they” debate scripture references and psychology reports, do they realize the despair they engender? Jamie absorbed the messages too well. She lost her identity as a child of God. “They” stole that from her. But we as a people of God need to reclaim the marvelous message of Isaiah, need to counter the despair with a God who has created us and loves us, who has called us by name, who says so clearly we are precious and honored and loved. What would the church be, what would society be if that was preached, proclaimed from pulpit and mountaintop? I have Isaiah 43 taped on my bulletin board in my office and on the headboard of my bed. It is the first thing I read when I wake up and the last thing I read before I go to sleep. With every breath I take it fills my soul: Created, called, loved, precious. To quote a Claudia and Tom Walker song: “I am a child of God—no one can shake my confidence, I am a child of God—no one can take my inheritance: never alone, I’ll stand, strengthened by God’s own hand. I am a child, a child of God.” As children of God, let us reclaim our identities, reclaim our lives, reclaim our souls, and be strengthened by the outrageous, abundant love of our God. Let there be no more Jamies. Creating and loving God, help us to hear you calling us to our true identity as your precious, honored sons and daughters. Isaiah 43:1-3 (Read all of Isaiah 43.) 18 Open Hands Under the pseudonym Isak Dinesen, Karen Blixen wrote this in her “Immigrant’s Notebook,” a part of her book, Out of Africa. It sums up what we celebrate this summer in our Pride marches and festivities. We celebrate our faith in God, and in God’s divinely queer idea to make us Queer, set apart from the rest, outcast from religion, societal and ecclesiastical scapegoats alongside other scapegoats of the world. There are those among us who resist that role. They want us to “mainstream” ourselves, and there’s nothing wrong with that— except that you may take us out of the Queer community but you can’t take the Queer out of us. No matter how easily we can “pass,” we forever have the perspective of the outsider, the one standing on the periphery, on the margins of society, on the threshold of the church, where prophets, poets, artists, mystics, and visionaries are to be found. To me, Pride is not just welcoming our gift to love someone of the same gender or of either gender, or the gift of being transgender. Pride is also about welcoming our gift to view the world and the church in a way others do not. The world is uncomfortable with our pride. A straight minister once took me aside to tell me he had been honored by being invited to preach at an interfaith Gay & Lesbian Pride service in his hometown. He said he had no problems with the gay and lesbian part. But he had always been taught that pride is a sin! I described to him the relatively recent movement to address issues of selfesteem and self-worth among those who have been shamed emotionally, spiritually, and sexually. I explained that among those of us who are lesbian or gay, bisexual or transgender, our “sin” may not be pride, may not be thinking of ourselves more highly than we ought. Our “sin” may be a failure to value who we are, beloved children of God. And like most sin, or ways of “missing the mark,” it is a collective sin, a communal missing the mark. All of culture has conspired to tell us we are less than we are, to shame us, to deny our cultural and spiritual integrity and inheritance. Thus it’s no mistake that, to counteract this cultural and religious message, Pride festivities evolved. Pride festivities do not celebrate that we are more than we are. Pride festivities celebrate that we are no less than we are. And we can take humble pride that our Queer difference has made all the difference that we offer the world and the church. Our difference has given us spiritual gifts that we offer the church. These gifts are not unique to us, but they are more necessary for us to ensure our survival. Out of these gifts, I highlight five. Discernment Awoman who had been attending events I led in Fort Wayne, Indiana, came to me toward the end of my visit. She had had a dream she felt was related to my time with her congregation. She dreamed that she stood at the base of her “high steepled” church and saw other church members trying to lasso the steeple with ropes and chains, intent on bringing the steeple down. She was afraid that, if they were successful, the whole church would topple. She ran to phone her pastor, who was not available, out making pastoral calls. She returned to the scene just as the parishioners achieved their goal. The steeple came crashing down, the whole building grumbled and groaned, and finally collapsed. Still in the dream, she turned away from the terrifying scene and found herself walking arm in arm with her best friend from college, another woman. She realized then that the church that had been destroyed was not her present church, but the church of her youth, the church ignorant and unwelcoming of homosexuality. The destruction of that church in the dream allowed her to acknowledge her hunger for intimacy with another woman, her girlfriend in college. This is the gift of discernment, the ability to let go of religious expressions and environments that do not value us, that treat us as less than God’s beloved, how I define spiritual abuse. In an age of practicing safer sex because of AIDS, we also have learned to practice safer spirit because of homophobia and heterosexism, seeking out those religious expressions and environments that honor our Pride, our faith in the idea that God had when God made us. Imagination One day, along my regular run through the streets of Atlanta, I noticed the sun’s light dim despite a cloudless sky. I remembered that there was to be a solar eclipse during the very time I was running. And I noticed something peculiar which I wrote off to my imagination: the light filtering through the leaves of the trees along the side- “Pride is faith in the idea that God had when God made us.” Pride festivities do not celebrate that we are more than we are. Pride festivities celebrate that we are no less than we are. Summer 2001 19 20 Open Hands walk seemed to me to take the shape of hundreds of tiny crescents. Months later in the Midwest, I was welcomed into the home of two women whose love for each other and new vision of family had created one child each with the cooperation of a gay male couple, friends of theirs. A beautiful little boy and girl played at our feet while we visited. I noticed the workspace of one of the women, a meteorologist, and to my amazement I saw newspaper clippings on a bulletin board that had pictures of the very phenomenon I had witnessed on my run, little crescent-shaped splashes of light beneath trees along a sidewalk. The meteorologist was pictured and quoted in the articles, so I asked her about them. She explained to me that it was like putting a pinprick at one end of a shoebox, facing it to the sun, and viewing the eclipse on the other end of the shoebox. So she essentially told me that what I had dismissed as my imagination was the reality. I looked at the family she and her lover had imagined, and how it too had become the reality. The expectation is that gay people are very creative, and creativity requires imagination. In his book, The Care of the Soul, Thomas Moore writes that the most under-utilized spiritual gift is imagination. We have imagined a God that welcomes us, loves us as beloved children. Our imagination is the reality. We have imagined our love is sacred, our relationships worthy of blessings. Our imagination is the reality. We have imagined a church that welcomes us, recognizes our sacred worth. Our vision has or will become the reality. Remember the Proverb, “Without vision the people perish.” Without our imagination, we perish. Without our imagination, the church is smaller and smaller-minded. Sexuality Co-leading a workshop on “Religion and Homosexuality,” we invited participants to say something about what brought them there. Everyone had some sort of religious connection, save one woman, who said she had no religious background. We pressed her a Fear is Such a Hassle Be not afraid. Deuteronomy 31:8 and popular Catholic hymn by Bob Dufford Fear is such a hassle. So if there is one thing I have taken from my Catholic upbringing it is not to fear much. And I don’t. I accompanied my sister to China where she and her husband adopted a baby. One day as our group was touring I was pushing Elizabeth’s stroller across a busy street in a huge Chinese city. It felt a little like crossing the Washington, DC Beltway at rush hour—in a word, cause for panic. I prayed that I would pilot the carriage across safely, worried that this kid might be flattened on my watch and we were not even on U.S. soil yet! I silently promised myself, and anyone else who might have been listening, that I would never fear anything with regard to this beloved god-child if only I could get us to the other curb, just this once. It was a little dramatic now that I think about it, but in the moment it was absolutely necessary to help me thread through the bicycles, cabs and vans that streamed by while I stood uncertain of when to dash with my new niece in tow. We arrived safely on the other side, little Elizabeth never the wiser about what we had just come through. I emerged a little more sanguine about our collective future, sure that I had used up the only fear I ever plan to have in her regard. Sometimes there is comfort in believing as we do. Be not afraid, and help me not to be either. Mary E. Hunt is a feminist theologian, co-founder and co-director of WATER, the Women’s Alliance for Theology, Ethics and Ritual, a GLBTsupportive organization in Silver Spring, Maryland. Summer 2001 21 little about why she had come to the seminar. She said, “In making love with my lover, I got in touch with a spiritual realm I never before experienced. Since spirituality has to do with God, I came here to find out about God.” In my own experience, during a period of feeling unloved and betrayed, a friend made love to me. We slept together in intimate embrace. The next morning I awoke, feeling beloved, loveable, and loving— even toward those who had proven unloving toward me. And I realized that God had touched me in that lovemaking, that God’s tender loving care for me had been incarnated, embodied once more in the loving pleasure of my friend’s touch. When denied access to the traditional means of God’s grace, we have discovered sexuality as a means of God’s grace, a way we receive and enjoy and share the love God intends for all. We remind the church of the holiness of the body and of sexuality. Sanctuary Author of Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality, the late historian John Boswell visited southern California and did a series of lectures on the special graces of lesbian and gay people, the sacred gifts that we offer. During an informal luncheon with ministers, he was asked what some of those spiritual gifts were. The first he named was hospitality. He said, more so than the general population, he had experienced that we were there for others, whether they needed an ear to listen, a shoulder to cry on, a place to crash, a cause to support. Afterward I took John on my favorite walk, along the palisades overlooking the shoreline of Santa Monica, down to the city’s pier, then back along the wide stretch of sandy beach. Eventually we passed through the gay beach. From there we walked through a pedestrian tunnel, the first leg of ascending the cliffs where my car was parked. I told him of an anti-gay graffiti writer who had once spray-painted on the tunnel walls the message, “Faggots go home!” “Faggots go home!” many times, objecting to the gay beach on the shore side of the tunnel. In reply, some enterprising lesbian or gay man had gotten a can of paint, and, on a high wall on the beach end of the tunnel, had painted in ten-foot-high letters H-O-M-E-! In other words, this gay beach was our home. In the midst of unwelcoming environments, we have created home for one another. Think of how your coming out encouraged others to share their own personal stories with you, of whatever variety. In the culture and the church we are creating sanctuary, a safe space where all are welcome, regardless, as the beloved children of God. Sacrament In the late 70’s, I served as the only openly gay person on a national Presbyterian task force on homosexuality that, after studying the issue for two years, recommended to our denomination that homosexuality should neither be considered a sin nor a bar to ordination. That recommendation was rejected, and my denomination has prohibited ordination of gays and lesbians since. Because Presbyterians are not afraid to be inconsistent, I was nonetheless hired for ten years as the founding director of the Lazarus Project, a ministry of reconciliation between the church and the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community in southern California. As we approached the ninth anniversary of the project on a Sunday on which we were to observe Holy Communion, I learned that our pastor was going to be away and we had to find an ordained minister to come and lead us in Communion. Finding none, we were forced to postpone Communion by a week. Now, the Lazarus Project was a ministry that did not require my ordination, but it was a pastoral ministry to which I could have been ordained. The irony that we could have celebrated Communion on that anniversary Sunday had I been ordained was not lost on me, and I used it as “fodder” for my homily. In a sermon entitled, “What Is Our Unique Sacrament?”, I pointed out that it was not only the anniversary of the beginning of the Lazarus Project, but it was also the ninth anniversary of my “non-ordination.” Thus we were forced to “fast” from the sacrament of Communion. In the absence of the traditional sacrament, I speculated what was the unique sacrament we offered the church, a holy act in which the sacred is manifest. After suggesting several possibilities, I concluded that our vulnerability was what we offer the church: in essence, our “coming out,” our own “communion.” We affirm our spiritual-sexual integrity in a church that has not satisfactorily worked out the relationship of spirituality and sexuality. We tell our stories as new and surprising ways in which God has been revealed. We offer ourselves as living sacrifices, living offerings, living reminders of the holiness of the body, of bodily experience, of sexuality and sensuality. A friend came to visit me when I was on a personal retreat. One of the brothers of the order that ran the retreat house joked with him, “George, what did you bring us?” George threw open his arms and announced, “I brought myself.” Pleasantly astonished, the brother explained that’s exactly what Africans visiting their house in Africa would say when they came. They would not bring gifts, they would say they brought themselves. We bring ourselves: beloved, sacred, holy, good, loving. We celebrate our pride, our faith in the idea that God had when God made us, when God loved us into being. Coda Near the beginning of the 20th century, Saint Elizabeth of the Trinity wrote a message to her mother superior, to be delivered after Elizabeth’s death. She wrote: “You are uncommonly loved,” loved by that love of preference that the Master had here below for some and which brought them so far. He does not say to you as to Peter: “Do you love Me more than these?” Mother, listen to what He tells you: “Let yourself be loved more than these! That is, without fearing that any obstacle will be a hindrance to it, for I am free to pour out My love on whom I wish! ‘Let yourself be loved more 22 Open Hands than these’ is your vocation. It is in being faithful to it that you will make Me happy, for you will magnify the power of My love.” (Prayers of the Women Mystics, ed. Ronda De Sola Chervin, p 202.) Growing up, I could not talk to my parents, my minister, my teachers, or a therapist about my “shame,” my homosexual feelings. But I could talk to God. And I believed God loved me. Many of us have had a similar experience. When we doubted others’ love, we reached out all the more for God’s love. Perhaps that is our vocation, like Elizabeth says of her mother superior, to let ourselves be loved, to realize more keenly and surely and intimately God’s love than many others who enjoy many sources of love. Yet, it is in being faithful to that vocation of letting ourselves be loved by God that we will be able to “magnify the power” of God’s love for others. Our lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender Pride is our faith, our “faith in the idea that God had, when God made us.” Yet it is a faith that is not simply “all about us.” Karen Blixen added an important corollary, “Love the pride of God beyond all things, and the pride of your neighbor as your own.” And she took it a step further: “I will love the pride of my adversaries,…and my lover; and my house shall be, in all humility, in the wilderness a civilized place.” Though we be “a voice crying in the wilderness,” we will yet make the church “a house of prayer for all peoples,” a civilized place in the wilderness. And we will yet make the world safe for sexual and gender diversity. Chris Glaser is editor of Open Hands and author of eight books, including the forthcoming Reformation of the Heart: Seasonal Meditations by a Gay Christian (Westminster John Knox Press, Fall 2001). A less parochial version of this was delivered as the message for the San Jose (California) 2001 Pride interfaith worship service. You may e-mail Chris at ChrsGlaser@aol.com or visit his website, www.ChrisGlaser.com. QTY BACK ISSUES AVAILABLE ___ Down on the Farm (Spring 2001) ___ What About Us Kids? (Winter 2001) ___ Our Healing Touch (Fall 2000) __ The god of Violence (Summer 2000) ___ For All the Saints (Spring 2000) ___ Liberating Word: Interpreting the Bible (Winter 2000) ___ Wholly Holy (Fall 1999) ___ Creative Chaos (Summer 1999) ___ Welcoming the World (Spring 1999) ___ Why Be Specific in Our Welcome? (Winter 1999) ___ A House Divided: Irreconcilable Differences? (Fall1998) ___ Bisexuality: Both/And Rather Than Either/Or (Summer 1998) ___ Treasure in Earthen Vessels—Sexual Ethics (Spring 1998) ___ We’re Welcoming, Now What? (Winter 1998) ___ Creating Sanctuary: All Youth Welcome Here! (Summer 1997) ___ Same-Sex Unions (Spring 1997) ___ Remembering…10th Anniversary (Summer 1995) ___ The God to Whom We Pray (Spring 1995) ___ Reclaiming Pride (Summer 1994) ___ Aging and Integrity (Fall 1992) ___ Our Spirituality: How Sexual Expression and Oppression Shape It (Summer 1992) ___ Lesbian/Gay Reflections on Theology (Spring 1991) ___ Images of Family (Fall 1989) ___ The Closet Dilemma (Summer 1989) ___ Lesbian & Gay Men in the Religious Arts (Spring 1989) ___ Living and Loving with AIDS (Summer 1988) ___ Sexual Violence (Fall 1987) ___ Minorities within a Minority (Spring 1987) ❑ Please send me the back issues indicated ($6 each; 10+ @ $4). ❑ Send me Open Hands each quarter ($20/year; outside U.S.A. @ $25). ❑ Send the current issue to name(s) attached. ($6 each). ❑ Send Open Hands gift subscription(s) to name(s) attached. Enclosed is my payment of $ _______ OR Charge $ _____________ to my VISA MASTERCARD (Circle one) # __________________________________________ Expiration _____/_____. Name on Card ____________________________________________________ Signature ________________________________________________________ My Name ________________________________________________________ Address _________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip _____________________________________________________ Daytime Phone (______) _____________________ Local Church _____________________________________________________ Denomination _____________________________________________________ Send to: Open Hands, 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 Published by the Reconciling Ministries Network in conjunction with Affirming Congregation Programme, More Light Presbyterians, Open and Affirming Ministries, Open and Affirming Program, Reconciling in Christ, and Welcoming & Affirming Baptist programs. A Unique Resource on Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual Concerns in the Church for Christian Education • Personal Reading Research Projects • Worship Resources Ministry & Outreach Photo: Mary Anne Mitchell Summer 2001 MINISTRIES 23 My conversion began in 1984 when our oldest son told us he was gay. It was a shock and, because of the way in which we had been indoctrinated, an undesirable bit of knowledge that caused Mary Lynn and I much soul searching and weeping. However, our love for our son never wavered. We learned anew what “unconditional love” meant to us. For those of you who perhaps don’t know, 1984 was also the year that the General Conference of the United Methodist Church passed the “Houston Declaration.” That document extended the exclusionary language of the Discipline to prohibit ordination of gay and lesbian seminary graduates as pastors. The minister of the United Methodist Church we attended signed that declaration. As you can imagine, Mary Lynn and I found it impossible for us to seek our pastor for care when we were trying to deal with this new knowledge. As educators, we began to research this topic. Over the next few years we read every pertinent scripture and every science and social journal we could find. But, while gaining considerable knowledge about the naturalness of same-sex affection for some, we were still silent about our son. When our son had come out of the closet, we had gone in. We didn’t tell anyone for a long time. Only a few of our closest friends knew even two years later. Then my son, home for a weekend visit, asked me why I wasn’t “out” with the information openly. That question changed my life. With the knowledge Mary Lynn and I had gained through research, study of the Bible, and other relevant experiences, and with the blessing of all our children, we began to advocate for justice and equality for gay and lesbian persons. My study of this topic has led me to the conclusion that the only moral stance that makes any sense is that the church and our greater society should encourage homosexuals to fulfill their need for love and intimacy in the same way we nurture heterosexuals. Encourage them to seek life-long companions; bless their unions; sustain them in their trials; recognize and embrace their talents in the church and in all facets of society. I believe that to continue to exclude gays and lesbians from any corner of our churches is unloving and immoral. To ostracize them or put them in a “don’t ask, don’t tell” environment, to me, is sinful. The hostility that has been aimed at these special people of God lacks a moral foundation. We must move to repent for these transgressions. I realize the difficulties that our church will face in changing our stand, both culturally and spiritually, but our United Methodist Church has traditionally been a leader in social change. When a body has advocated a particular position for a long time (28 years in the Discipline but longer in practice) change is often sensed as a weakness. It will not be easy to see it as an opportunity for justice. I believe that is why United Methodist bishops have called for more study of homosexuality. All facets of the topic must be examined. I appeal to you as a father who has been deeply touched by the suffering of my own family. I love my gay sons with all my heart and am proud of them. The thought that our church considers them unacceptable to God causes my heart to ache. I can’t believe that those people who consider my sons as sick or sinful realize how much hurt they are causing—for my sons and for other gay and lesbian persons. This is why I am appealing to you to take the time to study this issue in depth. I believe that you need to hear the stories of our gay and lesbian friends to discover that they are just ordinary human beings like the rest of us. I hope you will take the time to listen, to reflect and to pray. Our family will be enormously grateful that you care that much. And many other families will be as well. Dale Merkle, an educator and the parent of a gay son, wrote this to his home church. He is a lifelong educator and retired professor of research and science education (Shippensburg University in Pennsylvania) He has been a member of the United Methodist Church for over 40 years. Currently he serves on the Bay City, Michigan Public Schools Board as a trustee, which has a non-discrimination clause that includes sexual orientation, and is president of the Tri-Cities PFLAG Chapter. (From left to right) Chris, Dale (Dad), Mary Lynn (Mom), Sarah, and Gordon. Dale writes, “Gordon and Chris are our gay sons. Sarah is our straight daughter.” When our son came out of the closet, we went in. Dale G. Merkle 24 MINISTRIES Open Hands Saved Twice Brian Cave At a very young age I knew there was something different about me, but it did not have a name and it would be many years before I could put a name to it. All through middle school and high school, I was struggling with my sexuality. I knew I was supposed to be attracted to women, but I was only attracted to men. Since seventh grade my peers in school would call me fag, queer, tinkerbell, and other things. I did not know what these harsh words meant. All I knew was they meant something bad and I did not want to be whatever it was. Even though I had no attraction to women, I dated women in high school because that is what guys are supposed to do. Finally, in 1992, I graduated and at the age of 18, was able to get into a dance club for straight, gay, lesbian, and questioning people. My first night there scared the hell out of me. I was so nervous! I would go to the club every Saturday night during the summer before I left for college. I went off to a Southern Baptist college in Anderson, South Carolina. I had no idea what Southern Baptists were, having grown up in an Episcopal family that only went to church when our family’s busy schedule permitted. During my freshman year, my roommate confronted me after a conversation we had about sex: “I think it would be good for you to move out, and to do it by this afternoon, because you are gay.” I never once during the conversation said that I was gay and never in my life had I said to myself I am gay. I did not completely understand what gay meant. I freaked out. All of a sudden someone had figured out that I was or might be gay! I had no idea what to do, so I grabbed a hunting knife and placed its tip to my heart, crying, confused. But then I remembered how much my family and friends loved me, so I decided to call my mother, crying hysterically. She calmed me down, asking me what was wrong. I responded, “Mom, I am gay.” Her first response was, “ I was afraid so.” She asked me to find a counselor on campus. I made the decision to drop out of college that day and move back home. I left the campus without saying goodbye to anyone. Back at home I had several visits with a psychiatrist trying to figure things out. I was so scared of my homosexual feelings that I even lied to the therapist about my feelings. That summer I moved out of my parents’ house and started meeting people from the gay community. I was so scared and did not want to be seen in public with them. I started going to the club again. I only told a few of my friends what was really going on. After three months of partying into the wee hours of the night and working as a prep chef in a restaurant, I knew that this is not how I wanted to spend the rest of my life. I finally met and talked with a gay guy my age outside of the club. He pushed me a little faster than I was ready. I hated my first sexual experience with another guy. So I told my parents that I wasn’t gay and wanted to go back to school. I decided to be a straight-acting Republican boy. I was going rid myself of my homosexual feelings. I started attending Clemson University and was invited by my friends to the Presbyterian Student Association, which I did not quite understand because I did not know the word Presbyterian. I was skeptical because I did not trust religion. One of my first memories from a Sunday night program at PSA was hearing about a God who loves everyone, no matter what. I had never heard this before. God loves everyone, no matter what? I started to learn about having a relationship with God through prayer. I never understood prayer. So this was very powerful to me. I started learning about being the “I am” that God created me to be. I still had a dark secret inside me, and I decided that I would use my new relationship with God to “heal” me. I learned about a Jesus that could heal people. So every night before going to sleep I said a prayer asking God to take these sinful, wrong feelings away. My life changed when I began a relationship with God. However, I had to learn to do God’s will and not my will or the will of society. While my relationship with God was growing, so was my involvement with the church. I joined a Presbyterian congregation and held leadership positions in PSA. The church became my life. God became my life. I was trying to ignore my homosexual feelings and make them go away. I dated women and did everything possible to make sure everyone, including me, knew that I was straight. Little did I know that was not the will of God. I heard God challenging me to be a Volunteer in Mission in Alaska. While in Alaska my responsibility was to travel to a new village each week with my teammate organizing vacation Bible school and leading senior high programs. At this point in my life I was the poorest I had ever been—I had only the clothes that I could carry in my backpack, and I was dependent on people in the villages for food. My sole responsibility was to serve God. This is the time of my life when I was truly the happiest and the most content because the only thing I had to worry about was making sure that people experienced the love of God in a way that I had. I had plenty of time to spend alone in the mountains of Alaska praying like Jesus. I was reading the Gospels from cover to cover. It amazed me how much healing Jesus did. So I started questioning, “Well I have accepted Jesus as my savior and nothing changes when I ask God to ‘heal’ me.” I decided that I needed to sit still and listen for the voice of God while praying in the mountains alone. One day overlooking Rainbow Glacier (note the symbolism of the rainbow), this voice came over me and said “Brian, you are gay and it is okay and I still love you.” I was not with gay people, I was not in a club, and I was with God by myself when I accepted that I am gay. That night we had Communion with the kids around the campfire, and when I received it, I felt Christ with me in a way that I had never experienced before. My life has changed since then, since the night that I accepted the “I am” that God created me. A week later, another voice came over me and said, “You will be a minister one day.” I felt called to the ministry, but I had one problem, I am gay, and in the Presbyterian Church you cannot be gay and a minister. Summer 2001 MINISTRIES 25 Since then I have come out to my parents (again), my family, friends, and my church. I have received nothing but support and love. I have been out four and a half years and my life keeps getting better. I did not follow my call from God to go to seminary. Instead I feel that I am called to be a voice, a face, a person that has a story that needs to be told. The church saved me. I feel that if I had not found God and the church, I would either be dead from suicide or I would be messed up on drugs and alcohol. In my life I have been saved twice, once when I accepted Jesus Christ as my Savior and second, when I accepted whom God created me to be, the gay Christian Brian. Brian Cave, age 27, grew up in Charleston, South Carolina and now lives in New York City, working in non-profit as a development associate and attending Jan Hus Presbyterian Church, a More Light congregation. He is the liaison for Youth and Young Adults Concerns for More Light Presbyterians. All Kinds of Families Liz Alexander While human sexuality is a gift from God, and age appropriate materials should be a natural part of any educational curriculum, discussions about “all kinds of families” and who is welcome at the Lord’s Table are not about sex. They are about Christ’s message of justice and love for all people. Recently, before serving Communion to a group of fifth and sixth grade church school children, I asked the class to name those who did not feel welcome at “the table.” The scripture reading for the lesson that day was from Mark 10:13-16. We had talked about how Jesus had welcomed and blessed the little children, and had discussed the meaning of the words “for it is to such as these that the kingdom of God belongs” in a society where children had no status, power, or advocacy groups. When I asked the class who might not feel welcome in the church today, children named the homeless and those in prison. One child said that people of color did not always feel welcome in certain churches. Then, an 11-year-old girl sitting next to me said, “Sometimes gay people aren’t welcome in churches.” No one giggled or smiled. In fact, heads nodded in agreement. It was accepted as a simple fact, and we were able to affirm together that we were glad gay men and lesbian women were welcome at The Riverside Church, even as I am as a minister. It has not always been that way here. Just four years ago a parent became irate after a teacher “came out” to his third grade class. Because we have some children in our church school who are being raised by grandfathers, fathers, aunts and uncles, and grandmothers, we often focus on families, rather than mothers, on Mother’s Day. On this particular Mother’s Day the third grade teacher showed the class some photos that included nontraditional families in a discussion about all kinds of families and all kinds of parents on Mother’s Day. The photos were not only of gay and lesbian families. They also included pictures of heterosexual parents, grandparents raising grandchildren, and single parents. Some of the pictures were of bi-racial parents. When one child yelled out, “That’s sick for a man to be with another man,” pointing to a photo of two men from our church with their two sons, others in the class began to laugh. The teacher pointed out that one of the children was in our church school, and asked the class how they thought this child would feel if they heard them laughing. The girl whose mother later complained said, “It won’t hurt his feelings because he isn’t here to hear us.” The teacher talked to the class about how we are all members of a church family and how families don’t all look the same, but that they love one another, and explained that laughing at gay men and lesbians hurts us all, just like laughing at a person because he or she is different from us in color, ethnic origin, religion, physical ability, or age. He agreed with them that it especially hurts the person you are laughing at, and then told them that it especially hurt him because he is gay. Most of the class was embarrassed and apologized. It was a powerful lesson. Since then, we have been more intentional about including discussions about what it means to be Open and Affirming and naming gay men and lesbians when we speak of who are welcomed and included in God’s family, and speak of gay rights when we talk about equal rights and justice. Elizabeth (Liz) Alexander is the director of Children and Family Ministries at The Riverside Church in New York City. She is an openly lesbian minister with the Presbyterian Church (USA) and an at-large member of Presbyterian Welcome, a New York Citybased organization that supports those “who in good conscience must resist all efforts to deny God’s calling or grace” and actively works to change Presbyterian policies that discriminate against LGBT persons. She and Martha Gallahue, a psychotherapist, are in a committed partnership that was blessed at Riverside. Liz has two children ages 30 and 28. Contact her at ealexander@ theriversidechurchny.org. Recommended Reading: Abramchik, Lois, Is Your Family Like Mine? (New York: Open Heart, Open Mind Pub.,1993). Bosche, Susan, Jenny Lives With Eric And Martin (London: The Gay Men’s Press Ltd., 1983). Gillespie, Peggy and Gigi Kaeser, Love Makes A Family (Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press, 1999). Kutch, Robert, Who’s In A Family, (Berkeley, CA: Tricycle Press, 1995.) Say, Elizabeth A. and Kowalewski, Mark R., Gays, Lesbians and Family Values (Cleveland, OH: The Pilgrim Press, 1998). Tax, Meredith, Families (New York: The Feminist Press at The City University of NY, 1981). Willhoite, Michael, Daddy’s Roommate (Los Angeles: Alyson Wonderland Publishers, 1990). Willhoite, Michael, Daddy’s Wedding (Los Angeles: Alyson Wonderland Publishers, 1990). See also: Open Hands, Winter 2001 (Vol. 16, No. 3), Issue Theme: “What About Us Kids?” 26 MINISTRIES Open Hands Scotland 2000 Donn Crail High Street in Edinburgh, called the Royal Mile, runs down from the rocky promontory on which is situated Edinburgh Castle, to Holyrood House at its other end, the queen’s official residence in Scotland. On the royal mile are some significant historical sites for the Church of Scotland (and all Presbyterians). There is of course St. Giles, the high kirk of Scotland, with an imposing statue of John Knox in front of it. Less imposing is his grave, which, being in the parking lot, usually has a car parked over it. Nearby is John Knox house, where we were told he may or may not have actually lived. It is a detail with which Scots do not overly concern themselves. The tourists keep coming. We met in these historic surroundings, in St. Alban’s Anglican Church, just across a narrow street from Edinburgh castle. My room was three flights up in a B&B a mile or more down the hill from St. Alban’s. Needless to say, for almost a week, I walked my buns off. Nonetheless, it was worth it. Of the 160 there I was the only person from the United States attending Scotland 2000, an international and ecumenical conference held a year ago this past May sponsored by the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement. Absorbed as I am with issues of sexual orientation in the U.S. and the Presbyterian Church, I had given little thought, and had only the most general knowledge of these issues outside this country. Being ecumenical, the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement, centered in London, has for over 20 years united gay and lesbian Christians and their allies in the U.K., linked itself with similar ministries in Europe, and through that has probably moved this issue forward in ways that we have yet to see in the U.S. Perhaps the WOW Conference that followed last summer will give us similar momentum. A sort of testimony to the significance of the Gay and Lesbian Christian Movement may be that a few years ago at the Lambeth Conference, the Worldwide Assembly of Anglican bishops, the archbishop of Nigeria tried to exorcize the “homosexual demon” from Richard Kirker, the Anglican priest who is its founder. Apparently it didn’t work, as he is still openly and unrepentantly gay. One thing I had realized on previous trips overseas, and it has not changed, is that the pond is a narrower one from the U.K. to America than it is from America to the U.K. They seem always to be more aware of us than we are of them, and that is definitely true in relation to lesbian and gay Christians. I also perceived that many of them see the U. S. as a very—and strangely— religious country, growing primarily from the visibility, even from afar, of the religious right in this country. One of the speakers (and for me the most interesting one) was a young Roman Catholic lay theologian by the name of James Alison. His address, “Clothed and in His Right Mind” was an exegetical analysis of the story of the Gerasene demoniac (Luke 8:26–39). Though not implying the demoniac was gay, his exclusion from his Gentile village, their using of him to define who they are not, and his self-destructive behavior, are dynamics that resonate strongly with LGBT persons and the church. Jesus liberating him from the “legion” of demons that have possessed him so that he is found “sitting, clothed and in his right mind,” is a powerful image of persons through Christ set free from their self-hated and destructive behavior. Remarkably the villagers’ response to this is not thanksgiving but hysteria. Sound familiar? Alison’s presentation reinforced my conviction that for all that is said and written about the homosexual and scripture, the most relevant passages are often completely missed. I had missed this one. Politically the focus in the U.K. on gay/lesbian issues is centered on efforts to repeal Section 28, a piece of legislation passed by Parliament in 1992 during the Thatcher administration. It is about the teaching of human sexuality in schools. The most offensive part of this in the lesbian/gay community, and indeed among almost all progressives and teachers, is that local authorities “must not promote the teaching of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship.” The words “pretended family relationship” have outraged almost all progressives in England, and even more so in Scotland (section 28 does not apply in Ireland). The House of Lords has twice stopped the repeal of Section 28, and will probably do so again this year. As I understand it they can only do that three times and then The House of Commons may override and vote for the repeal and is expected to do so. An English businessman, Brian Souter, has put half a million pounds (approx. $800,000.) into efforts to keep Section 28 on the books. Some clerics have organized efforts to retain the article, especially the Roman Catholic cardinal in Glasgow. Much of the rhetoric in support of keeping Article 28 is focused on “protecting the family and institution of marriage,” very similar to what was done in California with Proposition 22. There was much discussion of section 28 at the conference, and an existing law that makes the age of consent for heterosexuals to be 16, but for homosexuals it is 18; evidence of just how much irrationality can come of homophobia. Not all Lords are men. The Lord Provost of Edinburgh (think— mayor) is a woman. One evening there was a welSummer 2001 MINISTRIES 27 coming reception for us in an elegant Hall of the Edinburgh City Chambers to meet the Lord Provost. I had the opportunity of visiting with her during the evening. She was a charming woman and totally on the side of full equal rights for gay and lesbian persons, and for the repeal of Section 28. She and other Scots take some justifiable pride in not having done business with Pat Robertson. We also heard from Bishop Richard Holloway, in Scotland the counterpart of the Archbishop of Canterbury. This Anglican Bishop is something of a hero among those in the lesbian/ gay Christian movement as he is total in his support of them, and fearless in addressing his colleagues on this issue. We also heard from the current Moderator of The Church of Scotland, Rt. Rev. John Cairns. The moderator’s message, while supportive, was more “moderate” (no pun intended) than the Bishop’s, perhaps because a Moderator has less authority than a bishop. Sunday morning for the closing worship of our conference I trudged up the hill from my B&B one last time for the closing worship service at St. Alan’s. When I got there only standing room remained, and not much of that. Bishop Holloway gave the sermon. On the issue of scripture he excoriated the hypocrisy of those who have used it against gay and lesbian Christians. There had been some sort of ballot sent out toward a public referendum in support of retaining Section 28. Before his sermon Bishop Holloway publicly tore up his ballot. The service was led by a male Roman Catholic priest (what other kind is there) and a woman Anglican priest. We went forward to receive by intinction. I was moved to see that there was no distinction made between receiving from the Roman Catholic priest and the Anglican one. Rome might not have approved, but our oneness in Christ was so real that morning that denominational distinctions at the table would have been conspicuously false. One impression I came away with is that the church has moved more to the periphery of many persons’ lives than was true even 17 years ago. Apart from the conference itself my conversations with many persons I talked to in pubs or at breakfast in the B&Bs where I stayed in Edinburgh and later in London gave me a chilling sense of what “post-Christian era” means. I return with fresh and passionate conviction that gay and lesbian Christians are a great gift God is giving the church because when the church finally embraces them, it will receive back the Spirit—the breath—the life—that has gone out of it. The church has been suffocating on its fears. Shortly after my return home, I saw a sticker on the back window of a car in Hollywood that said, “JESUS HATES ME.” The point, I assume, was cynical, counter to those bumper stickers that say, “JESUS LOVES ME.” Still, I was startled by it. Perhaps this really is the message that much of the church is sending to many persons; and the reason for those T-shirts one sees for sale in some West Hollywood shop windows, “THANK GOD I’M AN ATHEIST.” I return knowing more deeply than I ever have that individuals do not need the church’s permission to find God in their lives. To a great degree the church has already missed its opportunity to love gay and lesbian persons and has left it to them to love themselves and each other, and to discover without the church—sometimes despite the church—that God loves them. Donn Crail is a lifelong Presbyterian pastor presently serving as executive director of the Lazarus Project, a ministry of reconciliation between the church and LGBT community hosted by the West Hollywood Presbyterian Church in southern California. He is married to Helen, who shares his commitment to LGBT justice. A Welcoming Strategy for Your Denomination Bob Gibeling In the past, Protestant denominations in the United States have tried to write and get national church approval of sexuality statements. They all seemed to fail badly, following very similar patterns. First a “blue ribbon” panel of people from across the country was appointed, asked to study and come to some consensus to draft a statement. The committee works for a year or more, learning and evolving to the point that they write a very progressive document. Then it’s taken to a national church convention and soundly defeated. Notice how this is really a “top down” strategy, hoping for systemic change to come from a single source at the national level of a denomination? Sound familiar? The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America had followed something like this pattern. The main difference was that its statement never even got to the point of being voted on. A very fine draft of the Social Statement on Human Sexuality was released in October of 1993. It hit the press before anybody in our congregations had a chance to receive it, much less read it and react. The Associated Press sensationalized the document, giving it national coverage in an article which literally began with the word “masturbation.” Needless to say, the statement was Dead on Arrival, but it still poisoned the atmosphere and brought out the worst in reactionary forces. The firestorm of protest—from people who had not read the document of course—was like a blast furnace. The reactions continued for a year or so as the ELCA struggled with what to do next. Several rewrites were ordered and the group of people who drafted the first document were dismissed by the ELCA. Among this fine group of volunteers were Anita Hill and John Ballew, both members of Lutherans Concerned. As a result of the of28 MINISTRIES Open Hands ten vitriolic reactions, no document was ever presented to the next ELCA Churchwide Assembly for consideration. This was bitterly disappointing to those who had hoped for some leadership and guidance from the national church. However, it pleased our opponents greatly. As a result of this failure, a Conservative Lutheran group even declared in its newsletter that Lutherans Concerned was in its death throws in 1995. Not only were we sound as an organization, but about to recognize what it takes to move the church forward. It was that summer that I attended the Convention of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada (ELCiC), meeting in Winnipeg. It crystallized for me what to do next. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada had taken a very different approach. Instead of trying to draft and adopt a statement on human sexuality, they set out to develop study modules. These consisted of video and study guides for congregational discussion of sexuality and faith issues. When I observed their convention that July, the debate was about the future of these educational modules. A very conservative man went to the microphone and railed against providing any more funding for this educational effort. He was horrified that these discussions were going on across the church. It became clear that he would much rather have a statement to vote on than to have discussions happening all over. He could rally the opposition at one time and place to defeat a national church sexuality statement once and for all. But the prospect of having discussions happening wherever people wanted them to happen—just left up to the Holy Spirit to lead people—was an alarming idea for him! That meant he couldn’t control the agenda, he couldn’t rally forces against a discussion, he couldn’t even be sure where or when these discussions were happening. His motion to cut the funding was defeated, largely because of powerful statements from youth delegates to the convention. They asked, “If we can’t talk about this in the church, where can we talk about it?” “Aha!” I thought. If this man is so upset by having a broadbased discussion, then that is precisely what we need to be doing more. That doesn’t mean statements are never introduced to a national church body; it just means the grass roots educational work has to be done first. Support needs to be lined up before it comes to a national church assembly. And it means an assembly cannot expect or wait for everybody to be at the same level of support at the same time before moving forward where and when possible. So what’s the best way to build that grass roots support? Clearly it’s the welcoming church movement. Educating and building support at the local levels first is essential in our ministry of reconciliation. In Lutherans Concerned, we have increasingly focused on securing more ELCA Synods to be part of the Reconciling in Christ Program. We structure RIC Synod statements so the synod is encouraging discussion and adoption of welcoming policies at local congregations. We now have 17 of the 65 ELCA Synods in our RIC Program. That’s over 25%. Two have adopted statements approving the blessing of relationships by pastors in those synods. This is clearly having an impact on the ELCA because of the grass roots nature of the movement. So the strategy that emerged from that ELCiC national convention in Winnipeg is this: 1. Provide educational resources and promote continuing discussions about sexuality and faith issues at all levels of the church. 2. Propose statements when the tide of support is turning toward becoming welcoming. Keep the intent of the statement clear and simple. 3. Focus on getting regional units of the church to promote discussions and move forward when possible. One final note about the convention in Winnipeg. The ELCiC adopted a statement at that same convention apologizing to the Jewish community in Canada for the anti-Semitic statements of Martin Luther. When it passed, one of the youth delegates came over to me and said, “One day the church will apologize to gay and lesbian people for how they have been treated.” Remember that prophesy from Canada. It will come to pass someday. Bob Gibeling is the program director of Lutherans Concerned/North America and serves on the editorial board of Open Hands. He lives in Atlanta. A Call to the Church: Open the Door! Harry Knox Excerpted from an address to the Western Ohio Conference of the United Methodist Church. When I was a student at Lancaster Theological Seminary in Pennsylvania in 1988, I was privileged to hear a lecture about apartheid in South Africa from an exiled Reformed pastor named Colin Juste. Colin was colored, of Indian descent, in a country whose caste system made him and his family something less than white, but not quite so bad as black. He had been exiled for leading his congregation of colored South Africans in a peaceful non-violent demonstration against the apartheid system. He had used his time in exile to gain a Ph.D. in theology from Yale Divinity School. Having finished his degree, he was touring this country speaking about apartheid before his planned return to South Africa a few days after he would leave our school. At the end of his presentation, I raised my hand. I had been moved greatly by Colin’s speech and I asked him, “Colin, do I understand correctly that if you go back to South Africa the government will put you in prison?” He said “Oh, yes. The minute I get off the plane, I suspect.” Summer 2001 MINISTRIES 29 I asked him why he would do such a thing. I asked him why he would put himself through that kind of abuse. I was so angry at the prospect I was blinking back tears of rage. In response, he smiled. He said, “My dear brother, I appreciate your anger on my behalf. But I am a minister of the Gospel of Christ. It is my task to seek and to save the lost. So you see, my responsibility is not to protect myself. I have a responsibility to the oppressor to call him from the sin of apartheid.” I was never the same. Saint Simons Island on the coast of Georgia is the site of Epworth-by-the-Sea, a United Methodist conference and retreat center some of you may have visited. It is where John Wesley preached and pastored, rather badly, in America. Not long ago a bicycle rental shop on the island that was owned by two gay men was vandalized and hate messages were spraypainted on the walls. The two men moved off the island and out of the state after they talked with the police about the incident. You see, the police told them, “That’s how we treat people like you here.” And there was no evidence to the contrary since no one among their neighbors offered even a word of concern. Not one minister went to see them, or the police, about the incident. Not one church layperson did or said a thing to help. There is a man in the little town of Wrens, Georgia, outside of Augusta, who calls me on the phone late at night because his phone is downstairs in his two story home. That’s significant because, since he was fired from his job because he is gay, the death threats have started. He lives in an old house with floor-to-ceiling windows downstairs and he doesn’t dare use the phone in his own home while the sun is out for fear of being visible to a gunman who might drive up in front of the house. There is a United Methodist Church in that town, but the church is silent. Two lesbians in Calhoun, in the mountains of North Georgia, were burned out of their home by a next-door neighbor who had waited in the driveway of his home everyday for weeks just so he could call them ugly names when they came home from work each day. When I called the county sheriff about the arson several days after the fact, he told me mine was the first call he had received about it since it was reported to him by the fire department. The two women whose home and belongings were gone never heard from any church in Gordon County. The Greek word akkadia is badly translated as sloth in English Bibles. My old professor in seminary told us that sloth is lying too long in the bath water. Akkadia, one of the seven deadly sins, doesn’t mean laziness. It means, “I don’t care.” One of the seven deadly sins is apathy. It is deadly to the one who practices it and it is deadly to those affected by the sinner’s inaction. My sisters or brothers in Christ Jesus, your soul is in mortal danger, as is the soul of the church. Your apathy is separating you from the Giver of Life and from those for whom Christ died. You are hauling the church down the road to destruction. Men and women called gay and lesbian stand in need of the grace which Christ alone supplies. We are at the door of your church, or down the street, or just around the corner, and you are too afraid to bring us into God’s House. God help me, it is my responsibility to call you from your sin. In your heart, you know being gay is not a choice. You may not know why I am gay, and I don’t know either, but you know it is not a choice. And if it is not, then you are consciously choosing to hurt me by excluding me from full participation in the life of the church. You have decided that gay people are expendable. That the needs of the many are more important than the needs of the few. You stand on the side of the majority because you are not willing to pay the price for standing for justice for the oppressed. God help me, it is my responsibility to call you from your sin. When Paul dreamed of a Macedonian who looked at him and said, “Come over and help us,” Paul had a choice. It wasn’t a good one. He had heard a call to leave the comfortable for the uncomfortable, the known for the unknown, the clean for the unclean, the Chosen for the damned. Thank God he answered the call and the world was changed. God is calling you to act on what you know, to move based on what you strongly suspect, to take action on faith. God is calling you to do no less than change the world. God does not promise you, and I do not promise you, that there will not be a terrible price to pay. It may cost you your ministry. It cost me mine. It may cost you the respect and love of your family. My uncle cut me out of his life for telling the truth about homosexuality. It may cost you friends. My best friend didn’t have gumption enough to do the task himself, so he had his wife write me a note to tell me our friendship was over. His father had been my district superintendent. It will cost you money, reputation, peace at home, and maybe even your life. Arsonists and vandals and neo-Nazis and skinheads are no respecters of persons after all. But akkadia, “I don’t care” will cost you your soul. Lesbians and gay men are wandering in the barbaric wilderness, but we are shouting to you to come over and help us. We are knocking on the door of your church and listening anxiously for the sound of your hand on the doorknob. But all we hear are the muffled sounds of your frustrated, fearful, faithless tears. For God’s sake. For my sake. For your own soul’s sake. Please. Get up and open the door. Harry Knox, a former United Methodist minister, is the executive director of the Georgia Equality Project, seeking to promote and defend the rights of LGBT persons. 30 Open Hands Movement News Presbyterians Vote Against Gay Ban Meeting in Louisville in June, the Presbyterian General Assembly voted by a 60%-39% margin to delete the denomination’s antigay ordination provision from its Book of Order and rescind all previous negative “definitive guidance.” The deletion needs to be ratified by a simple majority of the presbyteries. Twenty-nine of the PC(USA)’s 173 presbyteries had overtured the assembly for a change in the denomination’s 25-year-old policy. A PowerPoint Presentation emphasizing “forbearance” of diverse attitudes on non-essentials in the church seemed persuasive to the committee dealing with the overtures. It may be viewed on the website of The Covenant Network (www.covenantnetwork.org). The Progressive Partners, which include More Light Presbyterians, Covenant Network, That All May Freely Serve, Shower of Stoles, Witherspoon Society, and other groups, advocated the change and were optimistic about its fate in the presbyteries. Institute of Religion and Democracy Attacks Open Hands Article and Writer An article written for the Institute of Religion and Democracy has questioned the fitness of the director of admissions of a United Methodist seminary for opinions expressed in an Open Hands article. United Methodist minister Chip Aldridge, Jr., of Wesley Theological Seminary in Washington, D.C., contributed “E-Mails to a Young Q: Assurance and Information for a Questioning or Queer Youth,” to the Winter 2001 issue (Vol. 16, No. 3). IRD research assistant Erik Nelson criticized Aldridge for “urg[ing] youth in the church to ‘claim and name’ their sexual preference.” He cited only one student to the effect that Aldridge, in Nelson’s words, “is aggressive in recruiting homosexual students for Wesley Seminary” thus “ignor[ing] the official teaching of The United Methodist Church, which calls homosexual practice ‘incompatible with Christian teaching.’” Writer Nelson sent a copy of the article to Wesley’s president, Douglass Lewis. Aldridge, the current chair of the Reconciling Ministries Network Board, says the school has been personally supportive. According to an article by Leon Howell in the Fall 1998 (Vol. 14, No. 2) issue of Open Hands, the IRD emerged in the mid-90s among Washington insiders to push “wedge issues” as part of the conservative “culture wars” for the soul of America, largely funded by conservative foundations ($448,000 in 1994). Upcoming Events August 2-5. Affirming Congregation Programme Annual Conference, featuring Virginia Ramey Mollenkott, Wesley United Church, 6 Cambridge St., Cambridge, Ontario. Contact Ron Coughlin at acpucc@aol.com or 416/466-1489. October 6. YES! Conference 2001, Philadelphia, an interfaith, multi-racial, LGBT and friends gathering inspired by WOW 2000. Contact www.empoweringdiversity.com/Yes. LGBTQ Muslims Gather in San Francisco Al-Fatiha, an international organization dedicated to LGBT and Questioning Muslims and their friends, held its second North American conference in San Francisco June 21-24, 2001. Over 100 people gathered from five countries, representing more than two dozen ethnicities and cultures. Sessions focused on issues ranging from Coming Out to Islam to HIV/AIDS in Islamic communities. The Friday evening reception featured activists Kerry Lobel, Rev. Elder Troy Perry, Alvan Quamina, Surina Khan, and Christian de la Huerta. Participants were then led by Rev. Mel White and Faisal Alam in a candlelight vigil and procession through the Castro district of San Francisco. Chanting “the ocean refuses no river, no river,” marchers honored Muslims oppressed or killed because of their sexual orientation or gender identity, or died because of AIDS. On Sunday, a group of 40 LGBTQ Muslims and their supporters marched in the 31st Annual San Francisco Pride Parade. “We have finally taken our place at the table,” said Faisal Alam, founder and director of the group. The contingent received great applause as members chanted “We’re Here! We’re Queer! We’re Muslims! Allah Hu Akbar (God is Great).” Al-Fatiha takes its name from the title of the first chapter of the Holy Quran and means “The Beginning” or “The Opening.” Founded in October of 1998, it includes nine chapters in three countries: Atlanta, New York, London, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Toronto, Vancouver, and Washington D.C. For information, contact Al-Fatiha Foundation, PO Box 33532, Washington, DC 20033, (888) 303-8430, e-mail: gaymuslims@ yahoo.com, web: http://www.al-fatiha.net. Brief News Rev. Jacki Belile has resigned as Open Hands marketing manager and become the pastor of Grace Baptist Church, an American Baptist Welcoming & Affirming congregation in Chicago. Jenn Williams of Austin, Texas, will be obtaining ads for Open Hands as part of her new job at the Reconciling Ministries Network office in Chicago. Open Hands short story “Our Organist” by Michael Lindvall (Fall 2000, Vol. 16, No. 2) won Honorable Mention for Fiction in the 2001 Associated Church Press Awards. During this summer’s UCC General LGBT supporters react with delight to the vote of the Presbyterian G.A. Photo: Jack Hartwein-Sanchez Summer 2001 31 Welcoming Communities OPEN AND AFFIRMING New Covenant Community Normal, Illinois More than 100 members and friends make up this congregation whose focus is meaningful ministry with the community- at-large and the campus of Illinois State University in Normal. The church’s Open and Affirming/More Light commitment flows from its interpretation of Jesus’ “open table” ministry, in which he deliberately included the outcast members of society and brought together people of diverse, often conflicting circumstances. Inspired by this understanding and their affiliation with the Center for Progressive Christianity, members of the church are developing curriculum for their growing church school which will emphasize scriptural study, interfaith appreciation, and LGBT acceptance. The church also offers several book groups and has hosted progressive speakers such as Marcus Borg and Matthew Fox. Collenbrook United Church of Drexel Hill Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania Collenbrook United Church is a union church that is both PCUSA and United Church of Christ. Their clerk of Session is Nancy E. Krody, an early pioneer in the LGBT movement in the UCC. The church began in 1975 as a union of Northminster Presbyterian Church and St. Paul’s United Church of Christ. Collenbrook has been participating in a congregational study and discernment process since the fall of 1999 facilitated by the pastor and a More Light/Open and Affirming Task Force. The congregational affirmation to become a More Light and Open and Affirming Congregation was made during a congregational meeting on January 28, 2001. WELCOMING & AFFIRMING Old First Church Middletown, New Jersey Old First Church, a 312-year-old church, originally Baptist, became dually aligned with American Baptist Churches of the USA and the United Church of Christ in 1963. On October 1, 2000, the 75-member congregation voted to amend their church constitution to reflect the approval of the “Welcoming and Affirming/Open and Affirming” statements of the two denominations. The Rev. Dr. E. Kenneth Nichols saw the vote as one more link in a three-century-long chain of support for social justice causes. There was the church’s early involvement in the anti-slavery and temperance movements, with black members included as early as 1800. Through the years they have also had a public presence working for civil rights, peace and the environment. The moderator for the voting meeting explained, “The statement will confirm our congregation’s already manifest commitment to and love for all people, including those who are homosexual.” MORE LIGHT PRESBYTERIANS Synod/Disciples of Christ Assembly in Kansas City, Missouri, the UCC Coalition for LGBT Concerns will co-host a luncheon with GLAD Alliance (Disciples). The Coalition’s Open and Affirming Program will celebrate more than 80 congregations that have joined since the last General Synod in 1999, the largest group ever! Katie Morrison, M.Div. of Oakland, California has been named to join Michael Adee as a national field coordinator for More Light Presbyterians. The Reconciling Ministries Network in the Pacific Northwest has condemned as heresy the United Methodist anti-homosexual stance, claiming it to be “unfaithful to the teachings of Jesus.” At its semi-annual meeting this past February, the National Religious Leadership Roundtable co-convened by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force and Equal Partners in Faith announced plans to seek a meeting with John DiIulio, head of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives to discuss concerns related to that program. Last fall’s conference entitled “The Black Church and Human Sexuality” held at Vanderbilt Divinity School in Nashville concluded that the Bible is not the best resource on sex. Scholars Randall Bailey of Atlanta’s Interdenominational Center, Rev. Herbert Marbury and Victor Anderson of Vanderbilt, and Rev. Alberta Ware of The Balm in Gilead in Chicago, asserted that sexual rules were founded on the concept of women as men’s property and male sexual domination of women and certain men. Alyson Publications has just released The Greatest Taboo, edited by Delroy Constantine- Simms, a collection of 28 essays dealing with homosexuality and black culture (visit www.alyson.com). RECONCILING Arvada United Methodist Church Arvada, Colorado Located in a southern suburb of Denver, this congregation has been engaged in a period of study and discernment on reconciling ministry since 1991 when the youth group at Arvada proposed a charge conference to begin the Reconciling congregations study process. The church has long been a center for thoughtful theological inquiry. In a delightful twist on Charles Wesley’s teaching of the need to “unite the two so long disjoined, knowledge and vital piety,” the congregation describes itself as “a church where science, religion and life are compatible.” St. Paul’s United Methodist Church Redondo Beach, California St. Paul’s became a Reconciling congregation after a study process begun in 1994. The community-based congregation has been involved with justice work and outreach for many years, and was a pioneer in the California Pacific Annual Conference by founding AIDS Heartline, one of the first UM ministries to people with HIV/AIDS. Their statement of reconciliation reads in part, “as a reconciling congregation our mission is to provide a welcoming place where people of all backgrounds may worship, grow and serve.” Trinity United Methodist Church Pearl City, Hawai‘i Overlooking the historic Pearl Harbor memorial, this is the first Hawaiian United Methodist Church to declare itself a Reconciling church. The diverse congregation with an active Tongan ministry calls itself a “little church with a big heart.” Pastor Dick Matsushita describes the church’s mission as being “Christ’s body within and beyond this community reaching out to and receiving people as they are.” Matsushita described the community as helping people be “deepened in the Spirit, challenged with the ultimate claim of the Gospel, and sent forth to be a caring church, creating a just and loving society.” MORE LIGHT PRESBYTERIANS Bethany Presbyterian Church Spokane, Washington A church with a strong history of social justice and mission, this congregation is committed to living into the Gospel by caring for their community. The church recently hosted a display of The Shower of Stoles Project to demonstrate their vision of a truly inclusive and welcoming Church. Central Presbyterian Church Owensboro, Kentucky Founded in 1892, a downtown church that ordained the first woman elder for their presbytery is making history again as the first welcoming congregation in the city and the first More Light Church in its presbytery. Inspired by its pastor, this urban church is finding new life with a ministry and outreach that includes all of God’s children. University Presbyterian Church Tuscaloosa, Alabama Located near the University of Alabama campus, this church supported the civil rights movement when few churches did so in the 1960’s. Building upon this understanding of justice, this congregation makes history again in the state of Alabama as its first More Light church. Western Presbyterian Church Washington, District of Columbia Founded in 1848 in Foggy Bottom, this church with a history of social justice is located in the heart of the U.S. capital. Campus ministry, Miriam’s Kitchen that serves meals to the homeless, and a Stephen’s Ministry illustrate this church’s commitment to pastoral care and outreach. AFFIRMING Centenary-Queen Square United Church of Canada Saint John, New Brunswick Celebrating is 210th year of continuous ministry, Centenary- Queen Square United Church has a long history of “marching to a different drummer.” The first minister of the congregation (1791) had to appear annually before City Council for a permit to preach in a town where “Methodism was under social ban.” A more recent minister, established an Adult Day Care for socially-, physically-, emotionally-, and mentally-challenged adults in 1972 when most people did not understand it was needed, and in 1978 a Children’s Day Care for impoverished families was also begun. The congregation concluded its ministry in its historic Gothic cathedral in August 1998 and move into a storefront location where ministry, instead of property maintenance, is the focus. In August 1996, the Elders authorized the first same-gender covenanting service to be held in Atlantic Canada. The formal celebration of declaration as “An Affirming Congregation” within The United Church of Canada was held on April 29th, 2001. This is the first such declaration in Atlantic Canada. CQS United Church continues to march to a different drummer. Employment Opportunities Reconciling Ministries Network is seeking applicants for western outreach coordinator, summer and fall internships. Contact Marilyn Alexander, executive director, at marilyn@RMNetwork.org. More Light church seeks pastor/head of staff in suburban Portland. Visit the website (www.southmin. com) and contact Anna Mohney at 503/617-9858 or amohney@home.com. Southminster Presbyterian Church, 12250 SW Denney Rd., Beaverton, Oregon. 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 Open Hands Vol 17 No 1 - You are the Beloved! Healing Self Rejection https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/13216eec5ae30cc9268d3858031f29af.pdf 355a150c425c8b45db5ed1442bd17ca2 Issue An issue of a recurring publication. Volume Number The volume number of the issue 17 Issue Number The number of the issue (within a volume) 2 Publication Year The year the issue was published 2001 Publication Date The date the issue was published Fall Text Any textual data included in the document 2 Open Hands Vol. 17 No. 2 Fall 2001 Shaping an Inclusive Church The Ecumenical Quarterly of the Welcoming Movement Executive Publisher Marilyn Alexander Editor Chris Glaser Designer In Print—Jan Graves Editorial Advisory Committee Jeff Balter, RIC Vaughn Beckman, O&A Daphne Burt, RIC Ann Marie Coleman, ONA Chris Copeland, W&A Jocelyn Emerson, W&A Gwynne Guibord, MCC Bobbi Hargleroad, MLP Tom Harshman, O&A Alyson Huntly, ACP Bonnie Kelly, ACP Susan Laurie, RCP Samuel E. Loliger, ONA Ruth Moerdyk, SCN Mark Palermo, MLP Caroline Presnell, RCP Paul Santillán, RCP Kathy Stayton, W&A Margarita Suaréz, ONA Judith Hoch Wray, O&A and Program Coordinators Open Hands is the quarterly magazine of the Welcoming movement, a consortium of programs that support individuals and congregations in efforts to welcome lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, and transgenders in all areas of church life. Open Hands was founded and is published by the Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. of the Reconciling Ministries Network (United Methodist), in cooperation with the six ecumenical partners listed above. Each program is a national network of local congregations and ministries that publicly affirm their welcome of LGBT people, their families and friends. These seven programs, along with Supportive Congregations (Brethren/Mennonite [www.webcom.com/bmc], Oasis Congregations (Episcopal), Welcoming Congregations (Unitarian Universalist), and INCLUSIVE Congregations (United Kingdom), as well as the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches— offer hope that the church can be a more inclusive community. Subscription is $20 for four issues ($25 outside the U.S.). Single copies and back issues are $6; quantities of 10 or more, $4 each. Subscriptions, requests for advertising rates, and other business correspondence should be sent to: Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 openhands@RMNetwork.org www.RMNetwork.org/openhands/index.html Member, The Associated Church Press © 2001 Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. Open Hands is a registered trademark. ISSN 0888-8833 Printed on recycled paper. Designer’s Note: A special extended duotone (two ink colors) technique is being introduced in this issue providing a broader spectrum of colors to enhance the visual message. Erratum for Winter 2001 issue (Vol. 16, No. 3): “Who’s Teaching Who? A Parent and Child Teach Each Other About Homosexuality” by Marcia and Sarah Bailey was originally published in The InSpiriter (Vol. 3, No. 3), the publication of the Association of Welcoming & Affirming Baptists. OUR COAT OF MANY COLORS Our Creative Responses to Exclusion 4 editor’s word World Towers & Church Towers CHRIS GLASER 20 I’m Still Dancing A one-man play about AIDS PETER MASSEY 26 Celebration of Providence A short story DAVID R. GILLESPIE Queer Quest 5 for the Broken Grail JOE COBB Shadow Workers 15 and Soul Guides MARK THOMPSON Re-Creating 10 Religion TOBY JOHNSON A Congregational 32 Memorial Quilt DAN SMITH 18 Gospel Songs in a Gay Bar CLIFF BOSTOCK 22 If these churches are silent, gay choruses themselves will sing out! MICHAEL PURINTUN stand-up comedy God’s Glorious 16 Gadfly HOWARD WARREN “Fumorist” 16 Kate Clinton Welcoming Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender People Fall 2001 3 Publisher Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (UMC) Reconciling Ministries Network Marilyn Alexander, Coordinator 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 773/736-5526 www.RMNetwork.org Ecumenical Partners Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada) Ron Coughlin, Coordinator P.O. Box 333, Station Q, Toronto, Ontario CANADA M4T 2M5 416/466-1489 www.affirmunited.org • acpucc@aol.com More Light Presbyterians (PCUSA) Michael J. Adee, Coordinator 369 Montezuma Ave. PMB #447 Santa Fe, NM 87501-2626 505/820-7082 www.mlp.org Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ) John Wade Payne, Interim Coordinator P.O. Box 44400, Indianapolis, IN 46244 941/728-8833 www.sacredplaces.com/glad Open and Affirming Program (UCC) Ann B. Day, Coordinator P.O. Box 403, Holden, MA 01520 508/856-9316 www.UCCcoalition.org Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran) Bob Gibeling, Coordinator 2466 Sharondale Drive, Atlanta, GA 30305 404/266-9615 www.lcna.org Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (ABC/USA) Brenda J. Moulton, Coordinator P.O. Box 2596, Attleboro Falls, MA 02763 508/226-1945 www.wabaptists.org 9 A Prayer in Honor of Those Whom Jesus Loved JOAN CHITTISTER photo essays 24 So Great a Cloud of Witnesses The Shower of Stoles MARTHA JUILLERAT 30 AIDS Quilt as Folk Art SUSAN BUTTON next issue: SINGING GOD’S SONG IN A FOREIGN LAND Stories of Resistance in the Church Call for articles for Open Hands Summer 2002 Racism: Our Incomplete Rainbow What Drives Us Apart? What Brings Us Together? Theme Section: Our proud ingathering of 1000 Welcoming Christians at the WOW 2000 conference faced allegations of white privilege and failure to include people of color. Why does race and racism continue to separate us? Why is it that the LGBT movement does little better than the general population at involving people of color? What are successful models for overcoming the racial divide and the sexual divide? Personal, organizational, and congregational stories would be welcome, as wells as analytical articles and creative stories/visions. We want writers of all colors! Any length up to 3000 words per article. Columns: My Turning Point (how you changed your mind on the issue), How I Do Sex (how you reconcile or integrate sexuality and spirituality), My Church (a profile of your welcoming congregation), In Solidarity (with other justice issues), You’re Welcome (how to be welcoming), Worship, Spirituality, Retreats, Resources (books and videos), Outreach, Leadership, Marriage, Health, Youth, Campus, Children, and Family. These brief articles may or may not have to do with the theme of the issue. 750-1000 words. Contact with ideas as far before deadline as possible. Manuscript deadline: May 1, 2002 An article should be accompanied by the author’s two- to three-sentence self-description, photo (snapshot okay—we can crop to face), address, phone, and e-mail, plus any other photos helpful to the article. E-mail article as an attached Word Perfect, Microsoft Word, or Rich Text Format files, or paste in e-mail. Hard copy and photos should be sent to the mailing address below. Chris Glaser, Phone/Fax 404/622-4222 or e-mail at ChrsGlaser@aol.com 991 Berne St. SE, Atlanta, GA 30316-1859 USA www.ChrisGlaser.com poems Meeting a 23 Buddhist Monk on the Way Home from Work CHARLES HILL Puzzle 28 MALCOLM BOYD sustaining the spirit Revisiting Psalms 8, 25, 27 MADELEINE MANNING Columcille 12 A Sacred Space and Place 4 Open Hands People ask me how I came to be a writer. First, I loved stories. But second, I needed a way to express how I felt, a way of “getting a handle” on feelings over which I otherwise had little control, like my sexual and spiritual feelings. Others of us have similarly used words as their means of grappling with their deepest concerns. Some have done so seriously, even academically. Others have done so fancifully, sometimes in fiction or humor, sometimes in prayer or liturgy. Still others have expressed their passions without words, visually and ritually, in acts of charity and working for justice. Like Joseph’s coat of many colors which set him off from his brothers, our creative rainbow of responses to resistance and oppression that we meet in the church and culture sets us off as the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender community. Our sexualities and genders themselves call us to “think outside the box,” as the cliché goes. Those who share our struggle in the church also “think outside the church” as part of the Welcoming movement whose denominational programs publish Open Hands. This magazine’s very name suggests welcome and receptivity. The week following what I will call “Terrible Tuesday”—the terrorist attacks on U.S. soil—the leaders of the Welcoming Programs met with our Editorial Advisory Committee and a representative from our newly formed Publishing Managerial Board to plot the future of the magazine at our regularly scheduled annual meeting. We also shared a meal with the recently formed WOW 2003 Organizing Committee, which will mount a conference for us all like the Witness Our Welcome 2000 that 1000 attended last year. We were fertile with creative ideas that will improve the magazine, persuading more people to support it and subscribe to it. This opening column by the editor is the first of many innovations to appear in future issues. Resistance and oppression call for such creative responses. When resistance merely meets resistance or oppression is used to address oppression, the “battle lines” remain in place. Creativity is the flanking movement required to “think around the battle line.” I write this two weeks almost to the hour of Terrible Tuesday. It seems impossible and irresponsible not to write about that day’s events, to give voice to my feelings and possibly your own. Southern Voice, the LGBT newspaper of the South, carried gay-related stories of the tragedies: the New York Fire Department chaplain, an openly gay Catholic priest, who removed his helmet out of respect as he gave last rites, killed by flying debris; the gay man who phoned his mom, who may have helped down the plane in Pennsylvania, saving its intended target; the Frasier executive producer killed on one of the flights, not gay, but a supporter who wrote an outstanding “gay episode” of Cheers years ago. I have the greatest appreciation for these stories—remember, I love stories— but the gay angle on these stories seemed somewhat irrelevant to me in the face of such catastrophe. In facing the terrible, such categories seemed to disappear, walls literally and metaphorically came down. We were no longer Democrats or Republicans, no longer black or white, no longer gay or straight. We were humbled, but not by the terrorists. We were humbled by recognizing our need for one another. We do not, we cannot stand alone. Look how quickly Jerry Falwell was slapped down by his divisive comments that blamed gays, feminists, and pro-choice activists, as well as God. Remember how rapidly we sought to defend Arab Americans and Muslims that some would separate out for retribution. And notice how we resisted those few who would divide us by blaming the victim, the U.S., in a way they would never blame editor’s word the victims of any other form of violence, such as rape or spousal and child abuse. We rallied around each other, symbolized politically by the now everpresent flag and spiritually by our neverending prayers. It was a moment of history, of chronos, marked on chronological time; but it was also a moment of kairos, how the Bible refers to spiritual crisis, spiritual opportunity. This terrible experience was a spiritual opportunity to remember that we are ALL children of God, that we are all Beloved. Ancient peoples experienced God as “terrible.” An encounter with God is also humbling, prompting us to come together, “neither Jew nor Greek, male nor female, slave or free,” in the apostle Paul’s words. Categories no longer matter in the blinding flash of the eternal. Eventually, Americans and the world will move beyond the tragedies in New York City, Washington, D.C., and the Pennsylvania countryside. Walls and differences and partisanship will be reconstructed. The same thing happens to Christians. An encounter with God transforms us, and we are ready to love everybody. But then we return to building our walls, divisions, and categories. Our churches face a kairos moment in deciding how welcome LGBT people will be. For some it will be an opportunity for ecclesiastical terrorism, threatening schism, the Body of Christ broken and crucified once more. For others it will be an opportunity for Pentecost, an infusion of Spirit that reminds us of our need for one another in the terrible and humbling presence of God. Just as the U.S. government must seek creative ways to avoid recycling violence, the Welcoming movement addresses resistance and oppression creatively. What follows on the pages of this and every issue of Open Hands are samples of our creativity, “Our Coat of Many Colors.” ▼ WORLD TOWERS AND CHURCH TOWERS CHRIS GLASER Fall 2001 5 The tea light danced in the bluetipped glass chalice. The flickering candle-light revealed a long coffee table adorned with a beautiful rainbow cloth draped down its middle. Surrounding the table were deep, dark, inviting chairs and couches. Light from two lamps warmed the rest of the room. Twelve people from across the country filled the room at Ghost Ranch in Abiquiu, New Mexico, to spend the week with the writings of Henri Nouwen. Nouwen had long been a spiritual mentor for me through his writings, tapping my own vulnerability through his. In his classic book Reaching Out, he writes that “hospitality is the creation of a free space where the stranger can enter and become a friend instead of an enemy.” The retreat facilitator, Chris Glaser, a friend and former student of Henri, offered an invitation into this “free space”: “Bring your sacramental gifts and place them on the table and share what you like of their significance in your life. They will serve as symbols of our sacramental life together this week.” I was in a sacred space to befriend the stranger within and claim my soul as a friend. I pulled myself up from a very comfortable chair and stepped toward the table, cradling a fragile, broken chalice. I cradled my own soul, wondering if this would be the place I could share my deepest fear and greatest gift. I don’t remember the origins of the chalice—where I bought it, who made it, why I liked it, or if I simply wanted to add yet another chalice to my collection. It is earthen in color, with a red orange tint on the stem and darker hues mixed within the ridges on the cup. My earliest memory of the chalice is its absence. For a long time it sat on a corner table in my office, along with several others. One of the crowd. One day, it was gone. The place it normally occupied was empty. Absence made me long for its presence, so I got up from my desk and went over to look. I peered around the edges of the table and then behind. The stem was intact with two jagged edges of its cup splayed like arms on the floor after a fall. The pieces of the cup lay scattered. I looked at all the pieces. Still life. a mirror of life. I turned and walked away. Weeks went by, but not without my new daily ritual of looking at the empty place, then behind the table, at the remains. Someone will pick up the pieces. The custodian or someone else might come in to vacuum or dust. Someone will pick up the pieces. The prophetic thoughts stunned me, when early one morning, I discovered the remains missing. Someone had picked up the pieces. My ritual was broken. I wept and wondered. The sun shone brightly through the western windows of the office as I stepped to the curtains to pull them closed. Reaching behind for the pull cords, I noticed an object huddled in the corner shadows. The stem of the chalice was standing, cradling the broken pieces. I released the pull cords and gently swept the chalice into my hands to look, and hold, and wonder. Whoever picked up the pieces placed them for me to find later, now. I placed the chalice on the window ledge. With a few days of direct sunlight, the chalice became a depository of dust. a good friend walked in one afternoon, surprising me with her words. “That’s beautiful!” “What?” I asked. “That chalice—the way the light is bathing the brokenness—it is as though the light is being poured over and through the pieces. What are you going to do with it?” “Oh, I was thinking about throwing it away.” “Don’t you dare, Joe. It’s beautiful. Light has a way of shedding beauty in broken places.” QUEER QUEST FOR THE BROKEN GRAIL JOSEPH L. COBB 6 Open Hands Sharing the Brokenness On Sunday morning, during the televised worship service, I prepared the congregation for confession with the story of the broken chalice and my friendly encounter. The very things we passionately talk about and share with others may reflect the truth of what we are hearing within the depths of our souls. Sharing the brokenness of the chalice became a way for me to begin sharing my own. The following Wednesday morning a package arrived in the office addressed to me. The return address read: Hamilton County Drug Store, Syracuse, Kansas 67878. Though I could have used some medication for the depression I had not yet identified, I hadn’t ordered any drugs from Hamilton County! The contents were a mystery. I carefully opened the top of the box. Styrofoam peanuts popped out. I dove into the sea of white and felt something metallic. I pulled out a silver chalice, held it, and lifted it to the light. The cup was deep, well worn and tarnished. Many hands had held this chalice. I looked to see if anything else was in the box and noticed an envelope. I opened the note and read… Dear Joe, My husband Lonnie and I watch your televised service every week, as Lonnie is in the hospital and we can worship together. We especially appreciated your story of the broken chalice and want you to have the enclosed chalice as a gift. The chalice was given to us by an older woman whom we cared for until her death. It was last used to serve communion in the Dodge City Episcopal Church in 1919. We want you to have it because we no longer have anyone to pass gifts on to. Our only child, our son, was killed in a convenience store robbery last year. May this chalice bring you comfort the way your words brought comfort to us. Sincerely, Betty I held the note in one hand, the chalice in the other and wept. The following Sunday, during the prayer of confession, I shared the story of the silver chalice, knowing that I would be speaking a word of thanksgiving to Betty and Lonnie long-distance. Later in the service, while preparing for communion, my friend, who shed light on the broken chalice, now lifted the cup of juice to bless it and then poured the juice into the silver chalice, blessing this cup for a new work. While this moment of blessing was a gift, a pervading emptiness and sense of inner brokenness hounded me and eventually led me back to the broken chalice and chards. Secret of the Broken Chalice Nearly six months passed before I could muster the courage to hold the broken chalice and carefully look at the chards. I was leading a retreat on “Keeping the Bounce in Life Without Getting Bounced” and knew the time had come. I retrieved the chalice and looked at its shape. I gently held each chard and was able to claim a new awareness. From the journal I started that morning (and have continued the last four years) I wrote: “I am the brokenness. Those broken pieces are my broken pieces. I left them laying because I wanted to. Why pick them up? Why look at them? I’ve handled them a lot. “I’ve shown them to others, to invite them to look at their own brokenness and seek healing. But I’ve always held them away from me. I need to hold the chalice and the chards and explore what they can teach me.” The five chards revealed much about my deep, internal struggle to accept and love myself as God created me. The smaller chards were easy to identify: a need to always try and please others; looking for definition through the external perceptions of others; living with a shameful self-image and believing that this was somehow good; believing that vulnerability would only lead to judgment. The fifth chard was the largest and the most severe, with the deepest edges. And it pointed to my deepest fear: that the truth of my sexuality could not possibly be received as a gift. Yet, even this fear could not keep me from addressing the agony it was creating in my soul and relationships. Through the careful listening of a therapist, I was able to name my deepest struggle: my homosexuality. Her response was a gift: “I am honored that you shared your deepest struggle with me.” The Beauty of Vulnerability Vulnerability is surprising. The strength it carries is the beauty of cracking open new perspectives in the movement of life. For years, all I could see in the broken chalice was its brokenness. The stem and the chards became a mirror of my soul— or, rather, the way I saw myself. The depression I experienced became a doorway to a deeply embedded truth. Hope knocked on the door of my soul and invited fear to dance. The invitation came through Emily Dickinson and one of her poems I heard read by Garrison Keillor on radio’s The Writer’s Almanac: Fall 2001 7 A Call to Worship Joe Cobb Hope is the thing with feathers That perches in the soul, And sings the tune without the words, And never stops at all. Hope perched on what was broken and cracked it open. While participating in a writer’s conference in Taos, New Mexico, Natalie Goldberg introduced me to the gift of Zen meditation and the importance of sitting, listening, being present to life, and the courage to keep going. The time to meditate and write also introduced the idea of cracking open the structure of my life to be awake to what is fresh; to have an intimate relationship with my soul. As I grow in this intimacy, I can lift both the “cracked open” chalice and the silver chalice and celebrate who God has created me to be. Can You Drink The Cup? Toward the close of the retreat at Ghost Ranch, Chris led us in a beautiful ritual based on Nouwen’s book, Can You Drink The Cup? The first movement invited us to hold the cup, look at our lives, and claim who God created us to be. What I wrote then, continues to bless me today: I am a beloved, beautiful child of God a tender, loving gay man a wonderful daddy a minister of hospitality The second movement invited us to lift the cup and offer a toast to life, to others, and to the larger community we live in—a blessing of sorts. My blessing comes from the incredible song, Lord of the Dance, by Sydney Carter: “Dance, then, wherever you may be!” The third movement invited us to drink the cup, take in the whole of our lives, and drink in the goodness of what is and what is yet to be: I look forward to a new life filled with honesty, courage, joy and lots of writing!” This queer soul is cracking open the gift of new life! ▼ Joe Cobb, a former United Methodist minister from Kansas, is, in his own words, “a daddy to two children and a free-lance minister of hospitality.” Leader: Here’s to this day, O God! A day you have created and called sabbath! People: We lift the cup of our lives to you in praise and thanksgiving! Leader: Here’s to this moment, O God! A moment to gather as the community of faith and share the brokenness and blessing of our lives. People: We lift the cup of our lives to you in praise and thanksgiving! Leader: Here’s to life, O God! Life filled with awe, mystery, wonder and hope! People: We lift the cup of our lives to you in praise and thanksgiving! This Call to Worship was used in a service based on Psalm 116:12-13: “What shall I return to the Lord for all God’s bounty to me? I will lift up the cup of salvation and call on the name of the Lord.” The service also included an altar designed to hold a river of chalices and candle light, celebrating the way in which light pours over and through our moments of brokenness to crack open new understandings. 8 Open Hands Happy are those whose illusion is revealed, Whose fantasied wholeness is made truly whole. Happy are those open to the truth of their body, And whose spirit has been opened to Truth. While I kept silence about the truth of my body, I wasted away, And groans pushed their way out through my clenched teeth all day long, For day and night the truth of my yearning was heavy in me, While I denied them, the juices of my longing dried up as in the heat of summer. Then I acknowledged my lie to You And I could no longer hide my true longing. I said, “I will claim my truth before our God” And You revealed me as mirror of Your own Longing. Therefore let all who are true to our body-spirit Speak openly with You. At the floodtide, the mighty rushing waters of my desire Still could not fill the core of my beloved; Still fullness remained hidden from me. You revealed the aching beauty of my yearning At the heart of my glad cries of deliverance. “I will instruct you and teach you the ways your body-soul is one; I who am One will counsel you with my eye upon you. Do not think your strong-tender flesh is a horse or mule, Separate, without understanding; Whose spirit must be broken with a bit and bridle As if it could wander off and not stay near you! “Many are the torments of those who try to be one or the other, But the ceaseless ebb and flood of My Yearning-Love Pulses in the soul-body rhythm of your passion. Be glad in your echo of My Desire, and rejoice, my hungry one; And shout for joy, all you whose hungers pulse in My Heart.” ▼ Madeleine Manning is grateful to Carter Heyward for providing the peg “straight queer” on which to hang her passion. A free lance writer and liturgist, her work has been used extensively by the Houston Interfaith Gay Pride Worship celebration for the past two years, and she co-authored (with Winter 2001 Open Hands writer Victor Schill) the liturgy used in the nationwide celebration of Reconciling in Christ Sunday 2001 in Evangelical Lutheran Churches of America (ELCA) congregations. These renderings are excerpted from a full paraphrase of the Psalms under the working title Wholebody Singing. Two of her other psalms are found on pages 25 and 27. Be Glad in Your Echo of My Desire Revisiting Psalm 32 Madeleine Manning Sustaining the Spirit Fall 2001 9 J Prayer in Honor of Those Whom Jesus Loved Joan Chittister Jesus who loved the Samaritan woman, outcast proclaimer of your name, let us love and support all those who proclaim your name to the gay and lesbian community. Jesus who loved the lepers whom others called unclean, let us see the glory of creation everywhere, in everyone. Jesus who loved the one condemned with him and promised him heaven by virtue of his faith, give us the faith to broaden our vision of the reign of God. Jesus who loved the hemorrhaging woman, long ignored and thought to be intrinsically disordered, give us hearts large enough to embrace those whom the world calls bent. Jesus who loved the tax collector the community feared, enable us to put down our fear of those who are different from ourselves. Jesus who loved the Roman soldier, foreigner and oppressor, help us to love those who make exiles of our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters. Jesus who loves us in all our humanness, all our glories, enable us to love those whose glories we have failed to see. You who called women disciples in a male world, who confronted leaders of the synagogue with their sins of injustice, who sent out your disciples to the whole world, give us the courage to stand with our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters, their families and those who minister to them. Give us the grace to confront their rejection, to ease their loneliness, to calm their fears and to belie their sense of abandonment. Give us all the grace of owning our sexual identity, whatever its orientation, as another manifestation of your goodness. Give us the vision to recognize and reject the homophobia around us and in our own hearts, as well. May we and the church of Jesus open our hearts and homes and sanctuaries to the gay and lesbian community, to the glory of God they bring in a new voice, with a different face. Let us bless the God of differences. Amen. ▼ Sister Joan Chittister, OSB, wrote this prayer in response to the May 1999 decision by the Congregation of the Doctrine of Faith of the Roman Catholic Church to silence the ministry of Father Robert Nugent and Sister Jeannine Gramick to gays and lesbians, said in church documents to be “intrinsically disordered.” [See Movement News, Summer 1999 issue of Open Hands, Vol. 15, No. 1.] Chittister, a noted Catholic author and speaker, has also been a strong advocate for women’s full equality in the church. About that commitment, she has said, “I presume my commitment to the ordination of women might be a stumbling block to those who believe, contrary to the experience and proof of history, that theology never develops.” You may order this prayer printed on cards from the Benedictine Sisters of Erie, PA ($9/100 cards, $5/50 cards, $3/25 cards. Add $1.75 shipping and handling. to Benetvision, 355 East Ninth Street, Erie, PA 16503-1107. Phone: 814/459-5994. E-mail: msbpr@juno.com Website: www.eriebene dictines.org 10 Open Hands Especially in conservative religious circles, the gay rights movement is usually perceived and portrayed as an extremist faction of the sexual revolution and a demonstration of the breakdown of morality. In fact, it is much better understood as a manifestation of dramatic changes in culture and consciousness caused by modernization, psychological sophistication, ecological awareness, scientific thinking, and expansion of the human population— that are loosely (and occasionally ridiculously) called “new age” or “new paradigm” thinking. Those conservatives are generally correct about the breakdown in traditional morality. But they’re incorrect about the causes and the consequences, and even the extent of this breakdown. People probably aren’t any more sinful today than ever. In fact, they’re probably less likely to commit violence and much more sensitive to issues of injustice and unfairness than people were in times past. The apparent rise in violence and madness in modern society is more a consequence of increased population and increased reporting. More people mean more incidents of crime, and more reporters looking for news stories mean more attention and sensationalism. Nonetheless, there clearly are huge shifts going on in public morality and they are dramatized by changes in sexual behavior, with homosexuality seeming to be the most dramatic violation of traditional sex and gender rules. But the shifts in values are not caused by gay people recognizing and embracing their true sexual feelings. It is obvious to most readers of Open Hands, but needs to be said to the general public, that gay men and lesbians coming out and seeking to lead honest lives is not the cause of divorce, teen pregnancy, abortion, drug addiction, suicide, infanticide, or school violence. Yet perhaps a whole swath of these problems can be traced to the failure of traditional religion to address modern day issues in ways that make sense to modern day people. The breakdown in morality, in my view, is a sign of the failure of religion. Transformation of Religious Consciousness There is a transformation going on today in the very nature of religious truth. Exposure to the varieties of religion around the world— combined with a commitment to the fundamental proposition that all human beings are created equal— forces modern thinkers to abandon the old-time notions that their culture and their religion alone were right and God-ordained. Modernization and globalization force us to think from broader perspectives. Our understanding of religious truths changes when we understand that religious stories are metaphors with meaning beyond the surface and that the surface details come out of cultural conditioning, politics, historical happenstance, and imagination. The old stories don’t make sense anymore. For all that you might feel saved by your personal relationship with God, exemplified in Jesus Christ, the fundamental doctrine of salvation in Christianity based in the mythology of bloody human sacrifice as fitting appeasement of God’s wrath probably doesn’t speak to you. Your relationship with God and Jesus is probably something more personal and loving and comforting, not consistent with the model of God as a stern and stiff-necked patriarchal Middle Eastern potentate demanding tribute. Your vision of God as ruler of the universe is necessarily based more on the model of a democratic leader administering government for the good of the governed than a dictator ruling for his or her own arbitrary pleasure. We necessarily adjust our understanding of religious mythology and imagery to fit our modern world views. We realize that the story of creation in the Book of Genesis is about the divine care for incarnate life rather than a history of the first week of evolution. We understand that the composers of Gen- RE-CREATING RELIGION TOBY JOHNSON esis thought the whole universe a flat disk about the size of the Mediterranean Coast floating in a cosmic ocean with little lights hung from a domed ceiling overhead. We know that the invention of telescopes has allowed a much different view of the universe, and the ancient religious stories have to be adapted to that modern vision of space and time. We know we have to change how we understand God because how we understand the universe and how we understand human nature has changed. In a world of daily bathing, deodorants, tampons, condoms, canning and refrigeration, cleanliness and food safety, many issues of Levitical law take on totally new meaning. And we are having a predictably difficult time making these adjustments, not least because religious institutions are slow to embrace the changes, and the changes keep coming faster and faster. Spiritual Creativity We modern human beings are literally having to create our own religions, figuring out what makes sense to us, interpreting the stories in ways consistent with the modern, global, scientifically- modulated worldview. And that worldview promises to keep changing, and changing faster than we can keep up with. It’s a little scary. But it’s also a wonderful opportunity. We are exposed to a panoply of ideas including astronomy, psychology, evolutionary biology, ecology, Buddhist and Hindu meditation practice, yoga, the Gaia Hypothesis, A.I. and E.T. speculation, paranormal phenomena as well as traditional religion. Indeed, it is said that we are exposed to more information by age seven than was known by all the great philosophers of the past put together. From this barrage of information we have to creatively make sense of life— and of God. A new religious consciousness is being born. It offers enlightenment and life meaning to individuals, but it is tremendously challenging to institutions. The Gay Rights Movement is part of that transformation, and that’s an important reason it meets with so much opposition from traditional religious institutions. Fall 2001 11 Even though sexual behavior and gender roles really have very little to do with the nature of God or how to think about mystical experience and spiritual phenomena, religion has been one of the carriers of the rules about sex and the conditioning about gender. Gender Roles Psychological sophistication and social critique show us how males and females are conditioned, even terrorized, into traditional roles. Men are taught to be leaders, decision- makers, competitors, warriors. Women are taught to be followers, servants, homemakers, child-rearers. Men are taught to dominate women. Women are taught to be submissive to men. Men are taught to suppress feelings and emotions, to be always in control. Women are taught to be victims of their emotions, to be feckless and needy. Everybody is supposed to see the world divided dualistically between dominant and submissive, male and female, light and dark, right and wrong. These dualisms preserve the status quo, keeping men in charge— especially the men who have risen to power within institutions that absorb responsibility and free them from accountability. This is really politics and economics, but it gets enforced through religion and morality. These models of men’s and women’s roles don’t apply to modern society. Women are now equal citizens, educated and responsible, no longer the submissive possession of a man who gave them a name and a reason for living. This is causing turmoil in society as we try to adjust to these changes. Gay people, in particular, demonstrate the violation of these gender roles. Gay people represent the ultimate flouting of societal conditioning, and exemplify the possibility of changing the old rules. Even beyond sexual behavior and gender roles, gay people challenge the belief in duality. Ironically, two thousand years ago it was Jesus and the early Christians who were challenging that dualistic, male dominant view of the world. Jesus scoffed at the elaborate taboos of the Temple, showing how these kept the poor suffering and poor and the rich men rich and powerful. He dismissed the dualism of clean and unclean— which was the essence of religion in those days— teaching that love and respect for human persons was what mattered, not obedience to the Law. Today the gay rights movement resonates with those teachings about respecting individuals and responding to human needs instead of just obeying rules. Gay Perspective Gay people reveal the perspective beyond traditional culture and belief that all modern human beings are being called to take. Most of us grew up feeling we didn’t fit, that there was something “wrong” with us, that we were different. If we were unlucky, the feelings of being excluded left us with damaged egos and self-fulfilling prophecies of failure and discontent. If we were lucky, we later learned that not fitting in had given us special skills and talents, trained us to be sensitive to other people’s emotions— if only out of selfprotection and secrecy— and enabled us to take a critical stance on the conventions and assumptions other people take for granted unquestioningly, and that we could see limited and diminished their life experience and perpetuated victimization of women and violence against supposed enemies. If we were especially lucky and escaped the internalized self-loathing and homophobia societal conditioning tried to impose on us, we might even have escaped the presumption of dualism— which includes both the notion that the world should be full of conflict and disagreement and that God and the world are forever separate. We might also have discovered the lesson, so important in a time of population explosion, that you don’t have to have children to live a good, fulfilled life. And that, in fact, you make an unselfish contribution to the world by not having children and working to better the world with no vested or self-serving interest in the future. These are precisely qualities needed for our newly developing religious attitudes: the ability to see from a perspective that honors and understands the meaning of the religious traditions that have come down to us without being enslaved by the details (that no longer fit modern reality); the awareness that the apparent duality of the world is an illusion, that enmity and competition are not inherent; and the mystical sense that we are participating in the development of God just in the course of our daily lives by stewarding the world whether we have children or not. A History of Being Spiritual Leaders It shouldn’t be surprising that gay people would exemplify certain spiritual/ mystical qualities. Modern gay-sensitive research into history and anthropology has found that many of the shamans and healers and miracle-workers of primitive times who helped create human religious consciousness in the first place were people who lived outside conventional gender roles. These days referred to as “two-spirit people,” healers and spiritual guides in Native-American and other shamanic traditions practiced cross-dressing and, at least, ritual homosexuality in ways that would make us think they’d be called gay if they were alive today. And throughout the history of Christianity, people we’d now call “gay” were the priests and monks and nuns who chose religious life as a meaningful alternative to marriage and family and who therefore guided the development of religious consciousness. Religion is in dire need of major transformation. The model of God and the world we embrace has to give us a These are precisely qualities needed for our newly developing religious attitudes: the ability to see from a perspective that honors and understands the meaning of the religious traditions that have come down to us without being enslaved by the details that no longer fit modern reality… sense of meaning and purpose in life and clear motivation to love one another and work in harmony. Because traditional religion— probably less out of its spirituality than its societal function of imposing gender and class roles— has opposed gay rights and the recognition of gay people’s human dignity, it is modern gay men and lesbians who should be especially motivated to bring about this transformation. And, two thousand years later, this transformation is just the next step in championing Jesus’s wisdom that the cause of human suffering—what we need to be saved from— is not our failing to obey dualistic rules about cleanliness, but our lack of love and respect for one another. Transformation in Action In fact, today, all of us are consciously or unconsciously adjusting our religious and mythological belief system to fit modern realities. It is a commonplace now that everybody’s got a different idea of what God means, and in a pluralistic society with freedom of religion, that seems okay with most people. Of course, traditionally this hodgepodge of opinions about the nature of God would have been considered heretical. But now it is just natural. The proliferation of Christian traditions, denominations, and sects is itself an indication that there is no longer a monolithic, authoritarian religious tradition and no clear and definite interpretation of what the Scriptures mean or of who holds final authority. But the transformation and amalgamation of various mythological traditions is much bigger than just variations on Christian theology. Within the context of what can loosely be called “Gay Spirituality” are several pertinent examples of how a new religious/mystical vision is being created out of past traditions. Perhaps the most identifiable example of religion in gay culture is the Christian denomination founded in Los Angeles in the 1960s by former fundamentalist pastor Troy Perry called the Metropolitan Community Church (MCC). While definitely Christian, and even evangelical, MCC proposes a very loose theology. There are few essentials you have to believe to be a member of the church (except maybe that the other churches are off-the-mark about homosexual orientation). The emphasis is on liturgy, community, and celebration, not doctrinal correctness. MCCers are almost all necessarily converts from other denominations who did not feel comfortable as openly or consciously gay in their home churches. That means that, in practice, MCC produces a liturgy that tries to seem familiar to Catholics, mainstream Protestants, and Southern Baptists alike. Within many of the mainstream churches, gay and lesbian affinity groups have developed: Integrity among Episcopalians, Affirmation among Mormons, Dignity among Catholics, CLOUT (Christian Lesbians Out Together), and the gay-positive denominational groups that have formed the Welcoming programs that publish Open Hands, to cite a few. These groups generally maintain religious orthodoxy on all issues except sexual orientation. They generally strive to get their denominations to wake up to modern realities, while at the same time providing worship and social opportunities for openly gay and lesbian church members. Body Electric, Wild Men, Wicca, and Faeries Beyond these, though, there are examples of the creation of whole new gay-inclusive and gay-inspired religions. At least three interweaving themes/ styles can be identified and offer examples of the modern syncretism/eclec- COLUMCILLE A SACRED SPACE & PLACE Twenty-one years ago, William H. (Bill) Cohea and Frederick Lindkvist began offering “weary sinners and reluctant saints” from all faiths and traditions the opportunity to enhance their spirituality, celebrate the seasons, and find their unity with the ever-new creation in this unusual place called Columcille, named for the saint Columba (cille means church). Very close to the Appalachian Trail and Kirkridge Retreat Center in northeastern Pennsylvania, this “playground of the human spirit” boasts 80 individual stone settings, the largest soaring 20 feet high, spread across 17 acres of hills and glens, forests and meadows. 12 Open Hands ticism: Tantric-based spiritualized sexuality, therapy-based transformative communities, and neo-paganism. Former Jesuit scholastic Joseph Kramer founded the Body Electric School, developing a series of trainings in sexuality reeducation based in Hindu and Buddhist Tantrism and Chinese Taoism that are now presented around the country in workshops called Celebrating the Body Erotic. Now under new leadership, most of the participants are gay men, but the trainings, which include techniques in touch, massage, breathing, and meditation, are now also styled for women and for heterosexuals. The focus of the Body Electric training is to relearn sexual arousal as an experience of spirit-energy in the body, not just a procedure for reproduction. Participants learn to allow arousal to build and maintain without orgasmic release so that it generates mystical states of consciousness, not just genital pleasure. On the surface, Body Electric is a workshop about eroticism and erotic stimulation, but the participants frequently come away with the added benefit of having “seen God,” not just a reassessment of sex, but having had an actual mystical experience transforming body and soul consciousness. Arising out of the popular men’s movement and so-called Wild Man Gatherings of the 1980s, along with 12- Step and other recovery and psychotherapeutic programs, gay men’s gatherings merge retreat, church camp, back-to-nature spirituality, and country campouts. The California-based Billy Clubs and the Georgia-based Gay Spirit Visions are major examples. Following the style (started by non-gay poet Robert Bly with the Wild Man gatherings) of honoring Native American nature spirituality and enriching it with the gay-positive two-spirit wisdom, these gatherings provide an alternative to church as a way of experiencing fellowship and ritual. With origins in psychological and therapeutic models, they call for life-transformation and participation in spiritual community without the mythological “baggage” of conventional religion. For lesbians, such country gatherings appear as women’s music festivals and feminist-based Wicca. Wicca, of course, is the proper term for the Goddess-worshiping religions of pre-Christian Europe that have been misrepresented and vilified in the term witchcraft. The most extreme form of such groups, and constituting a whole category of its own, is the neo-pagan Radical Faeries. The Faeries, using an archaic spelling of the word to suggest ancient and archetypal roots, developed out of a rural gathering, mostly of Californians, in 1979 called together by Harry Hay, founder of the 1950s Mattachine Society which initiated the modern gay rights movement. Though there are now men all across the country who call themselves Faeries, there is no organization as such. And so, of course, no doctrine. The movement is still based in Hay’s merging of California hippie styles of the ’70s, pop New Age notions, utopian idealism, and a radical honoring of gay consciousness as a special and “enlightened” way of seeing the world. Hay’s idea, echoed in the discussion above about gay non-dualistic thinking, is that gay people learn to relate to one another as subject to subject rather than subject to object. Because straight men and women cannot really understand each other’s deepest motivations and strivings, they must seek out one another to complement their masculinity or femininity in another person who is generally experienced as an object to be related to, not as another subject to be identified with. The Faeries celebrate nature festivals from Wiccan and pagan traditions with country gatherings and elaborately con- A trilithon (two giant column supporting a lintel) serves as one entrance to Columcille. St. Columba Chapel sits at its heart, a simple hexagonal structure that honors the visionary 6th century Irish monk who founded a Celtic Christian community on the Scots island of Iona. Four-thousand visitors per year visit Columcille, uniquely catalogued by the National American Art Museum of the Smithsonian Institution as the only “Outdoor Megalith Park and Celtic Art Center” in the United States. For information, contact: Columcille, 2155 Fox Gap Road, Bangor, PA 18013, colum@epix.net, www.columcille.org. Fall 2001 13 14 Open Hands trived rituals held at a number of “Sanctuaries“ around the country— the most prominent in Tennessee and Oregon. These Sanctuaries seem a little like oldtime monasteries with a crew of fulltime residents who live in community practicing simplicity of life, ecological awareness, and obedience to group consensus, but with a sex-positive take on chastity, and hosting the gatherings which bring visitors from all over the world, coming as pilgrims. One of the most notorious (and misunderstood) variants of this phenomena are the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, a self-proclaimed order of gay male nuns. Though known for their whimsically irreverent (and occasionally offensive to all) caricature of nuns in outrageous drag costumes, the Sisters really do perform good works and charitable acts in a positive imitation of the Catholic religious life they are parodying. Because gay people so often feel alienated from religion by the politicized rhetoric of TV preachers and selfproclaimed “conservative” pundits (and AM radio stars), many gay people end up creating their religion entirely on their own, without the help of the spiritual communities described above. A Personal Example I edit a small circulation, reader-written quarterly journal of gay men’s spirituality called White Crane. Submissions to White Crane routinely combine Christian social teachings with Buddhist notions of meditation and lifestyle simplicity, as well as images and references from pagan and classical mythology. Freed from orthodoxy, gay people can make up their own interpretations of what all the myths were intended to mean.Treating once sacrosanct and immutable ideas as arbitrary—because viewed from a broader perspective—is the first step in transforming religion for the needs of the modern world. To get personal, let me tell you that, through my exposure to the ideas of comparative religion scholar Joseph Campbell, I learned to make sense of the real meaning of Christianity by seeing the Redemption through an important image in Mahayana Buddhism. This 1st century reform movement in Buddhist history told the story of the attractive, lovable, and androgynous young saint, Avalokiteshvara, who, like Jesus, saved the world and became a bodhisattva, one whose very being is enlightenment. The mythological character Avalokiteshvara, rapt in compassion for all suffering beings, agreed to take on their karmic debts and to free them from suffering by living out their lives for them. Hence all sentient beings were saved and ushered into nirvana in distant mythic/sacred time. And all of us today, experiencing the suffering of life in the world, are, if we only saw, all incarnations of the bodhisattva fulfilling his vow. We are all One Being. The name Avalokiteshvara, depending on how you divide the syllables, means both “The Lord Who Looks Down in Pity” and “The Lord Who Is Seen Within.” Isn’t this the meaning of the Christian image of the Mystical Body of Christ? And of the familiar Christian idea that we should see Jesus in everyone we meet? And isn’t this a more meaningful way of saving the world than by being a victim of human sacrifice? Isn’t this a way of articulating in metaphor the modern eco-spiritual idea that all human beings are individualized organs of Gaia, the Earth consciousness? The Gaia Hypothesis, first suggested by evolutionary biologists James Lovelock and Lynn Margulis, asserts that the earth can be understood as functioning like a single organism, named for the Greek Earth Goddess Gaia. It is said there are Three Wonders of the Bodhisattva. The first is that he/she is androgynous, simultaneously and comfortably male and female. The second is that to her/him there is no difference between time and eternity, no difference between earth and heaven; he/she lives in the infinite Now. And the third wonder is that the first two wonders are the same! This is a gay positive myth. Each morning in my meditation, when I repeat the Bodhisattva’s vows to save all beings by relinquishing all resistance and entering all the possible doors of incarnation in order to attain the broadest possible perspective, I am reminded of the link between our androgynous gayness, our delight in incarnation, and our quest for spiritual insight. Saving Religion To transform religion, the first thing is to start paying attention to that wisdom human beings have been ignoring for two thousand years. If we truly loved our neighbors as ourselves, respecting difference and diversity, not making other people wrong, but seeing them also as manifestations of God’s growth in and through the world, then we could choose the myths and stories that enliven us, we could enjoy our religion as a clue to who we really are. Learning to love the people who exemplify the break with the old outdated world with all its superstitions and taboos and all its wrong-making and institutional enmity would be a good place to start. We save religion and redeem the teachings of Jesus and Buddha and the other founders of world religion by creating our own synthesis consistent with the modern vision of reality. That modern vision recognizes that for a wide variety of reasons human nature produces homosexuals as well as heterosexuals and that God’s work in the world is the evolution of consciousness to bring us all to love and harmony and acceptance of difference so that the world itself exemplifies God’s love for creation and shows itself as the Kingdom of God spread across the face of the earth. ▼ Edwin Clark (Toby) Johnson, Ph.D., former Catholic monk turned psychotherapist and gay community activist, was a student of the comparative religion scholar Joseph Campbell. Johnson is author of some seven books including the Lambda Literary Award-winning Gay Spirituality: The Role of Gay Identity in the Transformation of Human Consciousness. He is the editor of the quarterly gay men’s spirituality journal, White Crane (www.white cranejournal.com). Fall 2001 15 who we think we are—or have been taught to be—dies in the process. Through this transmutational act, the archetype of the wounded healer is brought to the fore. So, too is the discovery of the gifts and powers that await those who live out its myth. Claiming the wound is our spiritual occasion: the royal road to coming out inside as the transformers, healers, and workers of wonder we have the potential to be. One of the key roles that queer people play in any society is to preserve, refurbish, and expand its cultural values. The tasks of a wounded healer are many: to teach and inspire, proving a prophetic voice for all; to observe and uphold the rituals of birth and death and other life passages; and to create new ideas and forms of expression by which that society can evolve. Dag Hammarskjöld, Margaret Mead, Allen Ginsberg, Tennessee Williams, Aaron Copland, and Bayard Rustin are among those intermediate types whose lives and work have made an important contribution within my lifetime. The list of other such artists, writers, inventors, priests, healers, teachers, mythmakers, and community builders who have invested an often hostile world with ameliorant vision is a long one, indeed. These individuals can be characterized as shadow workers; those who elucidate the mysterious, speak the unspeakable, make real what is shunned or not seen by others. It has been a traditional queer function performed throughout history. ▼ Excerpted by the author for Open Hands from the book, Gay Body: A Journey Through Shadow to Self, by Mark Thompson (St. Martin’s Press, 1997). Mark Thompson is an author and editor who began his career with The Advocate in 1975, culminating his time there by editing Long Road to Freedom: The Advocate History of the Gay and Lesbian Movement (St. Martin’s Press, 1994). He is best known for his trilogy on gay spirituality: the anthology Gay Spirit: Myth and Meaning (St. Martin’s Press, 1987), Gay Soul: Finding the Heart of Gay Spirit and Nature (HarperSanFrancisco, 1994), and Gay Body: A Journey Through Shadow to Self (St. Martin’s Press, 1997), an autobiographical memoir combining elements of Jungian archetypes, gay history and mythology, and New Age spirituality. He lives in Los Angeles with his life partner of 16 years, Episcopal priest and author Malcolm Boyd. Photo on page 28. Because we live in a time when the objectivistic values of the Industrial Revolution and a Newtonian- Cartesian worldview (which separated mind from the body) are rapidly giving way, some people are realizing that meaning in life can be found through subjective experience rather than from something that is externally ordered. One possibility this presents is an ecology of associated differences: a world consisting of interdependent and multilevel realities in contrast to the monolithic model of superiority, conflict, and exclusion which still binds most people to their outworn cultural myths today. Queer people are harbingers of this new way of seeing and being in the world: an ascending consciousness that can help carry the world of the old, dying myths we now live in toward a more inclusive reality. As traditional systems of belief are forced to change, it will be recognized that we intermediate types play a vital role in effecting that change. When acting from our authentic selves, we evolve definitions of family, community, caregiving, of culture itself, even as that change continues to be resisted with an equal force. Creation of the new out of the debris of the old is usually difficult, even dangerous. So how can those whose function it is to mediate between the worlds of past and present, the seen and unseen, assume greater awareness about the tasks and trials ahead? I found that it usually takes a crisis of faith, a dark passage of the soul, a feeling of being trammeled by forces beyond control to break through to this deeper level of knowing. The accepted role of shamans in various native cultures offers one clue about who we may really be, as tenuous as that comparison may seem at first. Shamans are initiated into their work as mediators, healers, and soul guides through a ritual descent into the underworld, where they are symbolically dismembered and their bones scraped of flesh. Shamans are mortally wounded, and thus, after their resurrection, are endowed with the capacity to perceive the wounds of others. In our complex, post-modern era, that signifies the wounds not only of individuals, but of groups of people and the societies they form. What queer person who has struggled to gain consciousness about his or her true Self has not felt the scrape of flesh from bone? It is a soul-making process sadly without context, perhaps not even wanted, but encountered nevertheless. When we descend through the wound, a part of SHADOW WORKERS AND SOUL GUIDES MARK THOMPSON 16 Open Hands Excerpts from His Stand-up Comic Routine I know, I know, I don’t look like your average 62-year-old Presbyterian minister. Or do I? Let me tell you about this rather gay clerical outfit. For years I wore the traditional black frock with the little accent of white. After working at the Damien Center [as Director of Pastoral Care of that AIDS caregiving agency] for a few months, I was asked to be in the World AIDS Day Memorial Service and wore my black frock. Afterwards, Ronnie Russell came up to me and said, “Howard, if I’d known you were going to wear a black gown, I would have loaned you my white pearls.” So, on with the Rainbow colors—always have to make sure that this pin, “Thank God I’m Gay” is on straight. “FUMORIST” KATE CLINTON A self-described fumorist (feminist + humorist), Kate Clinton started her professional career as one of America’s funniest openly lesbian stand-up comedians in 1981 blending politics, Catholicism, and her lesbianism to compose a repertoire. A reviewer for The Los Angeles Times noted, “Kate Clinton is the lesbian you want to take home to meet your parents… She’s so far out of the closet, so natural with her sexual identity, that a homophobe would beg her to spend the night. She’s astute and—above all— amusing.” She has performed her one-woman show across the United States and Canada, and has appeared on Arsenio Hall, Good Morning America, Nightline, Entertainment Tonight, among other television programs. In 1996, she joined The Rosie O’Donnell Show as a writer. Clinton has been a big help to Dignity, according to Marianne T. Duddy, the organization’s executive director. For example, Clinton served as the LGBT Catholic group’s featured entertainer during their 1997 convention in Boston. ▼ Howard’s handwritten notecards for his comedy routine. GOD’S GLORIOUS GADFLY HOWARD WARREN Well, folks, choice or nature, remember the words of Rita Mae Brown, who said, “I became a lesbian out of devout Christian charity. All those women out there are praying for a man, so I gave them my share.” Fall 2001 17 Now, I’d like to say something wonderful about organized religion. (Sorts through his notes, looks up.) Ted, did you take my notes? Oh, well, let’s go on to something really important. Seriously, you out there, the local congregations that are open to all God creates, you have certainly heard of the Christian right or the religious right (oxymoron if I ever heard one!)? They keep saying there is a Gay Agenda. Anybody got a copy? I’ve never seen it. I’m gay and I’d love to know what I’ve been doing. Politics keeps getting us the headlines. Wouldn’t you think most heterosexuals would like us to settle down, have what we call same-sex ceremonies and be married? What an uproar! When Kate Clinton [see sidebar] was in town last year she said, “The freedom not to marry was always one of the things I enjoyed about being gay.” In the New York Times last week she called it the “Mad Vow Disease.” I don’t want to say very much about my Presbyterian church. Today I call it the Pale Presence of God. I only remain a Presbyterian minister because as an HIV+ person, I want to retain the health insurance I have paid into for 30 years. I don’t remember [gayness] being a question at ordination. We really are on different wave-lengths. The other day at a church and society meeting I talked about a needle exchange program and they thought it was a sewing project for a Third World country! Well, folks, choice or nature, remember the words of Rita Mae Brown, who said, “I became a lesbian out of devout Christian charity. All those women out there are praying for a man, so I gave them my share.” So live and don’t let the ecclesiastical b- & b-’s (and I don’t mean bed and breakfast) get you down. As they hate, be outrageous and laugh right back at them. If you are down and out and want real laughs, turn on the religious TV channels, turn the sound off, and just watch the hatred in their faces. Then turn them off and laugh. And always remember, “Ye shall know them by their fruits.” Alleluia. Shalom. Amen. ▼ Howard Warren, cofounder of Presbyterian ACT UP! and beloved pastor of traditional churches before joining the staff of the Damien Center in Indianapolis as chaplain to hundreds living with HIV/AIDS (1989-1999), celebrated his 67th birthday in September in a facility that cares for him as he copes with dementia, believed AIDS-related. He is known as God’s Glorious Gadfly. Thanks to Edgar Towne, Mary Z. Longstreth, and Rev. Dan Smith for providing the text and photos. 18 Open Hands Morticia DeVille has caught the Holy Ghost’s vibe. Her blond wig frames her face, and cascades sufficiently down her neck to hide any back hair that—she worries aloud—might be visible. Her face is beautiful in its uncannily open mix of spiritual fervor and irony. She is bent slightly at the waist, singing an old-time gospel song into the microphone. When the song ends, the crowd gathered about her at Burkhart’s Pub bursts into applause, but Tish remains bent, looking downward. “My dress is so pretty,” she says of her glitter-speckled purple dress. “You know, a drag queen has to be careful what she wears. We can become mesmerized by our own glitter.” After a few more cracks—about sex, her 159- pound weight loss, the muscles on a boy standing nearby—the taped background music cranks up and Tish and the Gospel Echoes, Mark Roberts and Philip Messer, perform a rousing rendition of “John the Revelator.” Morticia, whose name is a reference to her former occupation as a funeral director, has been performing old-time gospel music in Atlanta’s gay bars for 16 years. Her Sunday shows at 7:30 and 10:30 p.m., called the “Atlanta Gospel Hour,” are legendary in the gay community but have attracted increasingly diverse crowds in recent years. The Gospel Hour even includes a free buffet supper beforehand, only adding to the sense of a church bulletin’s inevitable summary of an event as offering plenty of “fun, food and fellowship.” A casual observer tends to see Morticia’s show only as a campy take on the music that has drenched the South for years. It’s not altogether inaccurate. Many, if not the majority, of Atlanta’s young gay men and women have sought refuge here from the South’s small towns, and it is astonishing to look around the bar during a performance and see how many are singing along—often ironically, often just because the music is so catchy. But many find the experience deeply emotional even if it isn’t explicitly religious. “This was the background music of my childhood,” my friend Will told me. “My father put on a stack of gospel records on the hi-fi every night. So, while I don’t have religious experiences, I become extremely nostalgic for my childhood when Tish is singing.” But you don’t have to look far to realize that just as many are caught up in something spiritual. A man in hot pants bangs a tambourine, closes his eyes and virtually drowns out Tish as he sings along. A young woman, rapturous, hugs herself while she sings, then stops to assure you that she is not a lesbian although her boyfriend happens to be bisexual and seems to have disappeared. Here, the “collection” comes in the form of dollar bills pressed, one by one, on the performers. “None of this is surprising,” a former priest tells me. “God shows up everywhere.” “As a man in a dress?” I ask. “Hello,” he says. “What do you think the average priest is? Have you ever seen the Holy Father in pants?” Indeed, the Catholic Church has a full roster of transvestite saints, mainly females like Pelagia, Eugenia, Anna, and above all, St. Joan. Monks were explicitly directed to feminize themselves, to “become the other.” During the reign of Henry VIII in England, boys were expected to cross-dress during carnival time and, if the wardrobe was not specifically female, it was that of a priest. In India, there is a whole cult of cross-dressing religious performers. Native American culture revered the berdache, a cross-dressing male spiritual figure. It is highly unlikely that Morticia DeVille and her cast see themselves in this tradition, but it makes sense. Crossdressing is transgressive; it takes us out of the ordinary, and the eruption of spirit is similarly altering of ordinary experience. For Tish the idea is much the same, even if not historically grounded: “I have to think it’s the Holy Spirit GOSPEL SONGS IN A GAY BAR MEETING A PRIEST OF THE REAL CLIFF BOSTOCK Fall 2001 19 moving at Burkhart’s. It’s God coming into a place you might not ordinarily expect to find him. Because he’s in such a strange place, it’s even more powerful.” “So, you’re deeply religious,” I said. “Apparently,” she replied. Of course, the otherness of the experience is heightened by the nature of the “congregation” of gay people, historically demonized by fundamentalist and mainstream churches alike. “God shows up where he’s needed and gay people, who suffer but are often excluded from church, do need him,” Tish says. “But we like to have a good time, too. So, If I get too drunk for the second show, it might make me a bad performer, but it doesn’t make me a sinner.” In that—the marriage of the sacred and the profane, the Bible with booze—the Gospel Hour is virtually a blending of the pagan and the Christian, like the Lenten carnivals of the Mediterranean area and the rowdy Easter pageants of the Hispanic world. Morticia’s show isn’t limited to drag queens. Besides her backup boys, she is joined by Ramona Dugger, a thoroughly heterosexual African-American singer who often brings a more serious tone to the proceedings. Her songs are almost always interpreted by a man who performs a kind of histrionic American Sign Language. Another regular cast member is Tina Devore, a wellknown African-American drag queen who sings and lipsyncs raucous black gospel. An astounding semi-regular is Alicia Kelly, who lip-sincs African-American gospel too, and breaks into rapturous, floor-rolling dancing, her fists full of dollar tips, sweat slinging off her lithe body, baptizing anyone nearby. But Morticia remains the absolute star of the show. Utterly and unself-consciously devoted to that delicious boundary between sex and the sacred, with a voice that can make your diaphragm vibrate, she is the priest of the real, pouring the gifts of the Holy Spirit with a thunderous laugh. Attend her service. ▼ Cliff Bostock (cliff.bostock@creativeloafing.com) is a popular Atlanta writer and insightful cultural critic who teaches courses in writing. He is a regular contributor to Atlanta’s favorite alternative paper, Creative Loafing, in which this article first appeared (Sept. 4, 2001). Morticia DeVille & The Gospel Echoes may be contacted at morticiadeville@aol.com. 20 Open Hands Excerpts from the play adapted from the book, I’m Still Dancing (Chi Rho Press, 1991), by the Rev. Stephen Pieters. Steve Pieters, a minister in the Metropolitan Community Church, fell sick with multiple maladies, including lymphoma and Kaposi’s sarcoma, and was finally diagnosed with AIDS in the early 1980’s. An experimental treatment that nearly killed him (thus abandoned as a remedy) brought his cancers into remission in 1986. He transformed his AIDS diagnosis into ministry, and with his newfound health led the Universal Fellowship of MCC’s AIDS ministry for more than a decade. He’s still alive and well and dancing, in churches and into the hearts of all whom he meets. Peter Massey may be contacted by e-mail at petermassey@ earthlink.net. It is 1997. An apartment or hotel room, with simple furnishings. A boombox, hand weights, and other items. Disco or jazzy, party-like dance music. Steve is dressed in workout pants and a tanktop, exercising as the lights come up. … I realize that from the beginning I took a very creative approach toward AIDS and cancer and everything. He reads from a journal. This is from one month after my diagnosis: “I am not going to capitalize the letters to “aids” anymore. It’s an acronym, of course, for Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, and when you write A.I.D.S. it’s proper to capitalize and put a period after each letter. But when I read it that way, I do not like how it screams I’M STILL DANCING A ONE-MAN PLAY PETER MASSEY out at me from the page. Capitalizing it gives it too much power, too much terror. So I don’t. It’s not AIDS. It’s aids. I’m not trying to diminish the seriousness of the situation. I just want to deflate some of the fear.” … He turns another page. “I have learned to face the stigma of the purple spots of Kaposi’s Sarcoma. I am fond of reminding people that purple has for centuries been considered the color of spiritual power and transformation. It’s been my experience with at least some people with aids, that as they have opened to their purple spots, and subsequently to their deaths, they have been filled with a unique spiritual power. “One such man is a friend I’ll call Alex. He rode in the Gay Pride parade last summer. His skin was covered with purple lesions and at the start of the parade he wore a huge sun bonnet, scarf and sunglasses to hide his purple face. But as the parade got underway, he took his protective clothing off, and he showed his lesions. It had a remarkable effect on the crowd. Some people turned their faces away, but most people applauded Alex. Many broke through the lines of the parade and came up to shake his hand or hug him. He sat up proudly, with a gleam in his eye. For once, he was not ashamed of the purple lesions covering his face, and people learned from him. And Alex looked more joyful than I had seen him in a long time. He died two weeks later.” He closes the journal. I have a growing conviction that healing is not mutually exclusive of dying. … Anyway, when I was first diagnosed with cancer in 1984—that spring— I preached the Easter sermon at MCC of the Valley in North Hollywood. I discovered that Easter that believing in the Resurrection meant that even though they had told me the worst thing I could imagine, I could still do a tap dance! So I did. (He turns on the tape player and dances through the following.) I tap danced in front of the altar on Easter Sunday...to proclaim the life I still felt, even in the face of what I assumed was my impending death. It was foolish, of course, but gee—I had terminal cancer! What did I care?! I consider myself a fool for Christ, actually. I’ll do anything for him. It doesn’t matter. I’ve tap danced in churches all over the world. … I’ve known I was gay for as far back as I can remember. … I remember being called a fairy for the first time in the second grade. I wasn’t sure what it meant, but I could tell the other kids didn’t mean it kindly, and I knew it had something to do with my acting more like a girl than a boy... Fall 2001 21 He steps behind a screen and begins changing clothes. …At 17, I was worried about the fact that I still liked fairy tales. You see, I believe in fairies. Truly. I don’t mind the fact that we’re called fairies. What is a fairy? A unique spiritual being. Doesn’t that describe us all? And didn’t we all grow up clapping along with Mary Martin dressed up as Peter Pan when she’d say “if you believe in fairies, clap your hands and make Tinkerbell live!” Well, I clapped my hands year after year after year and every year I helped bring that little fairy back to life. But of course, I believed I could. You know, for a while I felt that if I had just stayed in my closet, if I had never come out, if I had never had sex, then I would not have aids. I immediately realized the truth: the closet would have suffocated me and my spirit would have died. What kind of man would I be? He emerges from behind the screen, dressed in a purple clerical shirt and white collar. I have to tell you a story about this shirt. I was at an interfaith conference and an Episcopal laywoman approached me. She said, “I couldn’t help but notice your shirt. If you wear a purple clerical shirt in the Episcopal church, it means you’re a bishop. What does it mean in your church?” I thought about it and said, “In my church, it means you’re gay.” She was noticeably shocked for a moment and then remarked, “Well, sometimes in the Episcopal church it means that as well.” One of the most profound aspects of my experience with aids has been the reinforcement of my gay pride. I mean, saying something like that to a stranger. What is gay pride? Pride in myself. It’s that simple. But from a very deep place. It is directly connected to my faith. … When I was at McCormick Seminary, my preaching professor always told us to look for the grace in any given situation. So where is the grace in the aids crisis? I would like to begin by suggesting that God’s grace is in the present moment. Right here and now, in the ability to smile anyway, to share a good laugh, to enjoy another person’s company. There is a grace Peter Massey performing I’m Still Dancing presented by the Mohonk Mountain Stage Company at the Woodstock Arts Festival in New York in July, 1996. Afterward, Steve Pieters (right) joined him on stage to talk about the trip he had just made to the Vancouver AIDS Conference, where “combination therapy” was the talk of the gathering. for me in God’s loving presence in my life. At what could be a time of feeling abandoned by God, I have never been more sure of God’s love for me. God did not give me this disease. God is with me against this disease. … I resonate with Paul, who writes, “So we do not lose heart. Though our outer nature is wasting away, our inner nature is being renewed every day. For this slight momentary affliction is preparing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison. O Death, where is thy victory? O Death, where is thy sting?” Lights fade to black. ▼ Peter Massey has served as actor, director, playwright, and producer. He was Artistic Director of the Florida’s Riverfront Theatre and Managing Director of the Gay Men’s Chorus of Los Angeles. Earlier this year, Los Angeles critics uniformly praised his debut one-man tribute to the poet Ogden Nash. Oldest Continually Serving Disciples Congregation SEEKS A NEW SENIOR MINISTER This Open & Affirming urban Disciples Community with ecumenical partnerships, Day School and strong social action commitment is beginning to search for a new senior minister. Please indicate your interest to: Ragnar Naess Chair, Search Committee Park Avenue Christian Church 1010 Park Avenue NY NY 10028 22 Open Hands Since the early 1970s gay and lesbian choruses have been singing and growing, changing hearts and minds through music. GALA Choruses is an international group of over 180 choruses with over 12,000 members. Every four years it holds a huge festival. Last year, over 6000 singers and supporters descended on San Jose, California, July 22-29, and poured our hearts out in music. This is my story. My chorus, Voices of Kentuckiana, is a mixed chorus of men and women. We have spent four years planning and doing whatever it would take to get us to San Jose, an enormous undertaking for 60+ people. We sold raffle tickets, calendars, Entertainment coupon books, and just about everything we could to raise money. We planned and ordered new outfits, parts of which were made by chorus members, as we prepared to be physically ready. We planned our program, practiced our music and refined our presentation, trying to be as good as possible. Then we boarded planes to go to GALA Festival 2000 in San Jose. The festival began with splendid opening ceremonies that included a roll call of the choruses and lots of cheering. Harvey Fierstein and Broadway singer Kristin Chenowith sang and acted their way into our collective hearts; Kate Clinton made us laugh and sing; and a surprise appearance by folk singer Holly Near closed the ceremonies! Awesome. The next day, Sunday, July 23, GALA VI got down to business. The festival provides a place for each chorus attending to sing for its peers in a non-competitive atmosphere. What a joy to hear so many groups: Gloría, a mixed chorus from Ireland, the London Gay Men’s Chorus, the choruses from Germany and France, and those from California, Texas, Ohio, New York, Toronto and Vancouver, and many more. There was no way one could hear everyone (or meet everyone), but you sure wanted to. Over 120 choruses sang, danced (some of them), waved, and charmed their way into our hearts. Many of them performed pieces commissioned especially for their group. The Turtle Creek Chorale joined with the Women’s Chorus of Dallas and sang “Old Turtle” in their concert block, a choral and dramatic reading of the famed children’s book. Then they were persuaded to do a special workshop performance of their “Sing for a Cure.” This work was commissioned by the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation and the two choruses to support Breast Cancer research. I remember one song about a mother, wondering who would care for her child after she was gone. I was so proud to be part of a movement doing so much. Of course the festival was picketed and preached at by folks proclaiming God’s wrath, and how we are the scourge of the earth! One particular evening I was overcome with my interior frustration with God, and this whole church thing. I had sung with the Festival men’s chorus and walked by these picketers on my way to sing. Police were everywhere. I tried not to feel discouraged, and poured myself into the music, keeping my mind on my task at hand. After our sets were over, I just wanted to be held and told it didn’t matter, to be told that I mattered to GOD, to the world. But I was alone (the story of my life!) and I had almost gotten on the train to go back to the hotel, when something changed my mind. I ran over to the other performance venue in hopes that the last chorus to sing had not yet finished. Fortunately, they were running late. The Lavender Light Chorus from NYC sang about God’s love in a Gospel style. The audience was on their feet clapping and cheering! I can’t describe for you this experience. Hearing exactly what I needed to hear: that I matter…that we, GLBT people matter, that ALL of us matter and are God’s children. I felt like I was in church…a holy space! In that place, God spoke to us all through those voices and assured us of our worth! After a week of listening to other groups, my chorus, Voices of Kentuckiana, finally performed. We were the very last chorus to sing in San Jose. We put all our energy and all our passion into the music, communicating our love, acceptance, and our overwhelming “yes” to creation…to the music of life. We sang about birth, choices in life, death, and life, and yes, we sang about love. It was one of the most powerful moments of my life. My favorite song that we sang was “Even When God Is Silent.” When the Allies liberated Cologne, Germany, in 1944, they found this inscription on a wall in a cellar where Jews hid from Nazis during Kristalnacht, the Night of Broken Glass. It speaks, where I cannot: I believe in the Sun, even when it is not shining. I believe in Love, even when feeling it not. I believe in God, even when God is silent. As I sit here, writing, tears spring from my eyes as I think about this: how it related to the writer, and how it relates to me, my feelings about the church, God, everything! It brings to mind one of my favorite hymns: My life goes on in endless song, above earth’s lamentation; I catch the sweet, though far off hymn, that hails a new creation. No storm can shake my inmost calm, while to that rock I’m clinging; Since Christ is Lord of Heaven and Earth, how can I keep from singing? Thanks to GALA Choruses for renewing my faith, brightening my days, and filling the world with song. ▼ Michael Purintun is a singer and lifelong Presbyterian living in Louisville, Kentucky. He is active in More Light Presbyterians, and sings as a tenor with Voices of Kentuckiana, Inner Voices (small ensemble), in church, and with the Kentucky Opera Chorus. “IF THESE CHURCHES ARE SILENT, GAY CHORUSES THEMSELVES WILL SING OUT!” MICHAEL PURINTUN Fall 2001 23 He told me I looked like a Korean person and I bowed lightly toward him, my buzz cropped head bobbing like a lotus in the summer rain, the sun was shining still and he and I stood under his umbrella like two lovers eyeing only what we could see without more time. Minutes passed. I can’t say that I knew him or he knew me in that moment only that we could feel something like it is meant to be when one human finds another in time to say thank you for being born. that was only hours ago and now it is Friday evening and the sun is setting and I’ve come home from work and feel changed by what has happened. Buddha walked with Jesus today and they sat together at the entrance of the temple and he wrote his address on my namecard and sitting by my side he said, “come and see the mountains in Korea where I live, follow me and rest.” they were the best words I heard all day. Come. See where I live. Ride in my jeep over the mountain roads and see the life of Buddha in Korea. I lived with Buddha when I was younger, I tried to wash his feet and meet his needs, Christian that I am and now much older than I feel, I am glad to find faraway from ever finding home someone whose eyes hold me like a Lotus Blossom in the pool I stepped out of my own skin and into heaven and with the laughing monk who shares the year of my birth (The monk and I were both born in 1954!) I could see the way back to a place I long to go again a place where I let go of someone and the way we touched so long ago in spirit and in flesh. Listen, If you see the Buddha, kiss him in Jesus’ name. there is no shame in being real. I became real today when I bowed low and met him in the rain under his umbrella by the temple in the gentle sunlight where we talked for minutes that were like a lifetime; and as I rose and left the Buddhist temple mountain, I bowed low before the monk, felt how easily my hand found his as his hand reached mine, and then both bowed again with palms drawn together in peace I and the monk, both strangers, who meeting by the lotus pool felt some kind of second grace smiling in our amazed faces. Lost in distant gazes that reflect rainbows, I walk away thinking that I know nothing more than this until we meet again until we meet again Come. Follow me. I will give you rest. ▼ Meeting a Buddhist Monk Today On the Way Home from Work A poem based on meeting Jong-Woon Sunim Charles Hill served as educator-missionary for the Presbyterian Church (USA) from 1978- 1998 in Korea in university undergraduate education. He has translated and produced Korean plays in English and has been active in the human rights movement and democratization struggle in Korea from 1978 to the present, as well as the peaceful reunification movement. His last produced play was in Korea, called Second Sunrise, and dealt with national and personal loss: the 1980 Kwangju People’s Uprising and resulting civilian massacre and his own personal loss of his closest friend in Korea to death. The play is about finding hope in the ashes to go on. Presently, he is a faculty member at the University of Hawai‘i, Kapi‘olani, where he coordinates programs in international education. Charles Hill (Korean name: Han Chulsu) August 3, 2001, Honolulu, Hawai‘i My partner, Tammy Lindahl, and I were both ordained ministers, serving churches in rural Missouri and carefully hiding our relationship. Tammy came out in a dialogue on homosexuality on the floor of Heartland Presbytery, effectively ending both of our careers in parish ministry. In 1995, no longer able to work in the church, I chose to set aside my ordination. It was important for Tammy and me to impress upon our presbytery the fact that we were only two of hundreds of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people of faith who were active in the life and ministry of the church. At the annual meeting of More Light Presbyterians that summer, we asked LGBT friends and colleagues to send us a stole, that we might hang them in the church where our presbytery would be meeting on the day that I was to set SO GREAT A CLOUD OFWITNESSES A PHOTO ESSAY OF THE SHOWER OF STOLES MARTHA JUILLERAT aside my ordination. We were hoping to receive a couple of dozen stoles; instead we received 80 stoles almost overnight. After that presbytery meeting the stoles kept coming, along with cards and letters. By the following spring we had 200. We bought suitcases at thrift stores and took them to an annual meeting of More Light Churches in Rochester, New York. Seven weeks later we had over 350 stoles! By now we realized we had a sacred trust, and we committed ourselves to creating a project that would allow us to share this collection—and all of these stories—with the church. 24 Open Hands To contribute a stole, arrange a display (partial or full), or offer financial support, contact: The Shower of Stoles Project 57 Upton Avenue S. Minneapolis, MN 55404 612/377-8792 stoleproj@aol.com www.showerofstoles.com ▼ A volunteer hangs stoles for a display at Iliff Seminary in Denver. Story of one of the stoles being read to the congregation of First United Methodist Church, Boulder, Colorado.
▼ 2001 Presbyterian General Assembly in Louisville, Kentucky. Jack Hartwein-Sanchez ▼ First United Methodist Church in Omaha, Nebraska— the Rev. Jimmy Creech’s former church. ▲ Stoles adorn walls, balconies, and worshipers at the More Light Presbyterian worship during the recent General Assembly. ˛ I turn to You to be treated with dignity, O Gracious One, For people walk by me as though I am not there; Day by day, disregard undermines me. My doubts nibble at me all day long, And I see my misgivings mirrored all around me. O Source of Truth, when I am afraid Draw me to trust in You. You who always call me by name, In You I trust and sing for joy; With You I am not afraid, What can strangers do to me? Day in and day out they are blind to who I am; They see not the beauty You have given me, But only the caricature of their imagining. They watch only to be sure I do not step Out of the role they have cast for my life. I Turn to You to Be Treated with Dignity Revisiting Psalm 56 Madeleine Manning Sustaining the Spirit Waken them from the arrogance of their blinders; You can’t let them play god, o God! You have kept track of my efforts to fit in, Gathered the tears of my isolation to be cherished, Each one pooling in Your own heart. When will these who erase my soul retreat ? I call on You this day to waken them. This I know, that God is for me. In Truth, whose image I am, in Gift, whose worth I echo, In Dignity I trust; what can mere ignorance do to me? I will turn to you daily for confidence, o Wisdom. I will thank you each time your Breath Revives my soul from the thousand deaths Inflicted by these who cannot see The light of my life; Cannot see in me You, Light of my life. ▼ Fall 2001 25 The Shower of Stoles Project has expanded greatly in recent years. The collection now contains hundreds and hundreds of stoles—often with stories attached—from gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people in well over a dozen denominations, from the United Methodist Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, and the United Church of Christ to Southern and Free Will Baptist. The stoles are displayed over a hundred times per year throughout North America. ▼ ▼ Martha Juillerat joins Bishop Calvin McConnell and wife, Velma, beside the stole in which he was consecrated bishop in the United Methodist Church. Declaring that he could no longer wear it as long as not all were free to wear stoles, he transformed it into what is designated as a “signature stole” (a stole signed by those who stand in solidarity with LGBT people) by having members of the Pacific Northwest Annual Conference sign it. ▲ United Theological Seminary of the Twin Cities. Jack Hartwein-Sanchez ▲ The stoles adorn police barricades surrounding the Soulforce demonstration during the 2000 Presbyterian General Assembly in Long Beach, California. A CELEBRATION OF PROVIDENCE A SHORT STORY DAVID R. GILLESPIE When he shows me the announcement, I grab it from his hand and say, “Damn it, Mark! You would think I still had some privacy around here! Isn’t there some sort of federal law against opening another person’s mail?” I stuff the letter back into the envelope and throw it onto the coffee table. Sinking to the couch, I look up at him and immediately feel guilty for my outburst, all the while wishing I had checked the mail today. Fact is, I usually do and every envelope which arrives bearing the return address of Dabney Theological Seminary is hurriedly tossed unopened into the trash. I can see the hurt in his eyes and tell him how sorry I am. He smiles and asks, “How about a cup of coffee?” Mark has that way about him, always knowing the right thing to do or say to make me feel better. It’s one of the many things I love about him. “Coffee’d be nice,” I say and he walks toward the kitchen, his every step taken in by my eyes. He rounds the corner and my eyes shift to the envelope on the coffee table. The alumni association still refers to me as The Reverend Mr. Thomas J. Knox even though the association president, and all my other classmates for that matter, know I haven’t been that for a long time. I graduated twenty-five years ago, back during my time of lies, and haven’t been a reverend for twenty-one of those years. You’d think they would have caught on by now. I have. The aroma of brewing coffee creeps into the den followed by Mark bearing two mugs. He’s eight years younger than my forty-nine and it shows; or at least I see it. I see it in the way he walks, a spring in his step even now, here in the den. I hear it in his voice, an enthusiasm which I seem to have lost somewhere along the way, a vocabulary which at times seems strange. The gray I see each morning in my hair multiplying like fleas is conspicuously absent from his as is the slight sagging I’ve noticed on my jaw line. I sometimes feel invisible. He doesn’t see these things, or overlooks them, and reminds me at least once each day how handsome he thinks I am, like now when he says, “Here, good looking.” He hands me the coffee mug and joins me on the couch. “A reunion would be fun,” he says. “You think?” “Absolutely. I could even go with you.” “Oh, yeah,” I say, shifting one leg under the other and turning toward him. “I’d say they probably haven’t had a good queer burning down in Mississippi for at least five, maybe six years.” He scoots over closer to me. “You always become sarcastic when you want to avoid something, T.J.” We both laugh because he is right. I do. It’s a well practiced habit developed during what seems to have been a lifetime of equivocation. His eyes twinkle. “I know,” he says, “I could go in drag. That way you could tell them you’ve seen the error of your ways. You know, a little makeup, a wig...” I’m laughing outloud and he continues, “...some outrageous strapless gown. Black and red, of course. Oh, and a pair of five inch heels to top it off. Why we’d be the perfect couple.” I lean over, kiss him and say, “We are the perfect couple.” He strokes his chin and says, “You think I should shave or leave the goatee?” I push him and say, “You ain’t right, boy,” and we both laugh. Another thing about him. He makes me laugh just when I need to. I kiss him again and say, “I love you.” The impact of those three words still, after all this time together, is not lost. It gives me pause when I utter them. So much is embodied in them, those three simple words I hear in my mind: I love him. They are the words I uttered twenty-one years ago in response to the question posed by a classmate from seminary, Jason McCormick. Jason was serving on the commission assigned the task of adjudicating the charges which had been brought against me in the name of the Presbyterian Church. I had loved Jason, too, but always in silence. It was an unspoken affection and desire which had grown during our years together in college and seminary. My first serious crush I suppose. And my heart was glad when we both accepted calls to churches in the same presbytery after graduation. It was to this trusted friend and colleague, after Mark and I met, that I had first revealed my secret, my nature. At the trial, after I had answered Jason’s question regarding the nature of my feelings for Mark, a member of the commission whom I did not know asked, “And what does that love entail?” He knew damn well what that love entailed. They all did. I must have had a questioning, if not stupid, look on my face because he immediately followed with a clarifying query. “Have you engaged,” he asked, “in sexual intimacy with another man?” I’d like to give him more credit than just simply wanting to know all the juicy details. I’d like to. But I thought at the time, and still believe today, that for those men it all boiled down to sex, as if a person is defined by whom he or she sleeps with rather than the love which emanates from one’s inner being. Love didn’t seem to matter to them at all back then; not at all. It’s all that matters to me now as I sit here next to the man who is my second self. In recalling that time, the laughter and joy of a few minutes ago has been replaced with a silent sadness and I feel Mark’s hand on the back of my neck. “You okay?” he asks. I say yes, but he knows where I am. He leans back and puts his feet up on the coffee table while his hand rubs my back. I notice how his heel obscures the return address on 26 Open Hands the envelope and I wish I could conceal the memories with such ease. I close my eyes and see faces, young men laughing across the pool table in the seminary’s student center. I see serious faces, almost pained, staring intently at the front of the classroom while Professor Klooster scribbles Hebrew words on the chalk board. I see Jason’s face, a face I had longed to touch and kiss, and other classmates sitting around a table drinking beer, eating pizza and debating the presence of Christ in the Lord’s Supper. I am with them again and they want to talk of transubstantiation while I want to extol the virtues of loving another man. But I am not there. I am here sitting next to Mark who speaks. “Do you remember the first time we met?” he asks. I hear only a muffled sound and say, “What?” “The first time we met. Do you remember it?” he asks again. He snuggles closer and says, “I remember. When you walked into dad’s restaurant that day I thought you were the most gorgeous creature I’d ever seen. And when dad told me who you were I could have died. I don’t think I’d ever lusted for a preacher before.” I gently jab him with my elbow and we both giggle. I tell him I thought he was pretty hot that day, too, and he says, “Really? You never told me.” I look at him with incredulous eyes, but I know he’s right. How could I have told him back then? He was working the summer in his father’s restaurant in Kingstree and I was into my second year as pastor of Cedar Swamp Presbyterian, a congregation of fifty or so souls located a few miles from town. His father, Leland Harrington, was a member of our church session and I made it a point to eat in his restaurant at least once a month. I had heard Leland and his wife, Mildred, speak of Mark, of course, and had seen photographs of him on my visits to the Harrington house but neither had prepared me for what I felt when he was introduced to me by this father that hot June day. It was Mark who first suggested we get together sometime which ended up being a shopping trip to nearby Florence that concluded with our making out like a couple of high schoolers at Lynches River State Park. After Mark returned to the University of South Carolina that fall, I began spending my off days in Columbia, driving up on Sunday evening and returning to Kingstree early Wednesday morning. I told the Session I was visiting an elderly aunt. Living a lie sometimes requires telling one. Finally I told the truth to Jason McCormick and began my new life of honesty and authenticity, the one I live now with this wonderful man. I look at Mark and ask, “Any regrets?” “None whatsoever,” he says, then asks, “You?” “Just that I didn’t meet you sooner,” I say and he touches my face and says, “You and I met when we were supposed to.” He sits up straight and says, “Listen, I’m going to go start something for dinner. Any special requests?” I tell him no, that whatever he wants to make will be fine, and watch him walk into the kitchen. I look at the envelope on the coffee table and think how stupid, how childish I am to have let the announcement bother me so— for it was the thing itself, and not Mark’s opening of it, which had really set me off in the first place. I pick it up and pull the letter out and read it again. The words scream at me now: “to celebrate God’s providence in our lives,” it reads and the truth of Mark’s statement slaps me in the face. I would not be living here now with the man I love had I not attended Dabney Theological Seminary. I laugh and wad the paper and envelope up and toss them into the trash can. I stand and walk to the kitchen, quietly, and come up behind Mark, sliding my arms around his waist and he places his hands on mine. “You going?” he asks. “I don’t think so,” I say, then ask, “Know what?” “What?” “I am so glad you came into my life. God must love me.” “I think so,” he says. ▼ David R. Gillespie is a former Presbyterian minister turned writer living in Anderson, South Carolina. His nonfiction has appeared in numerous journals and magazines, his fiction in ByLine and Lonzie’s Fried Chicken, and his poetry in Timelapse. He may be contacted at drgsc@yahoo.com. When I make my home in fear, I tell myself, “There is no god.” I trust no one completely. I trust myself least of all. God looks out from the heart of my heart To see where my pain may be consoled, Seeking the wound to be made whole. The lifelines that wove me with hope have fallen away, There is no prospect for good in my surroundings, No, not one. I have no certainty; all I knew crumbles before systems Chewing up people as casually as bread, And never questioning their entitlement. And I live daily in great terror In terror such as surely has not been known before, For I question—I question, but cannot trust myself To find my way—within? outside?—my system. How can I hope in Love when I live in shame, Live in the fear that Love has rejected me? O that tenderness may bloom among the peoples! “I place all my trust in you,” says the Holy One— O, how terrible, how joyful to be trusted by such a One! ▼ Seeking the Wound to Be Made Whole Revisiting Psalm 53 Madeleine Manning Sustaining the Spirit Fall 2001 27 28 Open Hands don’t you see the irony you ask God to bless you for murdering me you pray aloud as you torture me I see tiny flames you want to castrate me I’m human, I’m tender I love, I work you strike me with an altar cross oh God it hurts please I want to go home water my plants feed my cat hear Bach love someone you feel me measure my size a closeted prelate with bad breath whispers “tell a lie for Christ” Malcolm Boyd is poet/writer-in-residence at the Cathedral Center of St. Paul in Los Angeles. An Episcopal priest since 1955, he is the author of more than 25 books, including the spiritual classic, Are You Running with Me, Jesus? He has just published Simple Grace: A Mentor’s Guide to Growing Older (Westminster John Knox Press) and Running With Jesus: The Prayers of Malcolm Boyd (Augsburg Fortress Press). He lives in Los Angeles with his longtime life partner, author and activist Mark Thompson. why me? I’m your son your brother your friend your schoolteacher your pastor my God, my God why forsake me? your angry crowd sings a hymn throws prayer books on fire makes it burn brighter my genitals are hanging for puritanical voyeurs your so practiced to use old stereotypes to condemn me like selected Leviticus like Paul out of context like Sodom and Gomorrah (again??!!) to make me appear evil, immoral irresponsible, unworthy in seductively selected words yet another “church resolution” ▼ MALCOLM BOYD PUZZLE Fall 2001 29 ISBN # 0-9701568-0-4 Order from your denominational Welcoming organization or from www.RMNetwork.org Don’t miss this opportunity to “help the rest of the church rediscover its soul.” —from book review by James B. Nelson $14.00 Shaping Sanctuary Proclaiming God’s Grace in an Inclusive Church A collection of essays, sermons, liturgies, and hymns from the Welcoming movement. Valuing Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender persons as an integral part of the Body of Christ. Exploring themes of embodiment theology, integrating spirituality and sexuality, and inclusive worship. Includes an eight-week group study guide. Dear Friends of Open Hands, This fall I visited a small church in Dayton, Ohio. The pastor told me that in her training for ministry, she was encouraged to subscribe to a number of helpful publications, including Open Hands. But when she began her pastorate, limited finances and time required her to cut down on her magazines. Open Hands was one of two publications she continued to take, both because she enjoys reading it and believes it’s vital to her ministry. Many of you feel the same way. But there are friends of yours who may not even know Open Hands exists! At this holiday season, start the new year right for your friends, family, pastors, and church leaders who would benefit from a gift subscription to Open Hands. On the next page, extend your own subscription by a year and/or give as many gift subscriptions as you can. And consider giving an additional, generous, tax-deductible contribution to support our work, especially as we become self-supporting during the coming year. All additional donations will receive a personal note of thanks from me. Gay poet W. H. Auden wrote of Christ’s nativity: “Remember the gift, the one from the manger; it means only this: we can dance with a stranger.” Open Hands teaches us how to dance together as God’s beloved children! Please support our “dance lessons”! With warm hugs and many thanks, Chris Glaser Editor, Open Hands ecumenical welcoming Bible study resource on homosexuality ✦ seven-session study series ✦ For more information or to place order contact: Reconciling Ministries Network 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 voice: 773/736-5526 fax: 773/736-5475 www.RMNetwork.org Claiming the Promise ▼ Examines biblical references to same-sex conduct in light of the broader biblical message which affirms that we are children or heirs of the Promise. ▼ Explores biblical authority and biblical interpretation. ▼ Discusses “gracious hospitality,” “gift-ed sexuality,” and “inclusive holiness.” ▼ Tackles hard questions of “right relationship,” lust/love, and sexual responsibility. ▼ Calls us all to live out the Promise as reconciling disciples. Includes adaptation for using with youth study book $5.95 leader’s guide $9.95 discounts for bulk quantities $20 (U.S. currency) per year (four issues). $25 outside U.S. Please make checks payable to “Open Hands/RMN.” Mail to Open Hands, 3801 N. Keeler Ave., Chicago, IL 60641. ❑ Please extend my present subscription by one year. ❑ Please send gift subscriptions to names on the right. ❑ Enclosed is a tax-deductible contribution of $_________. Gift cards should read: Enclosed is my total payment and/or donation of $_________ OR Charge $_________ to my VISA MASTERCARD (Circle one.) # ___________________________________________ Expiration _______/_______ Name on Card Signature My Name Address City/State/Zip Local Church Denomination Shaping an Inclusive Church FOR FRIENDS, FAMILY, PASTORS, CHURCH LEADERS: Name Address City/State/Zip Local Church (if known) Denomination (if known) Name Address City/State/Zip Local Church (if known) Denomination (if known) Name Address City/State/Zip Local Church (if known) Denomination (if known) CLIP & MAIL The AIDS Quilt is a creation of the people, by the people, and for the people. It is an expression of anguish, compassion, determination, and love. One panel is a scream, another an elegant memorial, yet another a scrapbook of family photos and mementos reflecting accomplishments and personalities. Pictured here are a few examples of panels with identifying religious symbols. These symbols challenge religious people who would separate themselves from people with HIV/AIDS and perpetuate the stigma of AIDS. These symbols comfort the often closeted religious people who mourn the loss of their own full identity even as they mourn the loss of friends, parishioners, or pastors. Most of the creators of the AIDS Quilt do not see themselves as artists, but rather, people who have more in their hearts than words can say. This is an art form that brings straight and gay together, that reaffirms family and spiritual values, that unites for a moment those who have passed with those who have created and those who view the panels. Visit the panels yourself at www.aidsquilt.org. ▼ Susan Button is a retired special educator. She is a member of Centenary-Chenango Street United Methodist Church in Binghamton, New York, where she is a frequent speaker on gay Christian issues. She is also one of the cofounders of Broome County Affirmation which has met weekly to worship since December, 1990. A group of her friends created her husband Phillip’s AIDS Quilt panel (not shown). Photos (unless otherise noted): Chris Glaser 30 Open Hands AIDS Quilt as Folk Art Susan Button Fall 2001 31 Alan NeJame Alan NeJame Susan Button 32 Open Hands By the late 1980s, the tragic effects of escalating deaths and multiple loss of partners, loved ones, and friends from HIV/AIDS hung like a cloud over the lives of the members of our congregation. Every week the prayer list grew and every month the number of funeral and memorial services increased. We were a community consumed by death and dying. Our people were experiencing so many deaths, so rapidly, that there was not really time for any closure or healing to occur before the next death occurred. In addition to this massive loss of young men in the peak of their lives (mostly men aged 20-40), our members were experiencing the natural cycle of deaths of family members. In 1989, as a way of remembering all those who had died within our family of faith, one of our deacons, David Muller, suggested we create a Memorial Quilt. The idea of this quilt was similar to the AIDS Memorial Quilt, a creation of The Names Project, but our quilt was not limited only to those who died of AIDS. Our quilt is a unique combination of friends and family members. Some panels memorialize one person, some panels have many names. The quilt covers the front wall of the chancel and has two side panels. Each panel of the quilt is 12 inches by 12 inches and any member of the church may remember a loved one by making a quilt square. New panels are dedicated on All Saints Sunday, the first Sunday in November, and the quilt hangs in the sanctuary throughout the month. One of the most important parts of the quilt was the way it enabled people to grieve. Making a panel for a loved one took a lot of thought. The rows of the quilt are in muted tones of rainbow colors and each person had the option of picking a color and location for their individual panel. Each person made her or his own panel, in a folk art fashion. Finding one or two symbols that summarized a loved one’s life involved a real thought process which also brought about many painful and wonderful memories of their loved one. Every symbol imaginable is used in the quilt: flowers, hats, embroidered lace work, a camera, a tree of life, rainbows, crosses and even Mickey Mouse ears (after all this is Southern California, and “the little mouse” is our mascot!). Most people said that making their panels for the Memorial Quilt was one of the most helpful grieving experiences they had. So many of the panels are sown with tears and thread! That has certainly been my experience. The year that we designed the quilt, I made a panel for my infant nephew who died twenty-one days after birth. Since he was a boy, I chose one of the blue panels. I decided a teddy bear would be the appropriate symbol, with his name (he was named after me) above. I looked at teddy bear appliqués in many fabric and craft stores, but they all seemed “too perfect” for what I wanted. I wanted a teddy bear that was not perfect to memorialize a child that was not born perfect. Finally, I decided I would make one. So I gathered a soft fuzzy brown material, purchased some batting and started away. With almost every stick of my needle, tears of sadness and love flowed forth! The teddy bear was “not perfect,” but it was perfect for what I wanted. On All Saints Sunday the panels of our Memorial Quilt were dedicated. A Remembrance Book was created and many members shared the story of their loved one on that first day of dedication. At the time, we weren’t sure if the quilt would be a “one time” experience or what its future would be. But as each of the individual squares were sewn together, and once the quilt was hung in the sanctuary, it was clear that this would become a living treasure of the church. Every year since 1989, members are invited to make panels for loved ones who have died. New panels are added every year on All Saints Sunday. Over the years, I have added panels memorializing both my father and mother, and dear friends who have died. Each time, it is a wonderful process of reflecting, grieving and remembering. The quilt for me, and all of us at West Hollywood Presbyterian, has become a living memorial of those who have come and gone before us, and it is one of the most beloved traditions of the church. ▼ Dan Smith is the pastor of West Hollywood Presbyterian Church, one of the first More Light congregations in the Presbyterian Church (USA). He is one of the first openly gay pastors serving congregations in that denomination, and served on the General Assembly task force on human sexuality whose report brought controversy in the early 1990s. The church is a progressive congregation, serving the lesbian, gay, and supportive heterosexual communities in Los Angeles. A CONGREGATIONAL MEMORIAL QUILT DAN SMITH 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 Open Hands Vol 17 No 2 - Our Coat of Many Colors: Our Creative Responses to Exclusion https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/330bdb8ef4ed0352bf6b6738e86a7716.pdf ba8f8b14da1b04f2224d1b56116a68d6 Issue An issue of a recurring publication. Volume Number The volume number of the issue 17 Issue Number The number of the issue (within a volume) 3 Publication Year The year the issue was published 2002 Publication Date The date the issue was published Winter Text Any textual data included in the document 2 Open Hands Vol. 17 No. 3 Winter 2002 Shaping an Inclusive Church The Ecumenical Quarterly of the Welcoming Movement Executive Publisher Marilyn Alexander Editor Chris Glaser Designer In Print—Jan Graves Editorial Advisory Committee Jeff Balter, RIC Vaughn Beckman, O&A Daphne Burt, RIC Ann Marie Coleman, ONA Chris Copeland, W&A Jocelyn Emerson, W&A Gwynne Guibord, MCC Bobbi Hargleroad, MLP Tom Harshman, O&A Alyson Huntly, ACP Bonnie Kelly, ACP Susan Laurie, RCP Samuel E. Loliger, ONA Paul Kozlowski McComas, RCP Ruth Moerdyk, SCN Mark Palermo, MLP Caroline Presnell, RCP Kathy Stayton, W&A Margarita Suaréz, ONA Judith Hoch Wray, O&A and Program Coordinators Open Hands is the quarterly magazine of the Welcoming church movement, a Christian consortium of denominational church programs in Canada and the United States whose ministries encourage and assist individuals and faith communities in welcoming and affirming lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people and their families and friends. Open Hands was founded and is published by the Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. of the Reconciling Ministries Network (United Methodist), in cooperation with the six ecumenical partners listed on page 3. Each program is a national network of local congregations and ministries that publicly affirm their welcome of LGBT people, their families and friends. These seven programs, along with Supportive Congregations (Brethren/Mennonite [www.webcom.com/ bmc], Oasis Congregations (Episcopal), Welcoming Congregations (Unitarian Universalist), and INCLUSIVE Congregations (United Kingdom), as well as the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches—offer hope that the church can be a more inclusive community. Subscription is $20 for four issues ($25 outside the U.S.). Single copies and back issues are $6; quantities of 10 or more, $4 each. Subscriptions, requests for advertising rates, and other business correspondence should be sent to: Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 openhands@RMNetwork.org www.RMNetwork.org/openhands/index.html Member, The Associated Church Press © 2002 Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. Open Hands is a registered trademark. ISSN 0888-8833 Printed on recycled paper. Note: The cover image is a rendering of a Marlan Proctor photo of the congregation of 1,100 “laying on of hands” in prayer surrounding Pastor Anita Hill and preacher Michael Cobbler (center of photo—see p. 6 for complete story). SINGING GOD’S SONG IN A FOREIGN LAND Stories of Resistance Welcoming Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender People editor’s word 5 Living “As If” CHRIS GLASER 24 Welcoming God’s Love: Traditional Marriages RICK MAWSON AND WARREN KREML Welcoming God’s Call: 6 Ecclesiastical Disobedience ANITA HILL Welcoming God’s Church: 9 A Critical Mass VICTORIA RUE next issue: HOW I CHANGED MY MIND Profiles in Grace and Courage Winter 2002 3 Publisher Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (UMC) Reconciling Ministries Network Marilyn Alexander, Coordinator 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 773/736-5526 www.RMNetwork.org Ecumenical Partners Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada) Ron Coughlin, Coordinator P.O. Box 333, Station Q, Toronto, Ontario CANADA M4T 2M5 416/466-1489 www.affirmunited.org • acpucc@aol.com More Light Presbyterians (PCUSA) Michael J. Adee, Coordinator 369 Montezuma Ave. PMB #447 Santa Fe, NM 87501-2626 505/820-7082 www.mlp.org Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ) John Wade Payne, Interim Coordinator P.O. Box 44400, Indianapolis, IN 46244 941/728-8833 www.sacredplaces.com/glad Open and Affirming Program (UCC) Ann B. Day, Coordinator P.O. Box 403, Holden, MA 01520 508/856-9316 www.UCCcoalition.org Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran) Bob Gibeling, Coordinator 2466 Sharondale Drive, Atlanta, GA 30305 404/266-9615 www.lcna.org Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (ABC/USA) Brenda J. Moulton, Coordinator P.O. Box 2596, Attleboro Falls, MA 02763 508/226-1945 www.wabaptists.org Call for articles for Open Hands Fall 2002 Turning The Other Cheek Terrorism and Non-Violence On the first anniversary of the terrorist attacks on the U.S., we explore the natures of terror, violence, and non-violence as they touch our experience as LGBT people and our advocates. In our own time, Mohandas Gandhi, Dorothy Day, Martin Luther King Jr., theologians, feminist writers, and others have questioned the usefulness of terror and violence to produce an end that is just. A recent book, Jack Miles’s Christ: A Crisis in the Life of God, suggests that when God could not free the chosen people through military victory, a new divine strategy was incarnated. In our own community, Soulforce came to be because Mel White was transformed by the non-violent teachings of Jesus, Gandhi, and King. What do you think of it all, as people who may have experienced spiritual violence at the hands of “well-meaning” Christians, and yet as people impatient to have our rights in the church and culture? Articles, prayers, Bible reflections/ studies, personal stories, opinions, analysis, photo essays, artwork welcome from 50 to 2500 words. Columns: My Turning Point (how you changed your mind on the issue), How I Do Sex (how you reconcile or integrate sexuality and spirituality), My Church (an extended profile of your welcoming congregation), In Solidarity (with other justice issues), You’re Welcome (how to be welcoming), Worship, Spirituality, Retreats, Resources (books and videos), Outreach, Leadership, Marriage, Health, Youth, Campus, Children, and Family. These brief articles may or may not have to do with the theme of the issue. 750-850 words. Contact with ideas as far before deadline as possible. Manuscript deadline: July 30, 2002 An article should be accompanied by the author’s two to three sentence selfdescription, photo (snapshot okay—we can crop to face), contact information including e-mail, plus any other photos helpful to the article. E-mail article as an attached Word Perfect, Microsoft Word, or Rich Text Format files, or paste in e-mail. Hard copy and photos should be sent to the mailing address below. Chris Glaser, Phone/Fax 404/622-4222 or e-mail at ChrsGlaser@aol.com 991 Berne St. SE, Atlanta, GA 30316-1859 USA www.ChrisGlaser.com special pullout section: 11 Welcoming Communities 2002 Annual List new features: 4 2002 Guest Columnist IRENE MONROE 22 My Turning Point PAUL MCCOMAS sustaining the spirit 19 A Prayer for Gay People in the Church MALCOLM BOYD 4 Open Hands Anew year requires more than changing our calendars. New Year’s Eve holds important significance in the life of African American churchgoers, because it is about creating a new life in the new year. As a child growing up in the tradition, there was always the mad rush every December 31 to clean the house, cook a pot of black-eyed peas for good luck, call folks to tell them if God wills you’ll see them in the New Year. Then we’d prepare for the most important event on New Year’s Eve, the Watch Night Service, which always started at ten o’clock that evening. Putting on your Sunday best, especially if New Year’s Eve fell on a weekday, felt strange, but you knew the significance of that day as folks hurried to complete their chores. Many black churches across the country celebrate Watch Night Services and it can be traced back to December 31, 1862, also known as “ Freedom Eve,” when African American slaves came together across the nation to await the good news that President Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation had finally become law. And on that day, January 1, 1863, a new life began for us even as the Civil War was still going on. During Watch Night Service, the minister would always remind us of the trials and tribulations of the year we were about to leave behind. But the minister would also tell us that the new year was the first day of new beginnings, just like our enslaved ancestors saw it. And at every service I attended as a child, when the clock struck midnight, the people applauded, cried, dance and sang. What hope and what inspiration it was to know that in spite of the year just lived, especially if it was fraught with pain, violence and tragedy, a new year comes in which we can free ourselves from the year past! But by freeing ourselves, the minister would always admonish us, we had to create it, because it would never come freely at the hands of our oppressors. Fast Forward to 1965, one of the years in U.S. history during which racial bigotry escalated to the national stage. In February of that year, Malcolm X was assassinated during a speech at the Audubon Ballroom in New York City. In March, thousands of marchers, led by Martin Luther King Jr., completed the Selma to Montgomery march to dramatize voting rights denied them in Selma. Two days earlier, Alabama state troopers beat and tear-gassed many of the demonstrators as they tried to cross the Edmund Pettus bridge en route to the state capitol. And in August, six days of rioting erupted in the Watts section of Los Angeles, ignited by police brutality. In the face of this violence, African Americans had to create a new plan of action, and we did. In 1966, we became more proactive, and created programs to suit our needs and sensibilities in the face of unrelenting violence. Bobby Seale and Huey Newton formed the Black Panther Party in Oakland, California, and Maulana Karenga, then professor and chairman of the African American studies department at California State University in Long Beach created the cultural festival Kwanzaa. As a celebration of the first African slaves who arrived here in the New World in 1619 and then finally freed in 1865, Kwanzaa, the annual seven-day celebration, pays tribute to who we are as a people. Who we are as an oppressed people, however, does not ignore who we are as an oppressor of people. While many African American lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people cannot celebrate Watch Night Services with our faith communities because of our sexual orientation, many us have creatively incorporated the spirit of Watch Night in Kwanzaa. On the sixth day of Kwanzaa, New Year’s eve, the principle celebrated is kuumba, meaning creativity. Creativity is essential for the life of any people, and it has played a salient role in the life and courage of African American people. Without it, African American music, dance, scholars, theologians and activists would have never been born. As a progeny of this African American creative legacy, I’ve learned to create a life for myself in the midst of a raging war, whether it’s homophobia in the black church or it’s racism in the queer community. And so enter 2002, a year to be shaped by war while we see our needs and concerns as lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people pushed to the back burner. We must create a life for ourselves, one that speaks to our needs at this particular time. If we don’t create a plan of action in this new year to address our needs, not only will we have participated in our own death and invisibility, but we will have not really crossed over into a new year, one that gives us creative hope, creative agency, and creative courage. Instead, we will remain stuck on a new year’s eve. Irene Monroe is a writer, theologian, and motivational speaker. A Ford Foundation fellow and doctoral candidate in the Religion, Gender, and Culture program of Harvard Divinity School, she is a regular contributor to In Newsweekly, a newspaper for GLBT people in New England. OPEN HANDS COLUMNIST FOR THE YEAR 2002 Creating Freedom Irene Monroe New Feature: Each year the Open Hands Editorial Advisory Committee will select a columnist for the year. Irene Monroe, already a frequent contributor and an outstanding writer, is our choice for 2002. Thanks, Irene! Winter 2002 5 The apostle Paul gave us the concept of living proleptically, “as if” the kingdom or commonwealth of God were already here, as if we were already sharing a common spiritual wealth. But Jesus gave Christians our primary model for doing so, declaring that as the good work of God occurs among us, the commonwealth of God is in our midst. Living proleptically is living prophetically, and that’s what Christians are “called out” to do. We pray, “Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.” I believe the commonwealth is among us as human will and divine will coincide. I also believe that people we recognize as “saints” enjoy such synchronicity a little more and a little sooner than the rest of us. They have one foot already in the commonwealth of God. That’s what strengthens them when demonstrating at the former School of the Americas in Georgia, or feeding and living with the homeless in shelters, or taking care of the daunting paperwork of administration required of nonprofit help organizations. That’s what encourages them to deliver sermons, teach Sunday school, and give generously to their houses of worship and to a variety of charities. It is the commonwealth of God in our midst that opens a congregation to the fruits of the Spirit in lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people. It is the commonwealth of God that unites such congregations in the Welcoming movement. Those welcoming congregations are the heart of our movement even as our annual “naming of the saints” is the heart of this issue, found in a special pullout section that begins on page 11. They are the heart of resistance to the broader church that would exclude rather than include. When I preached at the ordination of openly gay elders and deacons two decades ago at the West Hollywood Presbyterian Church contrary to denominational policies, I coined the phrase “ecclesiastical disobedience” to explain what we were doing, comparing it to the “civil disobedience” of Gandhi and King. I did not realize that a reporter for the Los Angeles Times was there to pick up on my words and writ them large in her story on our church! Others also have “coined the phrase” independently, because we all can see what we’re doing. By simply staying in the church, LGBT people are resisting church policies that would deny us access to the commonwealth of God. We are singing God’s song in a land, a church, in many ways alien to the commonwealth which we already enjoy: a commonwealth where “steadfast love and faithfulness meet, righteousness and peace kiss each other” (Psalm 85:10). Every issue of Open Hands sings that song loud, clear, and strong. This issue, we sing of how St. Paul Reformation Lutheran Church welcomed God’s call of Anita Hill. We sing of churches across North America which have welcomed God’s love by blessing same-gender couples. We sing of a movement among marginalized Catholics who welcome God’s church rather than man’s (non-inclusive term intended). And more. Jesus cleared the area of the temple where marginalized Jews could congregate, such as women and Gentile converts. In other words, where most of us reading this could gather close to Yahweh. We in the Welcoming movement do no less. With other reformers, we serve as leaven, as salt, as light—expanding the church, giving it flavor (and taste!), bringing it out of the shadows. Just as the Israelites exiled from their homeland in Babylon were challenged to sing God’s song in the midst of their exile throughout a strange land (see Psalm 137), we too are called to keep faith in the midst of denominations that do not understand. So we sing God’s song regardless and “as if.” Chris Glaser’s most recent book is Reformation of the Heart: Seasonal Meditations by a Gay Christian (Westminster John Knox Press, 2001). editor’s word Living “As If” Chris Glaser 6 Open Hands Christian Century magazine named St. Paul-Reformation Lutheran Church’s act of resistance one of the top ten religious news stories of 2001. Calling and ordaining an openly lesbian woman in a committed relationship is big news. Although our extra ordinem service of ordination garnered the most publicity, I believe the vote to call as pastor an openly lesbian woman in a committed relationship is in many ways the bigger event. On December 2, 2000, 176 voting members of St. Paul-Reformation (St. Paul, Minnesota) gathered after worship for an annual meeting to decide whether or not to challenge the rules of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) by calling a lesbian pastor. At times, it has been difficult to gather the 50 persons required to conduct business meetings at our multicultural, inner-city church. For this vote, nearly 300 persons stayed to see the outcome of the meeting! The ELCA’s Vision and Expectations of Ordained Ministers requires “Ordained ministers who are homosexual in their self-understanding are expected to abstain from homosexual sexual relationships.” It was clear that we were considering a step which might bring our congregation up for discipline. A lot of hopes and fears rested on this decision. My heart was pounding as I waited in the narthex for the discussion to be completed and the vote taken. I was hopeful about the outcome and also fearful that division might result from the vote. A unanimous 176-0 vote sealed our congregation’s leap of faith into the realm of ecclesiastical disobedience. Unanimous votes are hard to attain even on issues as seemingly non-controversial as choosing the color of new choir robes. I believe the unanimity of our decision shows our conviction that our action is Gospel-based and at the heart of what the Lutheran Church has stood for theologically. Through a unanimous vote, St. Paul-Reformation went on record saying that we could no longer, in good conscience, comply with the ELCA’s policy because it is unjust and at odds with the message of the Gospel. As a Gospel-driven community, we could no longer invite gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender persons into a church which welcomes them only conditionally as second-class members. We’ve come to know each other pretty well at St. Paul-Reformation. The congregation instituted Wingspan Ministry with and on behalf of sexual minority persons in 1982. After 20 years of outreach ministry, our membership of 600 includes 24% GLBT persons, 15% persons of color, and over 70% under age 50. I am a lesbian woman in a committed relationship. I’m a Christian who first heard God’s call to ministry 23 years ago, and who wrestled with fulfilling that call as a lay minister. I’ve served on staff of St. Paul-Reformation for 13 years, first as an associate with Wingspan Ministry with and on behalf of GLBT persons, and later as a pastoral minister serving the whole congregation. The community of faithful folks known as St. Paul-Reformation has helped me grow in pastoral leadership, sustained me through seminary studies, clinical pastoral education, the death of my parents, and given witness to the depth and breadth of God’s grace. When the ELCA refused to grant my entrance to its official candidacy process for ordination, St. Paul-Reformation supported my application to the Lutheran Extraordinary Candidacy Project (ECP). The ECP was established to provide a process for certifying the credentials of openly GLBT candidates who have satisfied all of the ministry criteria established by the ELCA, but who also feel bound by conscience to oppose our denomination’s celibacy requirement. St. Paul-Reformation’s long-range plan developed in 1993 called for an openly gay or lesbian pastor serving the congregation by the year 2000. Our congregation has worked to educate members of our denomination about welcoming GLBT persons. I’ve personally conducted hundreds of adult forums about sexual minority persons, which I’ve come to fondly call the Sunday Morning “Meet the Homosexual Show.” Our congregation council appointed a Call and Ordination Task Force in 1997 to study the issues, explore the options, and engage the congregation in dialogue and conversation about calling an openly gay pastor. We exhausted appeals to the ELCA for an exception to be granted through which I might be ordained to serve St. Paul-Reformation as an approved member of the denomination’s clergy roster. Over 700 persons across the ELCA sent letters to support our request for an exception. Hill reacts to the congregation’s thunderous response as her ordination is proclaimed! Wingspan Ministry will host a workshop on nonviolence led by The Rev. Mel White and Soulforce for the weekend of April 26–28, 2002, the first anniversary weekend of “our” ordination. A documentary titled “This Obedience” focusing on our ordination journey and actions to move the ELCA will be premiered. For registration information, contact Wingspan Ministry, St. Paul-Reformation Lutheran Church, 100 N. Oxford St., St. Paul, MN 55104-6540; 651-224-3371; or e-mail wngspan@aol.com. (See ad on page 4.) Ecclesiastical Disobedience Welcoming God’s Call Anita C. Hill Ordination photos by Marlan Proctor Winter 2002 7 Even with broad support, our request was denied. By the time our congregation voted to call, we understood what was at stake and chose to move forward in faith as a whole community together, seeking to be obedient to our calling in Christ to be fully, joyfully welcoming of all people, no matter what their gender, race, ethnicity, age, ability, orientation, or relationship status. Our decision to move into ecclesiastical disobedience rests on our understanding of the inclusive message of the Gospel, our concern for justice, and ongoing evangelical outreach. Ordination Day: April 28, 2001 Perhaps I should explain more fully why I call the ordination “ours.” It was a joyous, amazing, community event filled with God’s spirit, which has taken on iconic proportions of its own. One reporter noted that the ordination felt like a wedding in which everyone present were parents. I happen to be the fortunate woman who received the call to serve as pastor and who stood before a glowing crowd on ordination day, but it is clear to me that this ordination belongs to all of us who have longed for and worked hard for change in our church regarding the status of lesbian and gay people called to ministry. Sadly, it seems at times the larger church is still battling the right of lesbian and gay people of faith to be in the pews, rather than occupying the pulpits to which God has called them. “Our” ordination claims validity within the Lutheran heritage of the Church universal because it was authorized by an expression of Christ’s Church, with one active and three former Bishops and 180 ordained pastors present serving as signs of the whole church and all Christians present representing the whole church. St. Paul- Reformation committed this action of ecclesiastical disobedience as a means of protesting the injustice of the ELCA’s policy against ordaining gay and lesbian persons in committed relationships. The 1,100 who participated in the service of ordination joined in that protest. Congregation Censured and Admonished In June 2001, St. Paul-Reformation received a document of censure and admonition from our synod bishop for calling and ordaining a person not approved for the clergy roster of the ELCA. Sanctions and prohibitions against the congregation preclude the opportunity for any staff or members of St. Paul-Reformation to serve as elected leaders within our synod. As a result, I can no longer hold the post of Dean of our conference, and my colleagues forfeited positions on committees and task forces. We are relieved that the censure and admonition does not sever our relationship with the ELCA. We are, at the same time, deeply disappointed that in spite of ELCA statements welcoming gay and lesbian persons into the full life of the church, the ELCA continues to perpetuate an underclass within the church by precluding gay and lesbian people in committed relationships from ordination. The church’s policy of conditional welcome destroys faith and drives gays and lesbians away from Christ. Each time the church disciplines a congregation for its call of an otherwise qualified gay man or lesbian woman into the Ministry of Word and Sacrament, the church declares that gays and lesbians are not fully welcome in the life of the ELCA. This is contrary to the Gospel of God’s love and care for all, contrary to God’s call for justice, and contrary to the ELCA’s proclaimed desire to welcome all persons fully into the life of the church. St. Paul-Reformations’s “irregular/ extraordinary” ordination took place as an act of protest and to help us be faithful to our mission as a congregation. Unjust policies must be changed for the sake of the Gospel and for evangelical mission. To that end, we will continue to work to change the rule prohibiting the service of gay and lesbian pastors who are in committed relationships. ELCA Churchwide Assembly Because the censure date was set for September 1, 2001, I was allowed to participate as a voting member at the ELCA’s Churchwide Assembly. Being the first visibly open lesbian pastor in the role of voting member at the ELCA Churchwide Assembly in Indianapolis (August 8 -14, 2001) was an experience filled with both blessing and burden. I don’t think I’ve ever worked as hard in my life. I returned home weary of public scrutiny, but also aware of feeling spiritually deepened. The Holy Spirit moved among us in powerful ways. I am awed by the collaborative efforts of The Lutheran Alliance for Full Participation (Wingspan, the Lutheran Network, Lutheran Lesbian and Gay Ministries, the Extraordinary Candidacy Project, and Lutherans Concerned North America) working in partnership with Mel White’s Soulforce at the assembly. I found myself chal- Kirk Anderson, St. Paul Pioneer Press 8 Open Hands lenged and strengthened by the non-violence training of Soulforce to renounce violence of fist, tongue, and heart. I’ve controlled my fists for years, but I’ve too often harbored an angry heart and sharp tongue. I pledged myself to act from love for my church in non-violent ways. As a voting member of the assembly, I had opportunity to play a visible role as an openly lesbian pastor. I introduced a motion to lift the ban against the rostered service of lesbian and gay persons in committed relationships. Ultimately, the ELCA chose to continue study rather than act decisively. By a vote of 899-115, the assembly called for a study document on homosexuality which includes “biblical, theological, scientific and practical material” and addresses questions related to the blessing of committed same-gender relationships and the rostering of ministry candidates in such relationships. These study materials will target use in congregations, synods, hearings, and focus groups across the ELCA. A final document with action steps for implementation is due in 2005. In a related decision, the assembly voted to initiate a process within the ELCA “to develop a social statement on human sexuality.” No specific timeline was specified. In what became known as “Anita Hill’s Substitute Motion,” I called for changes in Vision and Expectations and Definitions and Guidelines for Discipline, which would allow for rostering of gay/lesbian persons who are in relationships which are “mutual, chaste, and faithful.” After two lengthy sessions of debate the move to lift the ban was replaced with creation of “a specific plan and time line leading to a decision concerning” rostering of such gay/lesbian people. Changes requiring churchwide assembly action are to be brought to the 2005 assembly. Unfortunately, the ban against gay/lesbian clergy in committed relationships remains in place. I deeply grieve the pain this continued stance of “second classness” in the ELCA has caused. For too many people, despair is again settling in with the awareness that their lives of faithful Christian witness have not won the day in our church. The church’s responses to gay/lesbian people and our families are life and death matters. I am gravely disappointed that for 3 churchwide assemblies over 6 years, we’ve been urged to wait while so-called “more important matters” have been addressed. At the same time, I have hope for the process in new ways. Never before have I attended a churchwide assembly in which the tone was more positive toward gay/lesbian persons in the church. Hundreds of people supported the move to lift the ban and truly welcome gay/lesbian persons into “full participation” including rostered ministries in the ELCA. For the first time, I perceive the votes to establish a study regarding blessings of same-gender relationships and of ordination of gay/lesbian candidates in committed relationships as more than another move to put off dealing with the matters at hand. Rather, we’ve provided new church leadership the opportunity to prepare the ELCA to make decisions from an informed position. I fully expect that justice will come soon in our church, but sadly, not soon enough for some. It feels like awaiting the second coming of Christ—we’ve been doing that for a long time, now, too. I continue to seek clarity about the “development of a plan and a process for making a decision” about lifting the ban against gay/lesbian clergy in committed relationships. It’s confusing to me, and I fear that it could take even longer than the projected date of 2005. I am glad that the ELCA’s new Presiding Bishop Mark Hanson will have the chance to lead us in his deeply spiritual, collaborative ways, seeking to draw our whole church into unity so we might move forward together. I pray we will do so with the conviction that ordination and rostering of gay/lesbian candidates in committed relationships is the right, just, and theologically sound step at last. These are weighty matters. I am tired, yet spiritually in a place of peaceful determination that justice will be done. I am glad to be out of the spotlight of assembly, once again surrounded by my family of choice and by the members of St. Paul-Reformation. There’s much work to be done over the next four years. These are fragile yet powerful times in my life and in the life of the ELCA and other Protestant denominations wrestling with receiving all whom God has called to ordained ministry. Please continue to keep gay/lesbian persons, including me, in your prayers. I have been moved and uplifted by the prayers of many this past year—as St. Paul-Reformation voted to call and set my ordination date; on the weekend of my ordination; during the Fred Phelps demonstration at our church, and at churchwide assembly. I particularly appreciate the prayers of my life partner, Janelle, who stood in silent witness and prayer vigil with Soulforce and the Lutheran Alliance for Full Participation at the ELCA assembly. We were both deeply affected by Soulforce’s training in nonviolence based on the work of Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. Anita C. Hill was “extraordinarily” ordained in April 2001. Pastor Hill serves St. Paul- Reformation Lutheran Church, St. Paul, Minnesota, an ELCA congregation dedicated to urban, multicultural ministry since 1883. Anita and her partner, Janelle Bussert, share their home with two cats, Ferris and Isabel. Anita Hill and her partner, Janelle Bussert, as the ordination service begins. Winter 2002 9 A child with her family kneels each Sunday evening in the living room. Eight children and parents kneeling to say the rosary. Bead after bead passes through her fingers “Hail Mary full of Grace… Hail Mary full of Grace.” This girl child kneels each Sunday with her family in the local Catholic church, Our Lady of Perpetual Help. They attend mass, first in Latin, later in English. A priest intones prayer formulas, bells and smells create an aura of something special. The girl, afraid to get Jesus stuck to the roof of her mouth, swallows a flat wafer. Each Saturday she also kneels in a black box called a confessional. A slit of light—a sliding window opens. In the dark, she confesses to a priest sins of jealousy, pride, bad thoughts. On the steps of the family’s front porch, her brothers and sisters kneel, as the girl becomes a priest saying mass. She places candied Necco wafers on little tongues. Each child whispers “amen” as the sugary wafer is consumed. The girl’s brother, after 8th grade, begins studies for the priesthood. After one year of college, she enters a convent to become a nun. The year is l968. Her perceptions of Catholicism, not questioned until she was in the convent, begin to crack wide open. And with those questions, it was the end of her kneeling, the end of her silence, and the beginning of her journey to find others with whom she could envision a future Roman Catholic Church. As a woman and a lesbian, I stand way out on the margins of Roman Catholicism—way out. So what’s a “girl” to do who feels called to priesthood and to changing the patriarchal structures of the Catholic Church? What I’ve learned from being a theater writer, director and actor as well as feminist theologian is to ACT AS IF. If you don’t want to leave the church altogether, stay and change it. And that’s exactly what we have been doing in “A Critical Mass: Women Celebrating the Eucharist.” Together with Monica Kaufer, a Cenacle Sister, we gathered a group of Roman Catholic women in l997 to create a public feminist, inclusive mass. In October of that year, we celebrated our first Eucharist. From our first meetings and discussions as A Critical Mass, it was important to me to make the connections between the oppression of the Roman Catholic Church toward LGBT people and the issue of the church’s misogyny. I had begun my journey as a Catholic activist in l988 as member of the Cathedral Project in New York City. As LGBT Roman Catholics we were shocked and angered at Cardinal Ratzinger’s infamous “Halloween letter” defining homosexuality as an “intrinsic moral disorder.” We decided to stand once a month during the Cardinal’s homily in St. Patrick’s as silent resistance to such homophobia. After three months, the Cardinal called in the New York City police to forcibly evict us from the mass. We decided we would create our own inclusive mass. For one year, standing on the sidewalk opposite St. Patrick’s Cathedral, I and others con-celebrated mass with openly gay priests— masses that celebrated the wholeness of our sexualities and named ourselves as “church.” After each mass, we participated in civil disobedience by either sitting on the cathedral’s steps (we had been barred from church property), or lying down on Fifth Avenue. We were always arrested and always let go. The media covered our masses and actions and counted us among other grassroots groups working for change in the Roman Catholic church. This was the activist background that brought me into the issue of women and priesthood. In l997, as one of the leaders of A Critical Mass, I was faced with a decision. I was counseled by members of the group to focus only on women’s call to priesthood and place the issues of LBGT people in the background. Some were uncertain that my out identity might derail the focus of our work. Suffice it to say that this was a painful situation that, unfortunately, is not new to any of us. So I did. I chose to keep women and a renewed priestly ministry as the focus of my work with A Criti- A Critical Mass Welcoming God’s Church Victoria Rue 10 Open Hands cal Mass. But, I must immediately add, the feminist mass we have celebrated for four years is, of course, inclusive of everyone and in every way. My LGBT sisters and brothers are often in the congregation. And the public identity of A Critical Mass continues to be focused on a renewed church, women’s call to priesthood, and creating a discipleship of equals. Yet, it is also very clear to me now that when bridges are not built from women’s marginality to other marginalized groups such as LGBT people, an opportunity is missed. When LGBT issues are not linked to women’s issues, the congregation is not encouraged to express their own LGBT joys and struggles. Perhaps this is the struggle for feminists, and particularly for lesbian feminists, who choose to stay in a tradition. We are the women of “small steps” who must see the long vision of changing a church tradition with a very long patriarchal, homophobic, sex-negative history. At this juncture, let me offer some historical background to the issue of women’s ordination in the Roman Catholic tradition. In l977, despite recommendations from the Pontifical Biblical Commission that there were no Scriptural obstacles to ordaining women, the Vatican issued a formal declaration, “Inter Insignores,” against the ordination of women. It claimed that the ordination of women in the RCC is not possible because 1) it has never been done before and, 2) women cannot image Jesus because he was male, and since the priest is supposed to image Jesus, women cannot be priests. In l995, the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued a “Responsum ad dubium” to “Ordinatio Sacerdoltalis” which reinforced the teaching that women cannot be ordained by claiming that it belongs to the “deposit of faith” and therefore cannot be questioned. Public opposition to Vatican policies and what is perceived as a decreasing toleration for dissent from these policies has mounted in recent years. What has arisen is a genuine feminist reform-reconstruction movement. Women and men have organized into grassroots groups, deciding they will stay silent no more. On Oct 5, 1997, calling ourselves “A Critical Mass: Women Celebrating Eucharist” we created our first feminist mass. At first we celebrated quarterly, and then, called further into our commitment, we began to celebrate our mass once a month. In October 2001, we will mark our fourth anniversary! If you are in Oakland, California on the third Sunday of a month, at 2 in the afternoon, please come! How does A Critical Mass: Women Celebrating Eucharist enact the future? How does it create a Eucharist in which the Roman Catholic tradition is held in tension with something new? Imagine if you will: It’s a sparkling Sunday afternoon in Oakland, California. You are in a small inner city park. The park is the site of the former Oakland Cathedral which fell down in the earthquake of l989. For two hours before our mass begins, friends of A Critical Mass, members of a Franciscan home church, feed two to three hundred homeless people who call this park home. During this time, some 300 people gather. Bells ring. The liturgy begins. A male priest walks down an aisle to a table that serves as an altar. He is dressed in traditional robes to say a Roman Catholic mass. He crosses himself and intones- “In the name of the Father, and the Son....” A blast from a trumpet and a shofar cut the air. The priest stops his ritual actions, and as if a film in reverse, he backs up the aisle he came from. Seven women dancers, in silence, twirl down the same aisle past him. They hand out long strips of colorful material to the congregation. Everyone holds the material over their heads. One of the women says, “We remember Peter’s words: You are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, God’s own people. As we place these stoles on our shoulders we acknowledge and remember that as women and men through the rite of baptism, we are all called to a renewed priesthood.” The cloth is now a stole of ordination. All silently slowly consciously place the stoles on their shoulders. The women leaders silently make a sign of the cross. But also add gestures that expand the four directions, opening wide their arms to include each other, the city, everyone. Again, the male priest walks down the aisle. This time preceded by a woman carrying high above her head the Bible. At the altar table, the book is held for the male priest. He begins to read from the Gospel of John. Again, the shofar and trumpet blast. Again the priest backs down the aisle. This time women dancers twirl down the aisle holding many books. They call out their names: Elizabeth Schussler Fiorenza, Rosemary Ruether, Mary Hunt, Beverly Harrison, Katie Canon, Carter Heyward, Alice Walker, Gerda Lerner, Audre Lorde, Judith Plaskow, Phyllis Trible, and on and on…. Excerpts from gospels and epistles by women poets, writers and feminist theologians are read. The congregation breaks into two’s and three’s to reflect on the readings. Now the bells ring again. And again the male priest comes down the aisle. This time he holds a large thin wafer and a chalice of gold. He stops at the table and begins the words that only priests are allowed to say “On the night before he suffered, Jesus took bread blessed broke and gave it to his disciples saying...” Again, the shofar and trumpet blow. Again the priest in reverse backs up the aisle. continued on page 23 Winter 2002 11 WELCOMING COMMUNITIES 2002 There are 1567 churches, campus ministries, judicatories, and national and international ministries of mainstream denominations that have publicly declared themselves fully welcoming of lesbian and gay people in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States. More than half have done so in opposition to their denomination’s policies. Most of them openly welcome bisexual and transgender people as well. The denominational affiliation of each Welcoming community is designated by the following codes: TOTAL AC, AM Affirming Cong. and Affirming Ministries (United Church of Canada) .............. 19 INC INCLUSIVE Congregations (United Kingdom, ecumenical) ...................... 2 ML More Light Presbyterians ......................................................................... 111 O* O, OAS, INT (Episcopal) .......................................................................... 165 ONA** Open and Affirming (United Church of Christ) ..................................... 428 O&A Open & Affirming (Disciples) ................................................................... 51 RIC Reconciling in Christ (Lutheran) ............................................................ 244 RC Reconciling Congregation (United Methodist) ........................................215 SCN Supportive Congregation Network (Brethren/Mennonite) ...................... 33 W&A Welcoming & Affirming (American Baptist) ............................................ 42 WEL Welcoming (Unitarian Universalist) ....................................................... 257 *O=Officially Welcoming; OAS=Oasis; INT=Integrity Host. **ONA/ncs are New Church Starts that are ONA. PULL-OUT SECTION ➚ ➚ WELCOMING CHURCHES CANADA ALBERTA Calgary Calgary Inter-Mennonite (SCN) The Unitarian Church of Calgary (WEL) Edmonton Southminster-Steinhauer United (AC) Unitarian Church (WEL) BRITISH COLUMBIA Burnaby St. Paul’s United (AC) Kamloops Kamloops United (AC) Kelowna Unitarian Fellowship of Kelowna (WEL) Vancouver First United Church (AC) Trinity United (AC) Unitarian Church (WEL) Victoria Capital UU Cong. of Victoria (WEL) MANITOBA Winnipeg Augustine United (AC) First Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Young United (AC) NEW BRUNSWICK Saint John Centenary-Queen Square United (AC) ONTARIO Hamilton First Unitarian Ch. of Hamilton (WEL) Kingston Sydenham Street United (AC) Ottawa First Unitarian Cong. of Ottawa (WEL) Scarborough (Toronto area) Warden Woods Mennonite (SCN) Thunder Bay Lakehead U. Fellowship (WEL) Toronto Advent Lutheran (RIC) Bathurst United (AC) Bloor Street United (AC) First Unitarian Cong. of Toronto Glen Rhodes United (AC) Metropolitan United (AC) Trinity-St. Paul’s United (AC) Waterloo Olive Branch Mennonite (SCN) Westminster United (AC) QUEBEC Montreal, Quebec City Unitarian Church of Montreal (WEL) SASKATCHEWAN Regina St. James United (AC) Saskatoon King of Glory Lutheran (RIC) St. Thomas-Wesley United (AC) UNITED KINGDOM ENGLAND Birmingham Edgbaston Soc. of Friends (Quakers) (INC) London St. Botolph’s Ch. of England, Aldgate (INC) UNITED STATES ALABAMA Auburn Auburn UU Fellowship (WEL) Birmingham Pilgrim Cong. Church, UCC (ONA) Huntsville UU Church (WEL) ALASKA Anchorage Immanuel Presbyterian (ML) UU Fellowship (WEL) Fairbanks Midnight Sun United Ch. (ONA/ncs) Juneau Jubilee Community United Ch. (ONA/ncs) Palmer Church of the Covenant (W&A) Sitka UMC of Sitka (RC) ARIZONA Chandler Valley UU Church (WEL) Mesa Celebration of Life Presbyterian (ML) Phoenix Asbury UMC (RC) Augustana Lutheran (RIC) Church of the Beatitudes (ONA) Faith Lutheran (RIC) Palo Cristi Presbyterian (ML) Shadow Rock Cong. UCC (ONA) Scottsdale Scottsdale Cong. UCC (ONA) Surprise Christ the Healer, UCC (ONA/ncs) Tempe Desert Palm UCC (ONA) University Lutheran (RIC) Tucson Church of the Painted Hills (ONA) Desert Dove Christian Church (O&A) First Christian (O&A) First Congregational, UCC (ONA) Rincon Congregational UCC (ONA) Santa Cruz Lutheran (RIC) St. Francis in the Foothills UMC (RC) UU of NW Tucson (WEL) UU of Tucscon (WEL) ARKANSAS Fayetteville St. Martin’s Episcopal Center (INT) Little Rock Pulaski Heights Christian (O&A) Trinity Cathedral (INT) CALIFORNIA Alameda First Christian (O&A) First Congregational (ONA) Albany Albany UMC (RC) Altadena Altadena Congregational (ONA) Christ the Shepherd Lutheran (RIC) Baldwin Park First Presbyterian (ML) Banning St. Agnes Episcopal (O) Bayside Humboldt UU Fellowship (WEL) Belmont Congregational Church UCC (ONA) Benicia Community Congregational (ONA) This nearly 8-foot-long iron fish hangs in the center of the sanctuary-inthe- round at Wheadon United Methodist Church, an Evanston, Illinois congregation renowned for its history of social activism and the third UMC church to declare Reconciling status. Welded and installed in 1973 by then-pastor Rev. Al Streyffeler, the figure incorporates a plumb bob as its eye. According to longtime Wheadonite Caroline Presnell, “After Al preached on Amos in the late ’70s, we decided that the fish, symbolizing Christ, was incomplete without the plumb line [Amos 7:7-9], symbolizing justice.” The Pride banner has been entwined through the fish’s frame since 1996; it is a duplicate of the banner created for that year’s holy covenant service between Wheadon members Carl Foote and Tom West. The banner subsequently was worn by Jill Graham and the late Burton Samuels at their interfaith wedding on the Wheadon front lawn. –Paul McComas photo: Paul McComas 12 Open Hands Berkeley Berkeley/Richmond Intercity Min. (O&A) Epworth UMC (RC) First Baptist (W&A) First Congregational (ONA) New Spirit Community Ch. (ONA/ncs) St. John’s Presbyterian (ML) Shepherd of the Hills Lutheran (RIC) Trinity UMC (RC) University Lutheran Chapel (RIC) University Church (O&A) Campbell First UMC (RC) Carlsbad Pilgrim Congregational UCC (ONA) Carmel UU of Monterey Peninsula (WEL) Canoga Park Emerson Unitarian Church (WEL) Chico Congregational Church (ONA) Claremont Claremont UMC (RC) Claremont UCC, Congregational (ONA) Cloverdale United Ch. of Cloverdale (ONA) Concord First Christian (O&A) Costa Mesa Orange Coast UU Church (WEL) St. John the Divine (O) Cupertino Redeemer Lutheran (RIC) Danville Danville Cong. UCC (ONA) Peace Lutheran (RIC) Davis Davis UMC (RC) Diamond Bar Diamond Bar Cong. UCC (ONA) El Cajon Summit UU Fellowship (WEL) El Cerrito Christ Lutheran (RIC) El Cerrito UMC (RC) Mira Vista UCC (ONA) Northminster Presbyterian (ML) Eureka First Congregational (ONA) Fair Oaks Fair Oaks UMC (RC) Fairfax Fairfax Community (ONA) Fremont Fremont Congregational (ONA) Niles Congregational UCC (ONA) Fresno College Comm. Cong. (ONA) First Congregational (ONA) Wesley UMC (RC) Fullerton Fullerton Congregational (ONA) Gardena First UMC (RC) Geyserville Geyserville Christian (O&A) Goleta Live Oaks UU Congregation (WEL) Guerneville Community Church, UCC (ONA) Hayward Eden UCC (ONA) New Fellowship UCC (ONA) United Church (ONA) Westminster Hills Presbyterian (ML) Hollywood Hollywood Lutheran (RIC) Hollywood UMC (RC) Hope Lutheran (RIC) Irvine Irvine UCC (ONA) Kensington Arlington Community UCC (ONA) Lafayette Lafayette Christian (O&A) Laguna Niguel Shepherd of the Hills (ONA) La Puente Delhaven Christian Church (O&A) Larkspur Redwoods Presbyterian (ML) La Verne Church of the Brethren (SCN) Livermore United Christian Church (O&A) Long Beach First Congregational UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Resurrection Lutheran (RIC) St. Luke’s Episcpal (O) St. Thomas of Canterbury (O) The UU Church (WEL) Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Los Alamitos Community Congregational UCC (ONA) Los Angeles All Saints’ Episcopal (O) Bethel Lutheran (RIC) First Unitarian of Los Angeles (WEL) Hollywood Independent UCC (ONA) Holy Nativity Episcopal (O) Lutheran Church of the Master (RIC) Mt. Hollywood Congregational UCC (ONA) Pueblo Nuevo de Jesucristo (O) St. Bede’s Episcopal (O) St. John’s Episcopal (O) St. Mary’s Episcopal, Palms (O) St. Thomas the Apostle (O) St. James’ Episcopal (O) Trinity Episcopal (O) United University (ML, RC) Westwood Hills Congregational (ONA) Wilshire UMC (RC) Los Gatos First UMC (RC) Skyland Community (ONA) Malibu Malibu UMC (RC) Marin City St. Andrews Presbyterian (ML) Martinez Martinez UMC (RC) Milpitas Sunnyhills UMC (RC) Modesto College Avenue Congregational (ONA) Morgan Hill Morgan Hill UMC (RC) Napa Emmanuel Lutheran (RIC) Newark Holy Redeemer Lutheran (RIC) North Hollywood St. Matthew’s Lutheran (RIC) Toluca Lake UMC (RC) Novato Faith Community Church (ONA) Oakland Beacon Presbyterian Fellowship (ML) Faith American Lutheran (RIC) First Congregational (ONA) First Lutheran (RIC) Lake Merritt UMC (RC) Lakeshore Avenue Baptist (W&A) Lutheran Peace Fellowship (RIC) Montclair Presbyterian (ML) Plymouth UCC (ONA) St. Paul Lutheran (RIC) Orinda Orinda Comm. Ch. UCC (ONA) Palo Alto Covenant Presbyterian (ML) First Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) First Presbyterian (ML) First UMC of Palo Alto (RC) St. Andrew’s UMC (RC) University Lutheran (RIC) UU Church of Palo Alto (WEL) Palm Springs St. Paul in the Desert (INT) Pasadena All Saints’ Episcopal (O) First Congregational UCC (ONA) Neighborhood Church (WEL) Throop Memorial UU Church (WEL) Pomona First Christian Church of Pomona (O&A) St. Paul’s Episcopal (O) Portola Valley Ladera Community Church (ONA) Rancho Palos Verdes Pacific Unitarian Church (WEL) Redondo Beach St. Paul’s UMC (RC) Richmond Grace Lutheran (RIC) Riverside First Congregational (ONA) St. George’s Episcopal (O) UU Church of Riverside (WEL) Sacramento Lutheran Church of Our Redeemer (RIC) Parkside Community (ONA) Pioneer Congregational, UCC (ONA) Unitarian Universalist Society (WEL) Salinas Good Shepherd Episcopal (INT) San Bernardino First Congregational Church, UCC (ONA) St. John’s Episcopal (O) San Bruno Peace Lutheran (RIC) San Diego First Lutheran (RIC) First Unitarian (WEL) Pacific Beach UMC (RC) St. Paul’s Cathedral (INT) San Diego Mennonite (SCN) University Christian (O&A) San Francisco Bethany UMC (RC) Calvary UMC (RC) Christ Church Lutheran (RIC) Church of the Advent (OAS) Ch. of the Incarnation (OAS) Church of St. John the Evangelist (OAS) City of Refuge (ONA) Dolores Street Baptist (W&A) First Congregational UCC (ONA) First Mennonite Church (SCN) First St. John’s UMC (RC) First Unitarian Society (WEL) First United Lutheran (RIC) Glide Memorial UMC (RC) Grace Cathedral (OAS) Golden Gate Lutheran (RIC) Hamilton UMC (RC) Noe Valley Ministry (ML) Greater Atlanta Presbytery of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) created standing committees on race and on women as the need arose, so when welcoming LGBT people was at issue, a straight ally, the Rev. Emmett Herndon, recommended the establishment of a Committee on Inclusion to assist churches in welcoming LGBT people, which he now chairs. Shown is the committee’s display created by Mickie Williams and the Rev. Carol Seaton, staffed at every presbytery meeting by Thelma Castleberry (right), a ubiquitous straight ally, accompanied on this occasion by Dr. Cynthia Warner (left). Winter 2002 13 Pine UMC (RC) Seventh Avenue Presbyterian (ML) St. Aidan’s Church (OAS) St. Francis Lutheran (RIC) St. John the Evangelist Episcopal (OAS) St. John’s UCC (ONA) St. Mark’s Lutheran (RIC) St. Paulus Lutheran (RIC) Temple UMC (RC) Trinity Church (OAS) San Jose Almaden Hills UMC (RC) Alum Rock UMC (RC) Christ the Good Shepherd Lutheran (RIC) 1st Cong. Ch. of San Jose UCC (ONA) First Christian Church (O&A) New Community of Faith (ONA, W&A) St. Paul’s UMC (RC) Trinity Cathedral (INT) San Leandro San Leandro Comm. Church (ONA, W&A) San Mateo Chalice Christian Church (O&A) College Heights UCC (ONA) First Christian (O&A) UU of San Mateo (WEL) San Pedro St. Peter’s Episcopal (O) San Rafael Christ in Terra Linda Presb. (ML) Faith Lutheran (RIC) First Congregational UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) UU Congregation of Marin (WEL) Santa Ana Messiah Episcopal (O) Santa Barbara First Congregational UCC (ONA) La Mesa Community (ONA) Trinity Episcopal Church (O) Santa Clarita St. Stephen’s Episcopal (O) Santa Cruz First Congregational UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Grace UMC (RC) Santa Monica The Church in Ocean Park (RC) St. Augustine-by-the-Sea Episcopal (O) Santa Rosa Christ UMC (RC) First Congregational UCC (ONA) UU Fellowship of Sonoma Co. (WEL) Saratoga Grace UMC (RC) Sausalito First Presbyterian (ML) Sebastopol Community Church (ONA) Simi Valley United Church of Christ (ONA) Sonoma First Congregational (ONA) South Lake Tahoe Lake Tahoe UU Fellowship (WEL) Stockton Central UMC (RC) First Christian (O&A) St. Mark’s UMC (RC) Studio City St. Michael and All Angel’s Episcopal (O) Sunnyvale Congregational Community (ONA) Raynor Park Christian (O&A) St. John’s Lutheran (RIC) Sunol Little Brown Church (ONA) Thousand Oaks Conejo Valley UU Fellowship (WEL) Tiburon Community Congregational (ONA) Shepherd of the Hills Lutheran (RIC) Westminster Presbyterian (ML) Vacaville St. Paul’s UMC (RC) Vallejo Fellowship UMC (RC) First Christian (O&A) Ventura UU Church of Ventura (WEL) Walnut Creek Mt. Diablo UU (WEL) Walnut Creek UMC (RC) West Covina Shepherd of the Valley Lutheran (RIC) West Hollywood Crescent Heights UMC (RC) West Hollywood Presbyterian (ML) Whittier St. Matthias’ Episcopal (O) Yucaipa Faith Lutheran (RIC) COLORADO Arvada Arvada Mennonite (SCN) Arvada UMC (RC) Aurora Parkview Congregational UCC (ONA) Boulder Boulder Mennonite (SCN) Community UCC (ONA) First Christian (O&A) First Congregational (ONA) First UMC (RC) Mount Calvary Lutheran (RIC) St. John’s Episcopal (O&I) UU Church of Boulder (WEL) Castle Rock Song of Joy Community (ONA/ncs) Colorado Springs All Souls Unitarian (WEL) First Congregational (ONA) High Plains UU Church (WEL) Denver Capitol Heights Presbyterian (ML) Fireside Christian (O&A) First Universalist (WEL) Our Savior’s Lutheran (RIC) Park Hill Congregational UCC (ONA) Sixth Avenue United Church (ONA) Spirit of Joy Fellowship (SCN) St. Andrew’s Episcopal (O) St. Barnabas Episcopal (O) St. John’s Episcopal (O) St. Paul Lutherans (RIC) St. Paul’s UMC (RC) St. Thomas Episcopal (O) Warren UMC (RC) Washington Park UCC (ONA) Englewood First Plymouth Cong. UCC (ONA) Evergreen Wild Rose UCC (ONA) Fort Collins Foothills Unitarian Church (WEL) Fort Collins Mennonite Fel. (SCN) St. Thomas Lutheran Chapel (RIC) Grand Junction Koinonia Church (SCN, W&A) Greeley Family of Christ Presbyterian (ML) Gunnison Gunnison Congregational UCC (ONA/ncs) Lakewood Lakewood UCC (ONA) Littleton Columbine UU Church (WEL) Longmont First Cong. UCC (ONA, W&A) Pueblo Christ Congregational, UCC (ONA) UU Church (WEL) Telluride Christ Presbyterian (ML) CONNECTICUT Bridgeport (Stratford) UU Church of Greater Bridgeport (WEL) Cornwall UCC in Cornwall, Cong. (ONA) Coventry Second Congregational (ONA) Danbury First Congregational, UCC (ONA) Ellington First Lutheran (RIC) Fairfield First Church Cong. (ONA) Glastonbury First Church of Christ Cong. (ONA) Guilford First Congregational UCC (ONA) Hamden Spring Glen Church, UCC (ONA) U Society of New Haven (WEL) Hartford Central Baptist (W&A) First Church of Christ, UCC (ONA) Immanuel Cong., UCC (ONA) Madison First Congregational (ONA) Shoreline UU Society (WEL) Manchester UU Society: East (WEL) Mansfield Center First Church of Christ Cong. (ONA) Meriden UU Church in Meriden (WEL) Middletown First Church of Christ Cong. (ONA) New Haven Church of Christ in Yale Univ. (ONA) The Church of the Redeemer, UCC (ONA) First Church of Christ (ONA) First & Summerfield UMC (RC) United Church on the Green (ONA) Noank Noank Baptist (W&A) South Glastonbury Congregational Church (ONA) Stamford St. John Lutheran (RIC) Storrs Storrs Congregational (ONA) Unitarian Fellowship of Storrs (WEL) Uncasville Uncasville UMC (RC) Waterbury South Congregational (ONA) St. John’s Church (INT) West Redding UU Society of Northern Fairfield Cty (WEL) Westport Unitarian Church (WEL) Windsor First Church UCC (ONA) DELAWARE Newark New Ark UCC (ONA) Wilmington First Unitarian Society of Wilmington (WEL) West Presbyterian (ML) DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Washington, D.C. All Souls Unitarian (WEL) Augustana Lutheran (RIC) Church of the Pilgrims (ML) Christ Lutheran (RIC) Christ UMC (RC) Community of Christ Lutheran (RIC) Dumbarton UMC (RC) First Congregational (ONA) First Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Foundry UMC (RC) Georgetown Lutheran (RIC) Grace Lutheran (RIC) Lutheran Church of the Reformation (RIC) Luther Place Memorial Lutheran (RIC) National City Christian Church (O&A) New York Ave. Presbyterian (ML) Riverside Baptist (W&A) Sojourner Truth Cong. UU (WEL) St. Thomas’ Parish (INT) St. Paul’s Lutheran (RIC) Westminster Presbyterian (ML) FLORIDA Bradenton Manatee UU Church (WEL) Clearwater UU Church of Clearwater (WEL) Daytona Beach (Ormond Beach) UU Society Daytona Beach Area (WEL) Dunedin Faith Presbyterian (ML) Fort Lauderdale UU Church of Fort Lauderdale (WEL) Gainesville United Church (ONA) Unitarian Universalist Fellowship (WEL) Key West Holy Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Lake Helen First Congregational, UCC (ONA) Lake Mary Grace UMC (RC) Miami Beach Miami Beach Community (ONA) Riviera Presbyterian (ML) St. John’s UMC (RC) 14 Open Hands North Palm Beach First Unitarian (WEL) Orlando First Unitarian (WEL) Pinellas Park Good Samaritan Church (ML, ONA) St. Petersburg Lakewood UCC (ONA) Sunrise Christ the King Lutheran (RIC) Tallahassee St. Stephen Lutheran (RIC) United Church (ONA) Tampa First United Church (ONA) John Calvin Presbyterian (ML) Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Tavernier Coral Isles Church, UCC (ONA) Winter Haven Trinity Congregational, UCC (ONA) GEORGIA Athens Unitarian Universalist Fellowship (WEL) Atlanta Clifton Presbyterian (ML) Ormewood Park Presbyterian (ML) St. Luke Lutheran (RIC) Trinity UMC (RC) UU Congregation of Atlanta (WEL) Macon High Street UU Church (WEL) Marietta Pilgrimage UCC (ONA) Savannah St. Luke Lutheran (RIC) HAWAI‘I Honolulu Calvary By the Sea Lutheran (RIC) Church of the Crossroads (ONA) First Christian Church (O&A) Honolulu Lutheran (RIC) St. Mark’s Church (INT) Kalaupapa Kanaana Hou-Siloama, UCC (ONA) Pearl City Trinity UMC (RC) IDAHO Boise First Cong. UCC (ONA) St. Michael’s Cathedral (INT) McCall Community Congregational (ONA) Pocatellow Trinity Episcopal (INT) ILLINOIS Aurora Lutheran Church of the Redeemer (RIC) The N.E. Cong. UCC (ONA) Bloomington Unitarian Church of Bloomington (WEL) Carbondale Carbondale UU Fellowship (WEL) Church of the Good Shepherd (ONA) Champaign Community UCC (ONA) McKinley Memorial Presbyterian (ML) St. Andrew’s Lutheran (RIC) Chicago Albany Park UMC (RC) Augustana Lutheran (RIC) Berry Memorial UMC (RC) Broadway UMC (RC) Christ the King Lutheran (RIC) Christ the Mediator Lutheran (RIC) Douglas Park Ch. of the Brethren (SCN) Ebenezer Lutheran (RIC) Epiphany UCC (ONA) Epworth UMC (RC) First UMC (RC) First Unitarian Church of Chicago (WEL) Galewood Community Ch., UCC (ONA) Grace Baptist (W&A) Grace UMC (RC) Holy Covenant UMC (RC) Holy Trinity Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) Immanuel Lutheran (RIC) Irving Park Christian (O&A) Irving Park UMC (RC) Lake View Lutheran (RIC) Lincoln Park Presbyterian (ML) Nazareth UCC (ONA) New Hope UMC (RC) New Light of Christ Lutheran (RIC) Park View Lutheran (RIC) Peoples Church (ONA) Ravenswood UCC (ONA) Resurrection Lutheran (RIC) Second Unitarian Church (WEL) St. James United Presb. (ML) St. Luke’s Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) St. Paul’s UCC (ONA) Third Unitarian Church (WEL) Trinity Lutheran (RIC) United Church of Rogers Park (RC) University Church (ONA, O&A) Wellington Avenue UCC (ONA) Elmhurst Maywood House Church (RIC) Decatur UU Fellowship of Decatur (WEL) East Peoria New Church (ONA) Evanston Lake Street Church of Evanston (W&A) Hemenway UMC (RC) Unitarian Church of Evanston (WEL) Wheadon UMC (RC) Hazel Crest Hazel Crest Community UMC (RC) Jacksonville Congregational Church, UCC (ONA) La Grange First Congregational (ONA) Metamora Christ UCC of Germantown Hills (ONA) Naperville Dupage UU Church (WEL) First Congregational Church (ONA) Hope UCC (ONA) Normal New Covenant Comm. (ML, ONA, O&A) Northampton St. John’s Episcopal (INT) Oak Park Euclid Avenue UMC (RC) First United Church (ML, ONA) Good Shepherd Lutheran (RIC) Grace Church (INT) Oak Park Mennonite (SCN) Pilgrim Church (ONA) Unity Temple UU Congregation (WEL) Park Forest UU Community (WEL) Rockford Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Schaumburg Prince of Peace Lutheran (RIC) Springfield Abraham Lincoln UU Congregation (WEL) Streamwood Immanuel UCC (ONA) Urbana UU Church (WEL) Waukegan First Congregational UCC (ONA) Wheaton St. Paul Lutheran (RIC) Wilmette First Congregational UCC (ONA) Winfield Winfield Community UMC (RC) INDIANA Bloomington St. Thomas Lutheran (RIC) Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Fort Wayne Plymouth Congregational, UCC (ONA) UU Congregation of Fort Wayne (WEL) Goshen Circle of Hope Mennonite Fellowship (SCN) Greencastle Gobin Memorial UMC (RC) Indianapolis First Congregational UCC (ONA) Northeast UCC (ONA) Lafayette Shalom UCC (ONA) UU Church of Lafayette (WEL) North Manchester Manchester Church of the Brethren (SCN) South Bend Central UMC (RC) First Unitarian (WEL) Southside Christian (O&A) Valparaiso Trinity Lutheran (RIC) West Lafayette Shalom UCC (ONA) IOWA Ames Ames Mennonite (SCN) Lord of Life Lutheran (RIC) UCC Congregational (ONA) University Lutheran (RIC) UU Fellowship of Ames (WEL) Cedar Rapids Faith UMC (RC) Peoples Church UU (WEL) Clinton Clinton-Camanche, Iowa MFSA (RC) Davenport Davenport Unitarian (WEL) Des Moines Cottage Grove Avenue Presbyterian (ML) First Unitarian (WEL) Plymouth Congregational UCC (ONA) Trinity UMC (RC) Urbandale UCC (ONA) Grinnel UCC Congregational (ONA) Indianola Crossroads, UCC (ONA) Iowa City Faith UCC (ONA) UU Society of Iowa City (WEL) Red Oak First Congregational UCC (ONA) Urbandale Urbandale UCC (ONA) KANSAS Kansas City Rainbow Mennonite (SCN) Olathe St. Andrews Christian (O&A) Topeka Central Congregational UCC (ONA) Wichita First UU Church (WEL) KENTUCKY Henderson Zion UCC (ONA) Lexington The UU Church of Lexington (WEL) Louisville Calvary Lutheran (RIC) Central Presbyterian (ML) First Unitarian (WEL) Third Lutheran (RIC) Mount Prospect Grace and Glory Lutheran (RIC) Union High Point Church (ONA) LOUISIANA New Orleans St. Mark’s UMC (RC) MAINE Alfred Alfred Parish Church (ONA) Bath UCC, Congregational (ONA) Camden John Street UMC (RC) Cumberland Center Congregational Church (ONA) Ellsworth Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Gorham First Parish Cong. Ch., UCC (ONA) Mt. Desert Somesville Union Meeting House (ONA) Parsonfield Riverside UMC (RC) Portland Woodfords Cong. UCC (ONA) Rockland The First Universalist (WEL) Saco First Parish Cong. Ch. of Saco (ONA) Sanford UU Church (WEL) South Portland First Congregational, UCC (ONA) Waterville Universalist Unitarian (WEL) Wilton First Congregational (ONA) MARYLAND Adelphi Paint Branch UU (WEL) Annapolis St. Margaret’s Episcopal (O) Unitarian Church of Annapolis (WEL) Winter 2002 15 Baltimore All Saints Lutheran (RIC) Brown Memorial Park Ave. Pres. (ML) Cathedral Church of the Incarnation (INT) Christ Lutheran (RIC) Church of the Good Shepherd (O) Church of the Holy Apostles (O) Church of the Holy Nativity (O) Church of the Redeemer (O) Dundalk Church of the Brethren (SCN) Epiphany Lutheran (RIC) First & Franklin Presbyterian (ML) Grace and St. Peter’s Church (O) Govans Presbyterian (ML) Holy Comforter Lutheran (RIC) St. Andrew’s Episcopal (O) St. George’s and St. Matthew’s (O) St. James, Lafayette Square (O) St. John’s Huntingdon (O) St. John’s UMC (RC) St. Margaret’s, Coventry (O) St. Mark’s Lutheran (RIC) St. Paul’s Parish (O) First Unitarian of Baltimore (WEL) Bethesda Cedar Lane Unitarian (WEL) River Road Unitarian (WEL) Westmoreland Cong. UCC (ONA) Catonsville Immanuel UCC (ONA) Cockeysville Sherwood Episcopal Church (O) Columbia Abiding Savior Lutheran (RIC) Christ UMC (RC) Columbia United Christian (O&A) Columbia United Christian (ONA) St. John UM-Presbyterian (ML, RC) UU Congregation (WEL) Cumberland Emmanuel Parish (O) Holy Cross Episcopal Church (O) Darlington Deer Creek Parish, Grace Memorial (O) Davidson All Hallow’s Parish (O) Deer Park St. John’s Church (O) Essex Holy Trinity Church (O) Frederick St. Timothy’s Church (O) Gaithersburg Christ the Servant Lutheran (RIC) Glencoe Immanuel Church (O) Glen Dale St. George’s Episcopal (INT) Lanham Good Samaritan Lutheran (RIC) Lutherville Church of the Holy Comforter (O) Towson UU Church (WEL) Oakland St. Matthew’s Church (O) Odenton Epiphany Episcopal Church (O) Prince Frederick St. Paul’s Parish (O) Rockville Rockville Presbyterian (ML) Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Unitarian Church of Rockville (WEL) Silver Spring Christ Congregational UCC (ONA) Silver Spring Presbyterian (ML) UU Church of Silver Spring (WEL) Street Holy Cross Church, The Rocks (O) Takoma Park Takoma Park Presbyterian (ML) Timonium Epiphany Church (O) Walkersville The Gathering–A Family of Faith (O) MASSACHUSETTS Acton St. Matthew’s UMC (RC) Amherst First Congregational UCC (ONA) Immanuel Lutheran (RIC) South Congregational (ONA) Andover Ballardvale United (ONA, RC) Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Arlington First Parish UU Church (WEL) Ashfield First Congregational, UCC (ONA) Athol South Athol UMC (RC) Auburn Pakachoag (ONA) Auburndale United Parish of Auburndale (ONA, RC) Barnstable The Unitarian Church (WEL) Boston Arlington Street (WEL) Church of the Covenant (ML, ONA) Old South Church (ONA) Union UMC (RC) Braintree All Souls Church (WEL) Brewster First Parish (WEL) Cambridge First Church, Congregational (ONA) Harvard-Epworth UMC (RC) Old Cambridge Baptist (W&A) University Lutheran (RIC) Concord West Concord Union (ONA) Danvers Holy Trinity UMC (RC) Duxbury First Parish Church, UU (WEL) Framingham Edwards Church UCC (ONA) First Parish in Framingham, UU (WEL) Grace UCC (ONA) Franklin First Universalist Society (WEL) Greenfield First Congregational UCC (ONA) Harvard The Evangelical Cong. Ch., UCC (ONA) Harwich First Congregational (ONA) Hingham First Parish Old Ship (WEL) Hingham Congregational (ONA) Holliston First Congregational (ONA) Jamaica Plain Central Congregational (ONA) First Church, UU (WEL) Lexington Follen Community Church (WEL) The First Parish Church, UU (WEL) Lexington UMC (RC) Lincoln The First Parish in Lincoln (ONA) Malden The First Ch. in Malden (ONA) Marblehead St. Stephen’s UMC (RC) Marshfield Marshfield UMC (RC) Medford UU Church (WEL) Middleboro First Unitarian Society (WEL) Needham Cong. Church of Needham, UCC (ONA) First Parish UU (WEL) Newburyport Belleville Congregational UCC (ONA) First Parish Society (WEL) People’s UMC (RC) Newton Eliot Church of Newton, UCC (ONA) Lutheran Church of the Newtons (RIC) Newton Highlands Congregational (ONA) Northampton First Baptist Church (W&A) First Church of Christ (ONA) Unitarian Society (WEL) North Easton Unity Church (UU) (WEL) Norwell First Parish Church (WEL) UCC Congregational (ONA) Osterville United Methodist (RC) Penbroke First Church in Penbroke (ONA) Plymouth First Parish Church (WEL) Provincetown Universalist Meeting House (WEL) Reading Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Salem Crombie Street UCC (ONA) First Universalist Society (WEL) Saugus East Saugus UMC (RC) Shrewsbury Mt. Olivet Lutheran (RIC) Somerville Clarenden Hill Presbyterian (ML) First Cong. of Somerville (ONA) Mennonite Cong. of Boston (SCN) South Hadley UMC of Holyoke, S. Hadley, & Granby Springfield First Ch. of Christ Congregational (ONA) South Cong. Church, UCC (ONA) UU Society of Greater Springfield (WEL) Stowe First Parish Ch. of Stowe & Acton (WEL) Sudbury The First Parish (WEL) Memorial Congregational UCC (ONA) Waltham First Presbyterian (ML) Wayland First Parish Church, UU (WEL) Wellesley Wellesley Congregational (ONA) UU Society (WEL) Wendell Wendell Congregational (ONA) West Newton First Unitarian Society (WEL) Second Church in Newton UCC (ONA) West Somerville College Avenue UMC (RC) Williamstown First Congregational UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Winchester First Congregational (ONA) The Winchester Unitarian Society (WEL) Worcester Bethany Christian (W&A, ONA, O&A) United Congregational (ONA) UU Church (WEL) MICHIGAN Ann Arbor Amistad Community Church, UCC (ONA) Church of the Good Shepherd (ONA) First UU (WEL) Lord of Light Lutheran (RIC) Memorial Christian (O&A) Northside Presbyterian (ML) St. Andrew’s Episcopal (OAS) Bloomfield Hills Birmingham Unitarian (WEL) Detroit Central UMC (RC) First UU Church (WEL) Truth Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) Douglas Douglas Congregational UCC (ONA) East Lansing Edgewood United Church (ONA) UU of Greater Lansing (WEL) Ferndale Zion Lutheran (RIC) Flint UU Church of Flint (WEL) Farmington Hills UU Church of Farmington Grand Rapids Plymouth Congregational, UCC (ONA) Kalamazoo Phoenix Community UCC (ONA) Skyridge Church of the Brethren (SCN) Lansing Ecclesia (O&A) Lansing Church of the Brethren (SCN) Pilgrim Congregational UCC (ONA) Livonia Timothy Lutheran (RIC) Muskegon Our Savior Lutheran (RIC) Port Huron St. Martin Lutheran (RIC) Portage Park Chapel Hill UMC (RC) 16 Open Hands Southfield Calvary Lutheran (RIC) Traverse City UU Fellowship of Grand Traverse (WEL) Williamston Williamston UMC (RC) Ypsilanti First Congregational UCC (ONA) MINNESOTA Albert Lea Christ Church Episcopal (O) Austin Christ Church Episcopal (O) Brainerd First Congregational, UCC (ONA) Burnsville Church of the Nativity (O) Presbyterian Church of the Apostles (ML) Chatfield St. Matthew’s Church (O) Duluth Gloria Dei (RIC) Pilgrim Congregational, UCC (ONA) St. Andrew’s by the Lake (O) St. Paul’s Episcoapl (O) Eagan Ss. Martha and Mary Episcopal (O) Edina Edina Community Lutheran (RIC) Good Samaritan UMC (RC) Falcon Heights Falcon Heights UCC (ONA) Frontenac Christ Church Episcopal (O) Hibbing St. James’ Episcopal (O) Lake Park Houglum Lutheran (RIC) Little Falls The Church of Our Saviour (O) Madison Parkside Presby. Church (ML) Mahtomedi White Bear UU (WEL) Mankato First Congregational UCC (ONA) St. John’s Church (O) Maple Grove Pilgrims United (ONA) Marshall St. James’ Church (O) Minneapolis Bethany Lutheran (RIC) Bryn Mawr Presbyterian (ML) Cathedral Church of St. Mark (O) The Church of Gethsemane (O) Christ the Redeemer Lutheran (RIC) First Congregational (ONA) First Unitarian Society (WEL) First Universalist (WEL) Grace University Lutheran (RIC) Hennepin Avenue UMC (RC) Hobart UMC (RC) Holy Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Judson Memorial Baptist (W&A) Linden Hills Cong., UCC (ONA) Lyndale UCC (ONA) Lynnhurst Congregational (ONA) Mayflower Community Cong. UCC (ONA) Minnehaha UCC (ONA) Mt. Olive Lutheran (RIC) Our Savior’s Lutheran (RIC) Parkway UCC (ONA) Praxis (RC) Prospect Park UMC (RC) Spirit of the Lakes (ONA) St. Andrew’s Lutheran (RIC) St. James’ on the Parkway (O) St. John the Baptist Episcopal (O) St. Luke’s Parish (O) St. Matthew’s Church (O) St. Paul’s Parish (O) St. Pede Lutheran (RIC) The Parish of Holy Trinity & St. Ansgar (O) University Baptist (W&A) Univ. Lutheran Church of Hope (RIC) Walker Community (RC) Wesley UMC (RC) Zion Lutheran (RIC) Minnetonka St. David’s Church (O) New Brighton United Church of Christ (ONA) New Ulm St. Peter’s Church (O) Northfield All Saints’ Church (O) First UCC (ONA) Onamia Onamia UMC (RC) Prairie Island Church of the Messiah (O) Red Wing Christ Church (O) St. Paul Lutheran (RIC) Richfield St. Nicholas’ Church Robbinsdale Robbinsdale UCC (ONA) Roseville St. Christopher’s Church (O) Sauk Center The Church of the Good Samaritan (O) The Living Waters (O) Shoreview Peace UMC (RC) St. Cloud St. Cloud UU Fellwoship (WEL) St. John’s Episcopal Church (O) Univ. Lutheran of the Epiphany (RIC) St. Paul Ascension Church (O) Cherokee Park United (ML, ONA) The Church of St. Paul on the Hill & La Mision El (O) Dayton Avenue Presbyterian (ML) Gloria Dei Lutheran (RIC) Hamline UMC (RC) Macalester-Plymouth United (ML, ONA) St. Anthony Park UCC St. Clement’s Church (O) St. John the Evangelist (O) St. Luke Lutheran (RIC) St. Mary’s Church (O) St. Paul Mennonite Fellowship (SCN) St. Paul’s UCC (ONA) St. Paul-Reformation Lutheran (RIC) Shapiing Sancttuarry Proclaiming God’s Grace in an Inclusive Church ISBN # 0-9701568-0-4 Order from your denominational Welcoming organization or from www.RMNetwork.org Don’t miss this opportunity to “help the rest of the church rediscover its soul.” —from book review by James B. Nelson $14.00 A collection of essays, sermons, liturgies, and hymns from the Welcoming movement. Valuing Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender persons as an integral part of the Body of Christ. Exploring themes of embodiment theology, integrating spirituality and sexuality, and inclusive worship. Includes an eight-week group study guide. ecumenical welcoming Bible study resource on homosexuality ✦ seven-session study series ✦ For more information or to place order contact: Reconciling Ministries Network 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 voice: 773/736-5526 fax: 773/736-5475 www.RMNetwork.org Claiming the Promise ▼ Examines biblical references to same-sex conduct in light of the broader biblical message which affirms that we are children or heirs of the Promise. ▼ Explores biblical authority and biblical interpretation. ▼ Discusses “gracious hospitality,” “gift-ed sexuality,” and “inclusive holiness.” ▼ Tackles hard questions of “right relationship,” lust/love, and sexual responsibility. ▼ Calls us all to live out the Promise as reconciling disciples. Includes adaptation for using with youth study book $5.95 leader’s guide $9.95 discounts for bulk quantities Winter 2002 17 Stillwater The Church of the Ascension (O) Sunfish Lake St. Anne’s Church (O) Wabasha Grace Memorial Church (O) Waseca Trinity Episcopal (O) Wayzatta St. Luke Presbyterian (ML) White Bear Lake St. John in the Wilderness (O) MISSISSIPPI Meridian Church of the Mediator (INT) MISSOURI Columbia Rock Bridge Christian (O&A) Kansas City Abiding Peace Lutheran (RIC) All Souls Unitarian (WEL) Country Club Congregational (ONA) Epworth Roanoke UMC (RC) Fountain of Hope Lutheran (RIC) Kairos UMC (RC) Spirit of Life Community (RIC) St. James Lutheran (RIC) St. Mark’s Lutheran (RIC) Trinity UMC (RC) Van Brunt Blvd. Presbyterian (ML) St. Louis Centenary UMC (RC) Compton Heights Christian (O&A) Epiphany (ONA) Evangelical UCC (ONA) Gibson Heights United (ML) Lafayette Park UMC (RC) St. Marcus Evangelical UCC (ONA) Tyler Place Presbyterian (ML) University City Bethel Lutheran (RIC) MONTANA Billings Billings UU Fellowship (WEL) First Congregational UCC (ONA) Mayflower Cong. UCC (ONA) Bozeman UU Fellowship of Bozeman (WEL) Butte United Congregational Church (ONA) Helena Big Sky UU Fellowship (WEL) Kalispell Flathead Valley UCC (ONA) Glacier UU Fellowship (WEL) Missoula University Congregational UCC (ONA) UU Fellowship of Missoula (WEL) NEBRASKA Lincoln St. Mark’s on the Campus (INT) Unitarian Church (WEL) Omaha First Lutheran (RIC) First UMC (RC) Reconciling Worship Community (RC) NEVADA Las Vegas Northwest Community, UCC (ONA/ncs) UU Congregation of Las Vegas (WEL) Reno UU Fellowship of Northern Nevada (WEL) NEW HAMPSHIRE Chocura UU Fell. of the Eastern Slopes (WEL) Concord South Congregational, UCC (ONA) Exeter Congregational (ONA) Hanover Church of Christ at Dartmouth (ONA) Our Savior Lutheran (RIC) Jaffrey United Church (ONA) Laconia UU Society of Laconia (WEL) Meridan Meridan Congregational, UCC (ONA) Milford Unitarian Universalist Congregation (WEL) Nashua UU Church (WEL) Pelham First Congregational (ONA) Plymouth Plymouth Congregational (ONA) Starr King UU Fellowship (WEL) Sanbornton Sanbornton Congregational UCC (ONA) NEW JERSEY Asbury Park Trinity Episcopal Church (INT) Belleville Christ Church Episcopal (OAS) Belvedere St. Mary’s Episcopal (OAS) Bloomfield Christ Episcopal (OAS) Boonton St. John’s Episcopal (OAS) Chatham St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Cherry Hill UU Church (WEL) Chester Church of the Messiah Episcopal (OAS) Clifton St. Peter’s Episcopal (OAS) Closter First Cong. Ch. UCC (ONA) Denville Church of Our Saviour Episcopal (OAS) East Brunswick East Brunswick Cong. UCC (ONA) Englewood St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Fort Lee Church of the Good Shepherd (OAS) Hackensack Christ Episcopal (OAS) Hackettstown St. James’ Episcopal (OAS) Harrington Park St. Andrew’s Episcopal (OAS) Hasbrouck Heights Church of St. John the Divine (OAS) Haworth St. Luke’s Episcopal (OAS) Hawthorne St. Clement’s Episcopal (OAS) Hoboken All Saints Parish (OAS) Jersey City Grace Lutheran (RIC) Grace Van Vorst Episcopal (OAS) St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Kearny First Lutheran (RIC) Trinity Episcopal (OAS) Leonia All Saints Episcopal (OAS) Lincoln Park St. Andrews Episcopal (OAS) Lincroft First Unitarian of Monmouth Cty (WEL) Madison Grace Episcopal (OAS) Maplewood St. George’s Episcopal (OAS) Mendham St. Mark’s Episcopal (OAS) Middletown Old First Church (ONA) Millburn St. Stephen’s Episcopal (OAS) Montclair St. John’s Episcopal (OAS) St. Luke’s Episcopal (OAS) Unitarian (WEL) Montvale St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Morristown Church of the Redeemer (OAS) St. Peter’s Episcopal (OAS) Unitarian Fellowship (WEL) Mt. Arlington St. Peter’s Episcopal (OAS) Neptune Redeemer Lutheran (RIC) New Brunswick Emanuel Lutheran (RIC) Newark Cathedral of Trinity and St. Philip (OAS) Grace Episcopal (OAS) Norwood Church of the Holy Communion (OAS) Nutley Grace Church (O) Oakland St. Alban’s Episcopal (OAS) Paramus Central Unitarian Church (WEL) Parsippany St. Andrew Lutheran (RIC) St. Gregory’s Episcopal (OAS) Passaic St. John’s Episcopal (OAS) Paterson St. Paul’s Episcopal (OAS) Plainfield First Unitarian Society (WEL) Pompton Lakes Christ Church (OAS) Princeton Christ Congregation (ONA, W&A) Ramsey St. John’s Episcopal (OAS) Ridgewood Christ Episcopal (OAS) The Unitarian Society of Ridgewood (WEL) Rutherford Rutherford UMC (RC) Short Hills Christ Episcopal (OAS) South Orange First Presbyterian & Trinity (ML) Sparta St. Mary’s Episcopal (OAS) Summit Calvary Episcopal (OAS) Christ Church (ONA) Teaneck St. Mark’s Episcopal (OAS) Tenafly Church of the Atonement (OAS) Towaco Church of the Transfiguration (OAS) Titusville UU of Washington Crossing (WEL) Union City St. John’s Episcopal (OAS) Upper Montclair St. James’ Episcopal (OAS) Union Congregational, UCC (ONA) Verona Holy Spirit Episcopal (OAS) Wantage Good Shepherd Episcopal (OAS) NEW MEXICO Albuquerque First Congregational, UCC (ONA) First Unitarian (WEL) St. Michael & All Angels (INT) St. Thomas of Canterbury (INT) Santa Fe Christ Lutheran (RIC) First Christian Church (O&A) St. Bede’s Episcopal (OAS) Unitarian Church (WEL) United Church (ONA) NEW YORK Albany Emmanuel Baptist (W&A) First Presbyterian (ML) First UU Society of Albany (WEL) Bay Shore St. Peter’s Church (INT) Binghamton Centenary-Chenango Street UMC (RC) UU Congregation (WEL) Blooming Grove Blooming Grove UCC (ONA) Brookhaven Old South Haven Presbyterian (ML) Brooklyn All Souls Bethlehem (O&A, ONA) Church of Gethsemane (ML) First Unitarian Cong. Society (WEL) King’s Highway UMC (RC) Lafayette Avenue Presbyterian (ML) Park Slope UMC (RC) St. Jn-St. Matt-Emmanuel Luth. (RIC) Bronx Transfiguration Lutheran (RIC) Buffalo Westminster Presbyterian (ML) Canandaigua UU Church of Canandaigua (WEL) Canton The UU Church (WEL) Churchville Union Congregational (ONA) Copake Craryville UMC (RC) Cortland United Community Church (W&A, ONA) Dobbs Ferry South Presbyterian (ML) 18 Open Hands Elmira The Park Church (ONA) Fairport Mountain Rise UCC (ONA) Gloversville First Congregational UCC (ONA) Grand Island Riverside Salem (ONA) Henrietta John Calvin Presbyterian (ML) Huntington UU Fellowship (WEL) Ithaca First Baptist (W&A) First Baptist Church (W&A) St. Paul’s UMC (RC) Manhasset UU Congregation at Shelter Rock Marcellus First Presbyterian (ML) Merrick Community Presbyterian (ML) Mt. Kisco Mt. Kisco Presbyterian (ML) UU Fell. of Northern Westchester (WEL) Mt. Sinai Mt. Sinai Congregational UCC (ONA) New Rochelle Christ UMC (RC) New York City Broadway UCC (ONA) Central Presbyterian (ML) Church of the Holy Apostles (OAS) The Community Church of NY, UU (WEL) Good Shepherd-Faith Presbyterian (ML) Grace & St. Paul’s Lutheran (RIC) Holy Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Jan Hus Presbyterian (ML) Judson Memorial (ONA, W&A) Madison Avenue Baptist (W&A) Metropolitan-Duane UMC (RC) Our Savior’s Atonement Lutheran (RIC) Park Avenue Christian (O&A) Riverside (ONA, W&A) Rutgers Presbyterian (ML) St. Paul & St. Andrew UMC (RC) St. Peter’s Lutheran (RIC) Trinity Lutheran Church/9th St. (RIC) Trinity Lutheran Church/100th St. (RIC) Trinity Presbyterian (ML) Unitarian Ch. of All Souls (WEL) Washington Square UMC (RC) West-Park Presbyterian (ML) Norwich First Congregational, UCC (ONA) Oneonta First UMC (RC) UU Society (WEL) Palisades Palisades Presbyterian (ML) Plattsburgh Plattsburgh UMC (RC) Poughkeepsie Unitarian Fellowship (WEL) Richmondtown (Staten Island) The Church of St. Andrew (INT) Riverhead First Congregational (ONA) Rochester Calvary-St. Andrews (ML) Ch. of St. Luke & St. Simon Cyrene (INT) Downtown United Presbyterian (ML) First Unitarian (WEL) First Universalist of Rochester (WEL) Lake Avenue Baptist (W&A) Third Presbyterian (ML) Westminster Presbyterian (ML) Saratoga Springs Presb.-New Eng. Cong. (ML, ONA) Saratoga Springs UMC (RC) Sayville Sayville Congregational UCC (ONA) Schenectady Emmanuel Bapt.–Friedens UCC (ONA, W&A) First UMC (RC) First Unitarian (WEL) Sea Cliff UMC of Sea Cliff (RC) Slatehill Grace UMC of Ridgebury (RC) Slingerlands Community UMC (RC) Snyder Amherst Community (ONA, O&A) Staten Island Atonement Lutheran (RIC) Syosset The Community Church (ONA) Syracuse First UU Society of Syracuse (WEL) May Memorial UU Society (WEL) Plymouth Congregational UCC (ONA) Troy First United Presbyterian (ML) Utica Unitarian Universalist (WEL) White Plains St. Bartholomew’s Episcopal (INT) Williamsville UU of Amherst (WEL) Yorktown Heights First Presbyterian (ML) NORTH CAROLINA Asheville UU Church of Asheville (WEL) Chapel Hill Church of the Reconciliation (ML) Olin T. Binkley Memorial Baptist (W&A) United Church (ONA) Charlotte Holy Covenant UCC (ONA) Holy Trinity Lutheran (RIC) UU Church of Charlotte (WEL) Durham Eno River UU Fellowship (WEL) Pilgrim UCC (ONA) Greensboro UU Church of Greensboro Hillsborough Hillsborough UCC (ONA) Raleigh Community UCC (ONA) North Raleigh United Church (ONA/ncs) Pullen Memorial Baptist (W&A) UU Fellowship of Raleigh Wilmington Church of the Servant (INT) UU Fellowship (WEL) Winston-Salem Parkway UCC (ONA) UU Fellowship (WEL) NORTH DAKOTA Fargo Fargo-Moorhead UU Church (WEL) St. Mark’s Lutheran (RIC) OHIO Akron UU Church of Akron (WEL) Brecksville United Church of Christ (ONA) Chesterland Community Church (ONA) Chillicothe Orchard Hill UCC (ONA) Cincinnati Church of Our Savior (INT) Clifton UMC (RC) Mt. Auburn Presbyterian (ML) Saint John’s Unitarian Church (WEL) Cleveland Archwood UCC (ONA) Euclid Ave. Congregational UCC (ONA) Pilgrim Congregational UCC (ONA) Simpson UMC (RC) Trinity Cathedral (INT) Trinity UCC (ONA) UU of Cleveland (Cleveland Hts) (WEL) West Shore UU (WEL) Zion UCC (ONA) Cleveland Heights Church of the Redeemer (RC) Hope Lutheran (RIC) Noble Road Presbyterian (ML) Columbus Calvary Lutheran (RIC) First English Lutheran (RIC) First Unitarian Universalist (WEL) North Congregational UCC (ONA) Redeemer Lutheran (RIC) St. Mark Lutheran (RIC) Dayton Congregation for Reconciliation (ONA) Cross Creek Community (ONA) Faith UCC (ONA) Miami Valley Unitarian Fellowship (WEL) Delaware Delaware UU Fellowship (WEL) Granville First Baptist (W&A) Lakewood Cove UMC (RC) Liberation UCC (ONA) Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Lorain First Cong. Church, UCC (ONA) Marietta First UU Church (WEL) Norton Grace UCC (ONA) Oberlin First Church in Oberlin (ONA) Sandusky UU Fellowship of Erie Cty (WEL) Shaker Heights First Unitarian of Cleveland (WEL) Sheffield Lake United Church of Christ (ONA) Strongsville Southwest UU Church (WEL) Toledo Central UMC (RC) St. Lucas Lutheran (RIC) OKLAHOMA Oklahoma City Church of the Open Arms, UCC (ONA) Epworth UMC (RC) First Unitarian Church of Okla.City (WEL) Mayflower Cong. Ch., UCC (ONA) St. Andrew’s Presbyterian (ML) Tulsa College Hill Presbyterian (ML) Community of Hope, UCC (ONA) Community UU Congregation (WEL) Fellowship Congregational, UCC (ONA) OREGON Ashland The Rogue Valley UU Fellowship (WEL) United Church of Christ, Cong. (ONA) Beavercreek Beavercreek UCC (ONA) Beaverton Southminster Presbyterian (ML) Bend First Presbyterian (ML) UU Fellowship of Central Oregon (WEL) Corvallis First Congregational Church (ONA) First UMC (RC) Grace Lutheran (RIC) Estacada Estacada UMC (RC) Eugene First Congregational, UCC (ONA) Unitarian of Eugene & Lane Co. (WEL) Forest Grove Forest Grove UCC (ONA) Gresham Eastrose Fellowship UU (WEL) Zion UCC (ONA) Hillsboro First Congregational, UCC (ONA) Hubbard Hubbard UCC (ONA) Klamath Falls Klamath Falls Cong. UCC (ONA) Lake Oswego Lake Oswego UCC (ONA) Milwaukie Clackamus UCC (ONA) Kairos-Milwaukie UCC (ONA) Portland Ainsworth UCC (ONA) Bridgeport Community Church (ONA/ncs) First Congregational (ONA) First UMC (RC) Metanoia Peace Community (RC) Peace Church of the Brethren (SCN) St. James Lutheran (RIC) St. Mark Presbyterian (ML) Trinity Cathedral (INT) University Park UMC (RC) Waverly Heights Cong., UCC (ONA) Salem First Congregational UCC (ONA) First Unitarian Society (WEL) Morningside UMC (RC) Springfield Church of the Brethren (SCN) Wilsonvillle Meridian UCC (ONA) Winter 2002 19 PENNSYLVANIA Allentown Muhlenberg College Chapel (RIC) St. John Lutheran (RIC) Bethlehem Trinity Episcopal (INT) Devon Main Line Unitarian (WEL) Drexel Hill Collenbrook United Church (ONA) Drexel Hill UMC (RC) Harrisburg Unitarian Church (WEL) Lansdale Trinity Lutheran (RIC) Levittown United Christian Church (O&A, ONA) Lewisburg Beaver Memorial UMC (RC) Norristown Olivet-Schwenkfelder UCC (ONA) Philadelphia Calvary UMC (RC) First UMC of Germantown (RC) Germantown Mennonite Church (SCN) Holy Communion Lutheran (RIC) Holy Trinity Church (INT) Old First Reformed (ONA) St. Michael’s Lutheran (RIC) Tabernacle United (ML, ONA) Unitarian Society of Germantown (WEL) Univ. Lutheran of the Incarnation (RIC) Pittsburgh First Unitarian (WEL) Sixth Presbyterian (ML) St. Andrew Lutheran (RIC) Reading Trinity Lutheran (RIC) State College Univ. Baptist & Brethren (SCN, W&A) Smithton Thomas UU Church (WEL) State College UU Fellowship of Centre County (WEL) Upper Darby Christ Lutheran (RIC) Wayne Central Baptist (W&A) York UU Congregation of York (WEL) RHODE ISLAND East Greenwich Westminster Unitarian (WEL) Newport Newport Congregational (ONA) North Providence St. James Church Pawtucket Park Place Cong. UCC (ONA) Providence Beneficent Cong. Church (ONA) Mathewson Street UMC (RC) SOUTH CAROLINA Charleston Circular Congregational (ONA) Columbia Gethsemane Lutheran (RIC) SOUTH DAKOTA Erwin Erwin UCC (ONA) TENNESSEE Chattanooga Christ Church–Episcopal (INT) Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Knoxville Ch.of St. Michael and All Angels (INT) Tennessee Valley UU (WEL) Memphis Calvary Church (INT) First Congregational UCC (ONA) Nashville Brookmeade Congregational UCC (ONA) Edgehill UMC (RC) First UU Church (WEL) Hobson UMC (RC) St. David’s Episcopal (INT) TEXAS Austin First English Lutheran (RIC) First UU Church (WEL) St. Andrews Presbyterian (ML) St. George’s Episcopal Church (O) Trinity UMC (RC) College Station Friends Congregational (ONA) St. Francis’ Episcopal Church (O) UU Fellowship of Brazos Valley (WEL) Corpus Christi St. Paul UCC (ONA) Dallas Bethany Presbyterian (ML) First Community Church (ONA) First Unitarian (WEL) Midway Hills Christian (O&A) Northaven UMC (RC) El Paso St. Timothy Lutheran (RIC) Fort Worth Angel of Hope Christian Church (O&A) St. Matthew’s Lutheran (RIC) Garland Ascension Lutheran (RIC) Houston Bering Memorial UMC (RC) Comm. of the Reconciling Servant (ML) Community of the Servant-Savior (ML) Covenant Baptist (W&A) Faith Covenant (ML, ONA) First Congregational (ONA) First UU Church of Houston (WEL) Grace Evangelical Lutheran (RIC) St. Stephen’s Episcopal Church (O) Lubbock St. John’s UMC (RC) Mesquite St. Stephen UMC (RC) Plano Community UU Church (WEL) San Antonio Spirit of Life (RIC) UTAH Midvale St. James Episcopal (INT) Ogden UU Church of Ogden (WEL) Salt Lake City All Saints Church (INT) First Unitarian Church (WEL) Holladay UCC (ONA) Mount Tabor Lutheran (RIC) South Valley UU Society (WEL) VERMONT Bennington Second Congregational (ONA) Burlington Christ Presbyterian (ML) College Street Congregational (ONA) First UU Society of Burlington (WEL) Middlebury Champlain Valley UU Society (WEL) Congregational UCC (ONA) Putney United Church (ONA) Rutland Rutland UMC (RC) Saxton’s River Christ’s Church (ONA) Thetford First Congregational Church (ONA) Westminster West Congregational Church (ONA) VIRGINIA Alexandria Hope UCC (ONA) Mount Vernon Unitarian (WEL) Peace Lutheran (RIC) Annandale Little River UCC (ONA) Arlington Clarendon Presbyterian (ML) Rock Spring Cong. UCC (ONA) Unitarian Church (WEL) Burke Accotink UU Church Centreville Wellspring UCC (ONA) Charlottesville Sojourners UCC (ONA) Harrisonburg Sanctuary UCC (ONA) Manassas Bull Run UU (WEL) Oakton A Prayer for Gay People in the Church Malcolm Boyd We stand inside your church, Jesus. Long ago we realized that we must regard the lilies of the field, putting our trust in you. Pressured to hide our identities and gifts, we serve you with an unyielding love. Taught that we should feel self-loathing, nevertheless we look into your face and laugh with grateful joy, Jesus. Victims of a long and bitter persecution, we assert an unshakable faith in your holy justice. Our “sin” and “damnation” were drummed into us as thoroughly as if we were mere sheet metal. We were carefully taught to apologize for our creation, although it was in your image. We learned what it means to be misunderstood, perceived as alien, even sometimes demonized and hated. We also know your grace and love as our savior. We thank you for sharing human life with us, dying for us on the cross, and blessing us with holy baptism and holy eucharist. We are alive and well and stand inside your church, Jesus. Bless us to your continued service. Amen. Malcolm Boyd, an Episcopal priest since 1955, is the author of Gay Priest and Take Off the Masks. Augsburg Fortress Press has recently published his Running With Jesus: The Prayers of Malcolm Boyd. 20 Open Hands I was a teenage homophobe. But like Michael Landon’s teenage werewolf before me, I became, in time, utterly “transformed.” Indeed, I performed an about-face on the morality of sexual orientation before my teen years ended—all by the grace of God. This story begins in the mid-1960s, when my parents enrolled me in kindergarten a year early. I’d tested bright enough, so in I went. No one had bothered, however, to test for social maturity: my classmates had far more interactive experience than I did, and it showed. In addition, though I’m just shy of 6’3” today, back then—as an almost-fouryear- old amongst almost-five-year-olds—I was the shortest kid in class. As a small, smart, socially awkward boy, I was taunted and teased, bullied and berated. I went on to spend the entirety of my childhood with the self-same set of classmates, all the way through high school graduation. If there was a silver lining to the abuse I endured, I suppose it lay in my developing in the process an empathy for victims, an intolerance for intolerance—and a hunger for justice. My budding progressivism, however, had its limits. I remember walking home from high school one day with my classmate, Carol, and her older sister, Janet, and shaking my head at their “crazy talk”—namely, that “the world would be a better place if everyone were bisexual.” In retrospect, these two teenage girls spoke with a prophetic voice: one that I, as yet, was unready to hear. By my freshman year of college in 1980 (my chance, at last, to fly the coop and reinvent myself amongst new people) progressivism was embedded in my very soul. Four years earlier, at 14, I had volunteered for the presidential campaign of environmentalist Congressman Mo Udall, and now I was campus rep for the Carter-Mondale re-election effort. I was pro-feminist, pro-workers’ rights and an outspoken critic of racism wherever I found it. Yet I still believed that homosexuality was wrong. God help me, I laughed at and even told the occasional anti-gay joke. The contradiction inherent in my so doing was lost on me. In discussions with Craig and Ken, a pair of other (indeed, more-) liberal-minded dorm-mates who, like Carol and Janet before, took it upon themselves to challenge my prejudice, I opined that same-sex romance was “unnatural,” as evidenced by the fact that it didn’t lead to reproduction. “Man,” Craig would say, “that’s some bad ideology.” (Though in retrospect, my stance may have been based primarily in a frustrated virgin’s envy toward anyone who was, in fact, getting some.) One day toward the end of the school year, I was alone in my room, studying the final chapter of my psychopathology text book. The American Psychiatric Association, I read, had overturned its prior categorization of homosexuality as a mental illness and now described it as a viable alternate “lifestyle.” I found this fact interesting, though not earthshattering. No, what got my attention was the black-andwhite photo accompanying that section. I can see it as clearly today, in my mind’s eye, as I saw it then before me: two middle-aged men, each with an arm around the other’s shoulder, staring directly into the camera with eyes that bespoke a lifetime of oppression—and an absolute determination, in spite of it all, to be who they were. It was a kairos moment. The Divine spoke to me through the men in that picture, and the message was a question: “Well, Paul. Who’s the bully now?” Or in other words, words once posed of another Paul: “Why do you persecute me?” I sat there transfixed, equal parts moved and ashamed. Then, finally, I felt grateful. After a while I got up and walked over to the room across the hall. “Hey, Craig,” I said. “About all that ‘gay stuff’ you and Ken and me were discussing? Um. . .you were right. I was wrong. Thanks.” They say there’s nothing like the faith of a convert. And indeed, for 22 years now, the struggle for Queer inclusion has been a core component of—and an enriching, inspiring force within—this straight man’s life. I’d like to take this opportunity to thank Craig and Ken for their well-timed challenge, as well as to let Carol and Janet know that the protagonist of my first novel, to be published later this year, is a bisexual woman who shares their views! While I’m at it, perhaps I should try to track down the men in that photo, or their families, and let them know the impact their mere image had on one teenage boy: a boy whose friends had laid the foundation for growth, and whose God then provided it. Paul McComas, here wearing a second- hand U.S. Border Patrol jacket, “crossed the border” into inclusion in 1980, the year this picture was taken. Paul is a writing instructor whose short-story book, Twenty Questions (1998, Fithian Press), is in its second printing and whose novel, Unplugged— excerpted twice in Open Hands—will be published by John Daniel & Company this September. Paul and his wife Chris, a student at Garrett Evangelical Theological Seminary, are members of Wheadon UMC, a Reconciling congregation in Evanston, Illinois. Paul recently joined the editorial board of Open Hands. My Turning Point Paul McComas We welcome 800-word submissions to “My Turning Point,” a regular feature of Open Hands told in first person about how you changed your mind about lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender people. Please include a snapshot of yourself and a brief self-description. Winter 2002 21 Fairfax Unitarian (WEL) Reston Washington Plaza Baptist (W&A) Roanoke Unitarian Universalist (WEL) Virginia Beach Christian Church Uniting (ONA, SCN) Winchester UU of the Shenandoah Valley (WEL) WASHINGTON Bellevue Eastgate Congregational UCC (ONA) First Congregational, UCC (ONA) First UMC (RC) Bellingham First Cong. of Bellingham (ONA) Bremerton Kitsap UU Fellowship (WEL) Carnation Tolt Congregational, UCC (ONA) Chelan Fullness of God Lutheran (RIC) Chewelah Chewelah UCC (ONA) Edmonds Edmonds UU (WEL) Ellensburg First UMC (RC) Everett First Congregational (ONA) Federal Way Wayside UCC (ONA) Kirkland Holy Spirit Lutheran (RIC) Kirkland Congregational, UCC (ONA) Leavenworth Faith Lutheran (RIC) Marysville Evergreen UU Fellowship (WEL) Medical Lake Shalom UCC (ONA) Mountlake Terrace Terrace View Presbyterian (ML) Olympia Comm. for Interfaith Celebration (ONA) Olympia UU Congregation (WEL) Pullman Community Congregational UCC (ONA) Reston Washington Plaza Baptist (W&A) Richland Shalom UCC (ONA) Sammamish Sammamish Cong. UCC (ONA) Seattle Alki Cong. UCC (ONA) Bethany UCC (ONA/ncs) Broadview Community UCC (ONA) Central Lutheran (RIC) Fauntleroy UCC (ONA) Findlay Street Christian (O&A) First Baptist (W&A) First Christian Church of Seattle (O&A) Gethsemane Lutheran (RIC) Gift of Grace Lutheran (RIC) Immanuel Lutheran (RIC) Keystone Cong. UCC (ONA) Magnolia UCC (ONA) Normandy Park Cong. UCC (ONA) Pilgrim Congregational (ONA) Plymouth Congregational (ONA) Prospect UCC Cong. (ONA) Ravenna UMC (RC) Richmond Beach Cong. UCC (ONA) Trinity UMC (RC) St. Paul’s UCC (ONA) University Baptist (W&A) University Christian (O&A) University Congregational (ONA) University Temple UMC (RC) Wallingford UMC (RC) Spokane Unitarian Church (WEL) Suquamish Community Congregational (ONA) Tacoma First UMC of Tacoma (RC) Resurrection Lutheran (RIC) Vancouver East Vancouver UMC (RC) First Congregational UCC (ONA) Walla Walla First Congregational Church White Salmon Bethel Cong., UCC (ONA) Woodinville Northshore UCC WEST VIRGINIA Huntington First Congregational (ONA) Morgantown UU Fellowship of Morgantown (WEL) Wheeling UU Congregation (WEL) WISCONSIN Brown Deer Brown Deer UCC (ONA) Delavan Delavan UMC (RC) Eau Claire University Lutheran (RIC) Green Bay Union Cong. UCC (ONA) Kenosha Bradford Comm. Church UU (WEL) Madison Advent Lutheran (RIC) Community of Hope UCC (ONA) First Baptist (W&A) First Congregational UCC (ONA) First Unitarian Society (WEL) James Reeb UU Congregation (WEL) Lake Edge Lutheran (RIC) Lake Edge UCC (ONA) Orchard Ridge UCC (ONA) Prairie UU Society Plymouth Congregational UCC (ONA) St. Francis House (INT) University UMC (RC) Milwaukee Broken Walls Christian Comm. (W&A) Cross Lutheran (RIC) Incarnation Lutheran (RIC) Lake Park Lutheran (RIC) Pentecost Lutheran (RIC) Plymouth UCC (ONA) Reformation Lutheran (RIC) St. Paul’s Lutheran (RIC) Village Church, Lutheran (RIC) Racine Olympia Brown UU Church (WEL) Our Savior’s Lutheran (RIC) Sheboygan Wesley UMC (RC) Sturgeon Bay Hope UCC (ONA) Waukesha Christ the Servant Lutheran (RIC) Maple Avenue Mennonite (SCN) Wauwatosa Mt. Zion Lutheran (RIC) CAMPUS MINISTRIES LCM, LSC, LSM=Lutheran Campus Ministry, Student Center, Student Movement UCM=United Campus Ministry UMSF=United Methodist Student Fellowship CANADA MANITOBA Univ. Of Manitoba, Winnipeg (AM) SASKATCHEWAN LSC, LSM, Saskatoon (RIC) UNITED STATES ARKANSAS St. Martin’s Ctr, Fayetteville (INT) CALIFORNIA BRIM. Berkeley (O&A) Cal-Aggie Christian House, UC-Davis (RC) UCM, UC, Riverside (RC) UCM, USC, Los Angeles (RC) Wesley Fdn., UC-Berkeley (RC) Wesley Fdn., UC-Santa Barbara (RC) Wesley Fdn., UCLA, Los Angeles (RC) COLORADO LCM-Co.State Univ., Ft. Collins (RIC) LCM, CU-Boulder (RIC) Wesley Foundation, U. of Denver (RC) DELAWARE Wesley Fdn., UD, Newark (RC) DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UMSF, American U. (RC) ILLINOIS Agape House, U. of Illinois, Chicago (RC) Ill. Disciples Fdn., UI, Champaign (O&A) UMSF, Ill. Wesleyan, Bloomington (RC) UCM, No. Illinois, DeKalb (RC, ONA) U. Christ. Min., Northwestern, Evanston (RC) INDIANA LCM, IU, Bloomington (RIC) IOWA LCM, UI, Iowa City (RIC) Stud. Cong., Luther Coll., Decorah (RIC) KANSAS Episc./Luth. Ctr, U. of KS, Lawrence (RIC) LCM, KSU, Manhattan (RIC) United Methodist CM, UK, Lawrence (RC) KENTUCKY Louisville Presb. Theo. Seminary (ML Chap.) MARYLAND U. of Md. Episc. CM, College Park (INT) MICHIGAN Guild House, UM, Ann Arbor (O&A, ONA) Wesley Fdn., Cen. MI U., Mt. Pleasant (RC) Wesley Fdn., U. of Michigan, Ann Arbor (RC) MINNESOTA Augsburg Coll. LCM, Minneapolis (RIC) Episc. Ctr, Minneapolis (INT) LCM in Minneapolis (RIC) Stud. Cong., St. Olaf, Northfield (RIC) MONTANA U. of Montana LCM, Missoula (RIC) NEBRASKA St. Mark’s on Campus, Lincoln (INT) NORTH DAKOTA Univ. Lutheran Center, NDSU, Fargo (RIC) OHIO UCM, OU, Athens (O&A, RC, W&A, ONA) OREGON LCM in Portland (RIC) Wesley Fdn., UO, Eugene (RC) PENNSYLVANIA Christ Chapel, Gettysburg College, Gettysburg (RIC) LSC-LCM, Kutztown U, Kutztown (RIC) TENNESSEE Wesley Fdn., Vanderbilt, Nashville (RC) TEXAS LCM, UT, Austin (RIC) VIRGINIA Campus Christian Community, MWC, Fredericksburg (RC, RIC) WASHINGTON Common Min., Wash. State U.,Pullman (RC) LCM, WWU, Bellingham (RIC) Wesley Club, UW, Seattle (RC) UM Fellowship, UPS, Puget Sound (RC) WISCONSIN LCM, UW, LaCrosse (RIC) LCM, Metro Milwaukee(RIC) LCM, UW-Stout, Menomonie (RIC) St. Francis House, Madison (INT) Wesley Fdn., U. of Wisconsin, Madison (RC) JUDICATORIES which have passed welcoming resolutions Conferences (ONA) California/Nevada N. Michigan California/Nevada S. Minnesota Central Atlantic New Hampshire Central Pacific New York Connecticut Ohio Massachusetts Rocky Mountain Conferences (RC) California-Nevada Oregon-Idaho New York Troy Northern Illinois Wisconsin Regions (O&A) Northern California/Nevada Synods (ML) Synod of the Northeast Synods, ELCA (RIC) Delaware-Maryland Pacifica Eastern North Dakota Rocky Mountain Eastern Wash.-Idaho Sierra-Pacific Greater Milwaukee Southeastern Metro Chicago Southeast MI Metro New York Southeast PA Metro Wash., D.C. Southwest CA Minneapolis Area Southwestern TX New England St. Paul (MN) Area Northeast Pennsylvania Upstate New York NATIONAL MINISTRIES which have passed welcoming resolutions Disciples Justice Action Network (O&A) Disciples Peace Fellowship (O&A) Gen’l Commission on Christian Unity & Interreligious Concerns (RC) Lutheran Student Movement—USA (RIC) Lutheran Volunteer Corps (RIC) Methodist Fed. for Social Action (RC) Urban Servants Corps (RIC) INTERNATIONAL MINISTRIES Baptist Peace Fell. of North America (W&A) 22 Open Hands PULL-OUT SECTION ➚ ➚ ❑ Send me Open Hands each quarter ($20/year; outside U.S.A. @ $25). ❑ Send Open Hands gift subscription(s) to name(s) attached. Enclosed is my payment of $ _______ OR Charge $ _____________ to my VISA MASTERCARD (Circle one) # __________________________________________ Expiration _____/_____. Name on Card ____________________________________________________ Signature ________________________________________________________ My Name ________________________________________________________ Address _________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip _____________________________________________________ Daytime Phone (______) _____________________ Local Church _____________________________________________________ Denomination _____________________________________________________ Send to: Open Hands, 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 www.RMNetwork.org/openhands/index.html Shaping An Inclusive Church Quarterly magazine of Welcoming congregations in the U.S. and Canada Skinner House Books ISBN 1-5896-409-6 At bookstores or call 800-215-9076. On the web: www.uua.org “Andrew’s story about coming out as a bisexual is embedded in a much broader tale of ‘coming out’ as a complete human being. Ultimately, Swinging On The Garden Gate…demonstrates the sweet liberation, the immersion in the sacred that comes to us when we find the courage to answer God’s call without shame, clothed only in the naked reality of who we are.” —Richard Broderick, The St. Paul Pioneer Press Swinging on the Garden Gate A Spiritual Memoir by Elizabeth Andrew Winter 2002 23 This time seven women step to the table with overflowing baskets. All types of breads and goblets of wine. The words spoken earlier by the lone priest are now said by everyone. Each of the seven women leaders folds the bread and wine to her body. “This is my body—this is my blood.” They put the bread and wine on the table and turn to each other. Touching an arm or shoulder, they say, “this is my body—this is my blood.” Now all present turn to their neighbors and take a hand or touch a shoulder “This is my body— this is my blood.” Music plays. The bread and wine is passed around the congregation. These words, “this is my body—this is my blood” known as the “words of institution” are the central ritual of the traditional Roman Catholic mass. A Critical Mass honors this tradition and opens the moment into an embodied theology that celebrates not sacrifice, not blood violently spilled, but rather the blood of our bodies that holds our relationship—not a thin insubstantial wafer but a luscious hunk of bread, and a hearty drink of wine. The women and men reach out to each other, embracing one another with “this is body—this is my blood.” With this act, a visceral web of life is enacted—our participation in the Divine. A Critical Mass enacts the traditional mass, and deconstructs it with a feminist liturgy that offers embodied prayer, gestures, silence, and the use of the arts to evoke multiple points of view, inclusive language, a celebration of the body and new visions of Divinity. A Critical Mass: Women Celebrating Eucharist is a prayerfilled vision of the future. It is the “not yet” of the Roman Catholic Church calling forth inclusivity instead of elitism, grassroots shared power instead of hierarchy. A Critical Mass is a ritual act that is enacting the future. It is an act of ecclesial disobedience that models a renewed church and a vital liberative theology. A traditional symbol of the mass is the altar which represents sacrifice. At a Critical Mass, the altar becomes a round welcome table, where all are embraced and find nourishment. And certainly the women and men who are this community do not all think alike. There are multiple points of view for example about the meaning of our bread and wine. These are held in tension and find expression in the Rue continued from page 10 liturgy—a liturgy that has a basic feminist inclusive framework that allows each mass to be similar but also creatively different. A Critical Mass has grown over four years of celebration into a community of women and men that call themselves church. This community finds their authority in both Roman Catholic tradition and the lives of women and all those on the margins of the church. We believe as a community of Roman Catholic people that in the mass we celebrate, Jesus is truly present, as he is truly present whenever we gather for prayer, feed the hungry and clothe the naked, mourn with those who suffer, work for justice and peace, and celebrate, heal and reconcile in Jesus’ name. To paraphrase a biblical idea: For God so loved the Roman Catholic Church that she gave the church A Critical Mass: Women Celebrating Eucharist and other inclusive eucharistic movements, not to condemn the church, but that the church might be saved through them! Please visit our website: www.acm-oakland.org or email us at: critmasswomeneucharist@pacbell.net Victoria Rue, Ph.D. teaches in the Religious Studies Department of St. Lawrence University in Canton, New York. Her beloved partner of 13 years, Kathryn Poethig, teaches in the Global Studies Department of the same university. Victoria is a theater writer, director, and feminist theologian. She is the co-founder of “A Critical Mass: Women Celebrating Eucharist.” Her most recent play is “Like Heaven” written in collaboration with a Vietnamese-American theater company San Khau Viet CALI in San Jose, California. True Photo 24 Open Hands “You may ask, ‘How did this tradition get started?’ I’ll tell you. I don’t know! But it’s a tradition. Because of our traditions, everyone here knows who he is and what God expects him to do.” So declares Tevye in the musical Fiddler on the Roof. He is a simple, poor man, eking out a living with his wife Golde, wondering how will he ever get his five daughters married, with no money, no dowry, no family position. Why are people attracted to each other? Have you ever wondered about that yearning we have for the one we love, our special “soul-mate”? Why do people marry? How did this tradition get started? Long ago people told stories to explain the strong attractions between lovers. Ancient Greek myths tell of a male being separated into two males, a female being separated into two females, and an androgynous being separated into a male and a female. From the original human being, the Genesis story suggests, the Lord God made companions: male and female. These stories seek to explain strong forces that draw lovers together for companionship, to feel whole again. [Boswell, 58- 59, ref. Plato, Symposium. This and future Boswell references are to John Boswell’s Same Sex Marriages in Pre- Modern Europe (Villard Books, 1994)] There is a romantic jewelry set consisting of a single heart cut into two jagged pieces. Each person wears half a heart, and when they are together the pieces match, and form a whole. Same idea. Romantic, satisfying, and it fits. What’s behind a traditional marriage? In ancient times all human relationships were defined by systems of domination and subordination. Women were considered sexual property. Men had free sexual use of any people under their political or economic domination. Women were abducted, conquered, bought, and sold. A man’s sexual access was limited only by the property rights of another man of equal or superior status. Many forms of coupling (unions or marriages, if you will) were developed to define boundaries of property ownership, to provide support for women and children, and to establish inheritance. For childless couples adoption set inheritance rights. In early marriage rituals a woman was adopted into her husband’s family, changing her surname to his family name. The Biblical witnesses affirm mutually- committed loving relationships, but never condemn loving committed relationships between people of the same gender. There is no single approved form of marriage specified in the Bible. Many traditional biblical models of marriage seem strange to us today: Abraham married to Sarah also had a concubine Hagar; Jacob married Leah and also married her sister Rachel; Esau had at least three wives; David had at least eight wives; Gideon had many wives and one concubine; Rehoboam had eighteen wives and sixty concubines; and Solomon had more than 700 wives and 300 concubines. “Nothing in the ancient world quite corresponds to the idea of a permanent, exclusive union of social equals, freely chosen by themselves to fulfill both their emotional needs and imposing equal obligations of fidelity on both partners.” [Boswell, p. 38.] In any ancient city, most people were not married at all. Slaves were forbid- Tr aditional Marriages Welcoming God’s Love Rick Mawson and Warren Kreml Rachel & Jennifer Middle Collegiate Dutch Reform Church New York City - October 1998 Winter 2002 25 den to marry. Marriage was for the upper class and was concerned first and foremost with property rights. For these reasons sometimes children as young as six were married. Political marriages occurred between ruling houses where the people never lived together. For most of recorded history, marriage matches were traditionally property negotiations between families, not the couples. The value of a woman was first in her virginity before marriage (to keep blood lines pure), her ability to provide male children as heirs, and of course her dowry and social class. Engagement negotiations preceded the wedding ceremony and were symbolized by an engagement ring. Ancients began marriage with property concerns, moved to raising children, then possibly love. Moderns begin marriage with love as a requirement, then possibly to children, and finally concerns over property, especially at times of divorce or death. According to tradition, Jesus’ first miracle was at a wedding in Cana. He told stories of wedding feasts, of brides and grooms. So, we were surprised to find out that Christians discouraged marriages for more than 500 years after the crucifixion. Marriage, or sexual expression within marriage, were strongly discouraged in favor of celibacy! Celibacy was a “purer form of Christian devotion.” (Read again the passage from 1 Corinthians 7.) Not until 1200 years into the Christian era were “traditional” Christian marriage ceremonies performed in churches, around the altars, and recognized as sacramental. By then, more than half of the whole of Christian history as we know it had already passed! Covenants and Contracts Our whole society has always had an investment in supporting the development of long-term, stable family relationships. To that end, over the centuries, many traditions, rituals and laws have developed around the process of establishing new families. These principles have helped families by providing a healthy, supportive social structure in which they can thrive. Couple’s Covenant When two people get to know each other and decide to spend the rest of their lives together, they enter into an honor-bound covenant with one another and exchange private vows with one another. Sometimes they say, “We are married in our hearts, and we don’t need a piece of paper to tell us that.” Many live together for many years based upon this private covenant of the heart. Wedding Covenant When a couple decides to share their honor-bound covenant vows with their family and friends, that is the time for a wedding. Many time-honored traditions come into play in a wedding, giving a place for families of origin and friends to gather to hear the vows exchanged by the couple, and to add their own covenants of support for the new family. Within a religious community setting, there are prayers of thanksgiving to God for the love that is shared, asking for God’s blessing and support of the new family. Among family and friends a wedding marks the beginning of a marriage, sometimes referred to as a Holy Union. Weddings become very important occasions for community validation of the couple’s relationship. This validation is just as important for gay and lesbian couples. Weddings provide sustaining memories in more stressful times. Marriage Contract When a couple gets a marriage license from the state, signs it, makes marriage vows before an official recognized by the state, and has those vows witnessed in writing, then the couple enters into a marriage contract. (The clergy in a religious wedding ceremony perform dual roles as representative of the religious community and also as an official of the state.) Once a couple enters into a contract of marriage, 1100 or more laws apply to their relationship providing legal privileges, obligations, and protections to each of them and any children they may have. These provisions of marriage laws are only available to male-female couples, and so far have been withheld from same-gender couples. In the U.S., only Vermont, through civil union contracts, addresses some of that inequity for samegender couples in a limited way. Frequently male-female couples, after the loss of a previous spouse, enter into private honor-bound covenants of the heart with a new person, then choose to have weddings to allow family and friends to participate in their marriage vows. Some couples choose to not enter into a legal contract of marriage because of the loss of retirement benefits or for other reasons. Same-gender couples do not have that option yet. Kenneth & Mark Central Congregational Church, UCC Jamaica Plains, Massachusetts June 21, 1997 26 Open Hands Of course Christians did marry, common- law fashion, simply by living together and declaring their marriage to the community. Others followed the ritual pattern of the pagan Roman civil ceremonies, the model we now consider to be a traditional Christian wedding ceremony. Over the years the pagan elements have been Christianized. The Traditional Wedding In such a wedding, the community of family and friends gathers to witness the public wedding vows. Private commitments are made public. Traditional wedding costumes, flower-decorated settings, and music mark these events as special. Ceremonial candles evoke God’s presence, marking a solemn occasion. On the arm of her father, the bride walks down the aisle to join the groom at the altar. There the property exchange will be made. The priest describes marriage as a fulfillment of God’s will and announces that “we are here to witness and bless marriage vows.” He reads from the Bible. The address to the couple warns them to take their vows with sober seriousness, and asks if anyone objects to this marriage. The priest asks each member of the couple for their consent to this marriage. And they give it. (It used to be that only the man gave consent. The woman had no say in the matter. Mutual consent was not common until the twelfth century.) The father gives the bride to the groom. Sometimes the dowry was also transferred at this point. (Today, the bride’s family traditionally pays for the wedding.) The priest joins the couple’s right hands (the most universal symbol of marriage throughout the ages, coming from the Roman tradition of shaking hands to confirm a contract.) Each makes their vows to the other, holding right hands, often placed upon a Bible. The priest blesses the wedding rings which are exchanged as outward and visible signs of the inward vows they have made to each other. (Rings, of course, are signs of ownership: she’s married and therefore off limits. Most recently also applied to men.) In prayer, the priest blesses the marriage by requesting peace, growth in Tower of Congregations and Committed Hearts Rick Mawson Our church’s Open and Affirming Committee was planning for the 2001 Gay Pride Parade and Celebration in Santa Rosa, California. Having participated since 1996, we identified a problem. Only the gays, lesbians, and their families who are already involved in a church had approached our booth in previous years at the Celebration, held on our local junior college campus. Others walked by, seeing our church banner, apparently curious about what we were doing there, but unwilling to approach our booth. We asked ourselves, what could we do to make contact easier? About 10,000 GLBT people were expected, and we wanted to do something that would attract attention and share the good news of what is happening across the country in the Welcoming movement. Searching the internet, looking at the websites of the Welcoming programs, we found the names of 885 welcoming and affirming congregations! We decided to list all of their names in rainbow colors on a barbershop- pole rotating tower. Using three stacked painted cardboard shipping barrels, mounted on a rotating platform powered by a wheelchair motor, we made a ten-foot tall display—big enough to be seen from across the campus. Then we found the list of 1500 Welcoming congregations listed in Open Hands, and also become aware that there were 300 Metropolitan Community Churches. So on a sign circling with the tower we printed “Now More Than 1,800 Congregations Welcome and Affirm GLBT Persons.” Since then we have become aware of 200 Reform Jewish congregations that also welcome gays and lesbians. To demonstrate the “affirming” part of the “welcoming and affirming,” we created a large mobile stretching out above the Tower of Congregations with rainbow-colored hearts bearing photos of 70 couples rotating with the tower. We sent out e-mails to 500 congregations requesting wedding pictures of samegender couples and their basic information. The pictures were included in a booklet entitled “It’s Happening Everywhere” to be sent to the couples as well as handed out at the Gay Pride Celebration. Many congregations wrote back saying that they had voted to be Open and Affirming or Welcoming, but had regretfully never had a service of Holy Union. When the pictures did come in, it became a time of tearful joy. We could hardly wait to get the mail each day. Precious people were sharing a personal part of themselves with some folks they did not know from a little town called Santa Rosa. On June 10th, our church, First Congregational UCC in Santa Rosa, had a service of blessing as the marchers went to City Hall to begin the Gay Pride Parade. We unfurled our church banner attached to a pole that we would carry as we marched. Thousands lined the parade route, waving to us, whistling, smiling, giving us a thumbs up. Many took our brochures about our congregation and our Open and Affirming policies. At the Celebration that followed, The Tower of Congregations and Committed Hearts attracted many hand-holding couples. Many we had never seen before stopped to read the names of the churches and to look at the pictures of the couples. Many spoke with us. We asked how long they had been together and their answers ranged from 2 to 27 years. We asked if they had ever had a wedding or blessing service. Only a few couples said, “Yes,” and spoke about it in detail. Most said, “No,” but would like to some day. One of the couples who had shared their picture with us for our project had told us that what we were doing was important because it will help other couples envision what is possible for them. It certainly helped us all envision what is possible for the church! Winter 2002 27 A CLARIFICATION OF POLICY regarding the blessing of covenant commitments between people of the same gender within the worship life of our faith community: WHEREAS First Congregational United Church of Christ, after faithful consideration and prayer, became an Open and Affirming Church by congregational vote November 19, 1995, making a commitment to openly celebrate the diversity of its membership: to welcome and affirm every person regardless of their race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, age, economic status, and physical or mental abilities into the full life and ministry of the church; and WHEREAS First Congregational United Church of Christ has an established policy regarding the use of church property and the official services of the clergy of the church in the blessing of couples in wedding services or marriage ceremonies; and WHEREAS the Church has historically encouraged couples, who have chosen to commit themselves to each other within life-long covenants of mutual responsibility and love, to marry, and to make their marriage vows to each other in a public affirmation of the sacred within their commitment to one another, in a service of worship with family and friends, seeking the blessings of God and the ongoing support of those who gather to witness and share in their vows; and WHEREAS the blessings of marriage rituals, within the church, become important defining moments in the lives of couples as they recognize the faithfulness of God as the Giver of the love they share, and that God’s Spirit is also a participant in their covenant, offering a sustaining foundation for the family life they have chosen; and WHEREAS a sacred marital blessing serves to validate a couple’s covenantal relationship among family and friends, enabling each one of us to promise to recognize, honor, and support the couple’s commitments, providing sources of encouragement and forgiveness in times of difficulty; and WHEREAS traditionally the clergy of the United Church of Christ perform dual roles while officiating at a marriage ceremony for a heterosexual couple, functioning first as a representative of God and the church, recognizing and giving blessing to the sacred covenant between God and the couple that their vows of commitment will endure; and secondly as an official representative of the State of California for those couples who choose to enter into a legal contract of marriage that is recognized and supported by State law; and WHEREAS the State of California has so far chosen to withhold from couples of the same- gender, the protections provided by law to a married couple consisting of a man and a woman; and WHEREAS First Congregational United Church of Christ is committed to the protection and support of sacred loving covenants made between people of good faith, regardless of gender; BE IT THEREFORE RECOGNIZED that First Congregational United Church of Christ in Santa Rosa, California intends to make it clear in all of its policies and publications that, as far as the faith community of the church is concerned, there shall be no distinction made between offering the blessings of God and the church to heterosexual couples, and the blessings of God and the church to same-gender couples, in public wedding or marriage ceremonies (sometimes referred to as “holy unions”), not withstanding the legal status of those marriages. Adopted April 1, 2001 (Suggested by Rick Mawson.) One Model for Covenant Commitment Blessings Hearts from the Tower of Congregations and Committed Hearts. 28 Open Hands From an 11th century Liturgy of Union Forasmuch as Thou, O Lord and Ruler, art merciful and loving, who didst establish humankind after thine image and likeness, and who didst deem it meet that thy holy apostles Philip and Bartholomew be united, bound one unto the other not by nature but by faith and the spirit. As Thou didst find thy holy martyrs Serge and Bacchus worthy to be united together, bless also these thy servants, (name), and (name), joined together not by the bond of nature but by faith and in the mode of the spirit, granting unto them peace and love and oneness of mind. Cleanse from their hearts every stain and impurity, and vouchsafe unto them to love one other (and let their brotherly union be) without hatred and without scandal all the days of their lives, with the aid of the Mother of God and all thy saints, forasmuch as all glory is thine. [Boswell, 295] mutual love, and sometimes children. He would wrap his stole around their right hands, tying a knot, symbolizing their union. Hence the saying, “they have decided to tie the knot.” He might drape a light cloth over the couple as a blessing symbolizing their new home and family. He pronounces the couple as “man and wife” (“property” theme again)—in our times, “husband and wife” (“union-of-equals” theme), and introduces them to the gathered community. The veil, symbol of virginity, is raised and the bride becomes available to her husband. The couple seals their vows with a kiss. And then they receive communion from a common cup, the bread of the Eucharist as their first meal, asking to be fed by the Spirit, receiving Christ’s presence in their marriage. A benediction is pronounced and the bride and groom lead the procession back out into the world. It is a time of joy, tears and hope. Then the party begins. The wedding banquet is another almost universal part of public marriages. Food, drink, music and dancing. Toasts to happiness, a fruitful marriage and long life. Witnesses sign official marriage documents for the civil authorities and the church. Alfred & Michael Riverside Congregational Church, UCC East Providence, Rhode Island November 22, 1992 Frank & George Plymouth Congregational UCC Coconut Grove, Florida August 2, 1997 Beth & Jenny Quaker Meeting House Woods Hole, Massachusetts October 9, 1993 Marilee & Erin Metropolitan Community Church San Francisco - July 29, 2000 Sarah & Krista Congregation Bet Mishpachah Reform Synagogue Washington, D.C. May 27, 2001 Winter 2002 29 And there is more: as a holdover from when women were stolen from their homes by men, the groom is expected to carry his bride over the threshold of their home. And then the marriage bed. Many marriages are not considered complete until they are “consummated,” as they say. Which brings up the question of technically when does the marriage actually take place? Is it at the time of consummation, first sex, the conquest? Is it at the time of the property exchange? Is it at the time of mutual consent? Is it at the time of signing the marriage contract? Is it when the public vows are taken, or is it when the private vows were made? Is it when the priest pronounces that they are married? Is it when the first male child is born? At different times, each of these criteria has been used to mark the official confirmation of a valid marriage. Our traditions provide treasured guidance for us. Traditions can also carry the baggage of outgrown values. Our prayer is that God will help us discern the difference. The creative tension among the biblical witnesses, our Christian traditions, and the Holy Spirit helps us define who we are, helps us to do what God expects us to do. John Boswell Studies John Boswell, the late professor of history at Yale University, searched ancient manuscripts in London, Paris, Munich, Rome and southern Italy looking for Christian ceremonies blessing marriages. Among liturgies for marriages between men and women he discovered about 100 manuscripts of same-sex “union” (or “marriage”) ceremonies. They go back to the 8th century with references that go back to the 4th century. Dr. Boswell documented in scholarly detail his discoveries in his 1994 book, Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe. We are indebted to him for his revealing work. Boswell discovered that for both same-gender and opposite-gender marriages, the church only blessed the union, and did not create the marriages. Both forms of blessings were based on the Roman secular model. The samegender forms became Christianized earlier than opposite-gender ones and always involved mutual consent. Samegender forms were from earliest times performed at the altar. Same-gender ceremonies and man/woman ceremonies had similar structures. Same-gender liturgies were performed for women as well as men at least from the 12th century on. Their unions, in terms of equality between the partners and mutual consent, closely resembled modern concepts of marriage. The traditional same-gender ceremonies stress spiritual values of love (agape). The traditional dual-gender ceremonies stress children and goods. Dual-gender ceremonies are based on the reproduction model of Adam and Eve, Abraham and Sarah: “Be fruitful and multiply.” The same-gender ceremony is identical to the ceremony for a second marriage, as in remarriage after the death of a prior spouse. It is based on love and companionship rather than procreation, although same-gender couples could adopt children. The secular public revulsion against homosexuals began to spread in the West in the 14th century. By the mid- 18th century, prejudice “crashes down” and people begin to be burned at the stake. According to Boswell, same-gender marriage ceremonies have been used all over the catholic world for 1500 years. In the 17th and 18th centuries the Vatican issued a syllabus, a list of approved ceremonies which included the same-gender marriage liturgies, and those approvals have never been rescinded. Serge and Bacchus Serge and Bacchus were Roman soldiers of high standing in the late third century. They were close to the Roman Emperor. They were Christian men, united in their love for each other in a way similar to other Christian married couples. Those who envied their close ties to the Emperor denounced them as “Christians.” The Emperor became an- “Nothing in the ancient world quite corresponds to the idea of a permanent, exclusive [heterosexual] union of social equals, freely chosen by themselves to fulfill both their emotional needs and imposing equal obligations of fidelity on both partners.” –John Boswell 30 Open Hands gry at this and ordered Serge and Bacchus to sacrifice to his Roman gods. They refused. Immediately the Emperor ordered their belts cut off, their tunics and military garb removed, and had women’s clothing placed on them and paraded them through the middle of the city, bearing heavy chains around their necks. This was a classic way of humiliating males in a society obsessed with warrior masculinity. It failed to embarrass them. They said something like this, “You have dressed us as brides with women’s gowns and joined us together. Since wearing female clothing does not prevent women from honoring God, it should hardly stop us.” In the literature of the time, there was no suggestion of sexual crimes on the part of Serge and Bacchus, but lots of theological argument over paganism and idolatry. The emperor banished Serge and Bacchus saying, “If they persist in their unholy religion (Christianity), execute them!” They remained faithful Christians. As a result, Bacchus was flogged to death. His remains were thrown out as meat for the dogs. Serge was forced to run ten miles in “shoes of torture” into which nails had been driven up through the soles, pointing into his feet. He did not betray his faith, so Serge was ordered executed. Before he died, Serge prayed for his executioners. Serge and Bacchus were officially declared Saints by the Catholic Church and their lives are commemorated by a feast celebrated October 7th in the liturgical year. Their images in sculpture and painting feature touching halos. Traditional liturgies for same-sex unions frequently invoke the memory and inspiration of this faithful couple, these saintly martyrs. Their relationship became an ideal model of a loving, committed, Christ-based marriage for both “gay” and “straight” Christians for centuries. Our Shame and Some Good News We have been ashamed of the role that we, as Christians, have played in the violent persecution of our gay brothers and sisters. When we are silent, in our culture of violence, we abandon our brothers and sisters to the bullies of our pulpits and streets. Yet good news emerges from our faith tradition. Serge and Bacchus opened a door of compassion through their loving commitments and faithful martyrdom. It is good news to discover that within the Body of Christ, Christians have already blessed same-gender unions. What a treasure! Those traditional blessings have survived underground for centuries of terror: human bonfires fueled by the bodies of our brothers and sisters. The biblical witnesses, our Christian tradition, and the Holy Spirit are calling us to compassion. We believe it is time for us to officially re-affirm and resurrect our ancient Christian tradition of blessing same-gender marriages, affirming God-created souls who have found each other in love. Within the body of Christ, within our congregations, within our community, let us make it known to all couples who hunger for affirmation of their love commitments that we will stand with them, join with them, by blessing their vows to one another and praying “that they may love, honor, and cherish each other, and so live together in faithfulness and patience, in wisdom and true godliness, that their home may be a haven of blessing and of peace, through our Lord Jesus Christ.” As Tevye would say, “Because of our traditions, everyone here knows who he is and what God expects him to do.” Warren Kreml is a retired United Church of Christ minister and chair of the Open and Affirming Committee at First Congregational UCC in Santa Rosa, California. Until recently he served as National Coordinator of the UCC Parents of Lesbians and Gays. Rick Mawson, a United Church of Christ clergyman, is an Associate in Ministry (a volunteer position) at First Congregational UCC in Santa Rosa, CA. He earns his living in his computer business, Mawson Computers (www.mawson.com). Rick has been active in the Open and Affirming process since 1992, focusing on what the biblical witnesses say and don’t say about God’s attitude regarding committed loving relationships between people of the same gender. We believe it is time for us to officially re-affirm and resurrect our ancient Christian tradition of blessing same-gender marriages, affirming Godcreated souls who have found each other in love. Serge and Bacchus Winter 2002 31 2002 marks our sixtieth year of providing safe space to seekers searching for inspirational, restorative, energizing experiences. Kirkridge is a Retreat and Study Center rooted in Christ close to the earth Where people from diverse backgrounds find community And experience the transforming power of the Spirit for personal wholeness reconciliation and justice in the world We will be having retreats led by Daniel Berrigan, Walter Wink, Robert Raines. There will be events on diversity, creative aging, writing, making a living, art-journaling, events of a special interest, such as Qigong, and for particular groups: a men’s abuse recovery weekend led by Mike Lew, a women’s retreat led by Joan Borton, and an Interfaith Dialogue on alternative responses to violence as a one day event in June. Earthcare in May and Charles Cook’s Awakening to Nature offer opportunities for renewing and nurturing our kinship with the natural world. Events which might be of special interest to Open Hands readers: Christian People of the Rainbow 2002, coloring Outside the Lines led by Virginia Mollenkott, Dale English, Robert Goss, Erin Swenson June 6 – 9 Thomas Merton, Active Contemplative, and Henri Nouwen, Contemplative Activist: Two Models of Spiritual Life led by Michael Christensen and Rebecca Laird August 2 – 4 Sankofa, a retreat for young GLBT adults of color August 2 – 4 To receive more information about these and other events or to receive our catalogue, write us at Kirkridge Retreat and Study Center, 2495 Fox Gap Road, Bangor, PA 18013 or call (610) 588-1793. You may register on-line by visiting our web site. www.kirkridge.org 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 Open Hands Vol 17 No 3 - Singing God’s Song in a Foreign Land: Stories of Resistance https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/286dc37a5d2bf8353b14336c3846fc72.pdf 2f374c8a212655789e30febcd8c0c561 Issue An issue of a recurring publication. Volume Number The volume number of the issue 17 Issue Number The number of the issue (within a volume) 4 Publication Year The year the issue was published 2002 Publication Date The date the issue was published Spring Text Any textual data included in the document 2 Open Hands Shaping an Inclusive Church The Ecumenical Quarterly of the Welcoming Movement Executive Publisher Marilyn Alexander Editor Chris Glaser Designer In Print—Jan Graves Editorial Advisory Committee Jeff Balter, RIC Vaughn Beckman, O&A Daphne Burt, RIC Ann Marie Coleman, ONA Chris Copeland, W&A Jocelyn Emerson, W&A Gwynne Guibord, MCC Tom Harshman, O&A Alyson Huntly, ACP Bonnie Kelly, ACP Susan Laurie, RCP Samuel E. Loliger, ONA Paul Kozlowski McComas, RCP Ruth Moerdyk, SCN Mark Palermo, MLP Caroline Presnell, RCP Kathy Stayton, W&A Margarita Suaréz, ONA Judith Hoch Wray, O&A and Program Coordinators Open Hands is the quarterly magazine of the Welcoming church movement, a Christian consortium of denominational church programs in Canada and the United States whose ministries encourage and assist individuals and faith communities in welcoming and affirming lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people and their families and friends. Open Hands was founded and is published by the Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. of the Reconciling Ministries Network (United Methodist), in cooperation with the six ecumenical partners listed on page 3. Each program is a national network of local congregations and ministries that publicly affirm their welcome of LGBT people, their families and friends. These seven programs, along with Supportive Congregations (Brethren/Mennonite [www.webcom.com/ bmc], Oasis Congregations (Episcopal), Welcoming Congregations (Unitarian Universalist), and INCLUSIVE Congregations (United Kingdom), as well as the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches—offer hope that the church can be a more inclusive community. Subscription is $20 for four issues ($25 outside the U.S.). Single copies and back issues are $6; quantities of 10 or more, $4 each. Subscriptions, requests for advertising rates, and other business correspondence should be sent to: Open Hands 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 Phone: 773/736-5526 Fax: 773/736-5475 openhands@RMNetwork.org www.RMNetwork.org/openhands/index.html Member, The Associated Church Press © 2002 Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. Open Hands is a registered trademark. ISSN 0888-8833 Printed on recycled paper. Welcoming Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender People VVooll.. 1177 NNoo.. 44 SSpprriinngg 22000022 HOW I CHANGED MY MIND Profiles in Grace and Courage editor’s word 4 How I Changed CHRIS GLASER columns 19 2002 Guest Columnist IRENE MONROE 20 My Turning Point CATHERINE SAGER-BOHNERT 28 How I Do Sex (NEW!) ERWIN C. BARRON 30 Movement News “You are a Christian only so long as you constantly pose critical questions to the society you live in.…so long as you stay unsatisfied with the status quo and keep saying that a new world is yet to come.” —Henri Nouwen changed lives 8 A Parent: MARILYNN Y. MILLER 9 A Spouse: HEDY LODWICK 13 A Friend: LILA FRAIZER 7 A Networker: FRAN NYCE 26 An Advocate: YOUTHA HARDMAN-CROMWELL feature articles 5 Would I Want This Person as My Minister? EARL B. STEWART 10 Changing Strategies to Change Minds AMANDA UDIS-KESSLER 15 Because I Came to Know Jesus, I Found the Courage to Speak PEGGY CAMPOLO 21 Conversion, The United Church of Canada Way ALYSON HUNTLY 24 From Falwell’s Liberty College to Gay Pride’s Grand Marshall VAUGHN F. BECKMAN Spring 2002 3 Publisher Reconciling Congregation Program, Inc. (UMC) Reconciling Ministries Network Marilyn Alexander, Coordinator 3801 N. Keeler Avenue, Chicago, IL 60641 773/736-5526 www.RMNetwork.org Ecumenical Partners Affirming Congregation Programme (United Church of Canada) Ron Coughlin, Coordinator P.O. Box 333, Station Q, Toronto, Ontario CANADA M4T 2M5 416/466-1489 www.affirmunited.org • acpucc@aol.com More Light Presbyterians (PCUSA) Michael J. Adee, Coordinator 369 Montezuma Ave. PMB #447 Santa Fe, NM 87501-2626 505/820-7082 www.mlp.org Open & Affirming Ministries (Disciples of Christ) P.O. Box 44400, Indianapolis, IN 46244 941/728-8833 www.sacredplaces.com/glad Open and Affirming Program (UCC) Ann B. Day, Coordinator P.O. Box 403, Holden, MA 01520 508/856-9316 www.UCCcoalition.org Reconciling in Christ Program (Lutheran) Bob Gibeling, Coordinator 2466 Sharondale Drive, Atlanta, GA 30305 404/266-9615 www.lcna.org Welcoming & Affirming Baptists (ABC/USA) Brenda J. Moulton, Coordinator P.O. Box 2596, Attleboro Falls, MA 02763 508/226-1945 www.wabaptists.org Call for articles for Open Hands Winter 2003 Monogamy to Polyamory The Range of Relationships Theme section: Both freedom and oppression have influenced how we imagine and create our relationships. In the past and still today, GLBT people could enjoy discrete casual relationships with less fear of reprisal from the church and society than when forming visible, ongoing same-gender marriages. For straight and gay alike, serial monogamy rather than “till death do us part” has become common practice. The bisexual, or the gay partner in a heterosexual marriage, may want a relationship in addition to a primary partner. Now the “cool” word among academics and sexual theorists is “polyamory,” relationships that involve more than two people. It represents a “shift in the paradigm” in thinking about sexuality within narrow, confined expressions. Sexuality, especially when unrelated to procreation, is freer to come out and play, so to speak. But then, what about rightrelation, mutuality, Christian ethics? What about the strategy of seeking samegender marriage rights? Should we emphasize our acceptance over experimentation? Is it legitimate to “think outside the box” of the traditional “couple”? Give us your thoughts in letters, personal stories, analysis, and so on. Are you involved in a polyamorous relationship? A monogamous relationship? An open relationship? Are you angry that we would even entertain such notions on the pages of Open Hands? 50-1500 words. See below for further instructions. Columns: My Turning Point (how you changed your mind on the issue), How I Do Sex (how you reconcile or integrate sexuality and spirituality), My Church (an extended profile of your welcoming congregation), In Solidarity (with other justice issues), You’re Welcome (how to be welcoming), Worship, Spirituality, Retreats, Resources (books and videos), Outreach, Leadership, Marriage, Health, Youth, Campus, Children, and Family. These brief articles may or may not have to do with the theme of the issue. 750 words. Contact with ideas as far before deadline as possible. Manuscript deadline: September 30, 2002 An article should be accompanied by the author’s two to three sentence selfdescription, a photo (snapshot okay—we can crop to face), contact information including e-mail, plus any other photos helpful to the article. E-mail article as a file attached to an e-mail explaining its contents, or paste in e-mail. E-mail digital photos separately. E-mail to: Chris Glaser ChrsGlaser@aol.com (No “i” in “Chrs”) www.ChrisGlaser.com sustaining the spirit 17 Virginia, My Soul Sister, a true story MALCOLM BOYD 23 God’s Wide Embrace, a hymn W. J. MATSON NEXT ISSUE: RACISM: OUR INCOMPLETE RAINBOW 4 Open Hands editor’s word This issue’s theme of changing minds and hearts may remind us of the internet joke series circulated endlessly (confirming Nietzsche’s myth of eternal return) about how many people of various faiths it requires to change a lightbulb. The answer of one group may fit all Christians: “Change? You want us to change?” Inertia may be a greater culprit than ignorance and homophobia in church resistance to the change required to fully welcome the membership, ministries, and marriages of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Christians. I once had a phobia and prejudice about a segment of the population. It was based in personal knowledge and experience, thus the more deeply rooted. I’d been bitten just too many times by this particular minority to welcome them into my life. No matter their personal stories nor public celebrities. I respected those who stood up for their rights, and believed they deserved them. And yes, I believed some could be good and loyal friends, but I wouldn’t want one as a neighbor or a friend, let alone a family member. Even the Bible spoke of them derisively, lumping them with degradation, sin, and heresy. Slowly, however, I changed. First I learned how to keep them at bay, so that my phobia decreased. Then, in college, I came into my liberal phase of acceptance. I lived with one in a household, even took him to church and introduced him to friends, rather proud of myself for how accepting I was. We’d play ball together, and I grew to respect his skills. But I was not ready to generalize my experience to “his people.” Then I met one who would radically transform me. I met him in a shelter for the homeless, asleep on the hard, cold concrete floor. Another nameless statistic till that moment, we brought him home with us to live. Now he was part of the family. I watched him grow up, learned how to view things from his perspective. He ate with us, worked with us, slept with us. Today I thoroughly enjoy and love him. Now I am a “dog person” forever. Though I was an avid watcher of Lassie and Rin Tin Tin, those celebrities could not touch me deeply enough to change me. My brother’s dog had bitten me too many times. Though I read dog literature through the years, positive, firsthand experiences were necessary to transform my mind and heart. Animal rights activists could persuade me that dogs deserved to be treated justly, but I could not enthusiastically welcome dogs into my home or church until I met Smokey in college. I learned that biblical writers wrote of dogs metaphorically and were culturally inclined to disapprove of them. And though I came to believe humans could develop deep attachments with dogs, I did not know such was personally possible until I fell in love with Calvin, and then Hobbes, a dog Calvin and I found lost or abandoned in the local park. If I could overcome my dogphobia, Christians can overcome our homophobia. If I can keep working on my humanonarcissism, Christians can keep working on our heterosexism (and all the other “isms” that divide us). We have an array of very fine articles describing how individuals (including several evangelicals) as well as a denomination (the United Church of Canada) changed their minds. And Peggy Campolo explains how her mind has never changed, but Jesus gave her the power to speak her mind! As editor, I confirmed two writers’ decisions to capitalize Evangelical when referring to evangelicals who as a group tend to oppose us to differentiate them from evangelicals generally, into which category even we fall. At least one article analyzes our strategies for change. Amanda Udis-Kessler’s research findings should give all denominational strategists pause, though her case study is of United Methodists. Are we politicizing our movement in detrimental ways? Are we creating our own marginalization toward the periphery of our denominations? Are we sacrificing our welcome and the possibility of changing the structure from within (subversion)? On the other end of the spectrum, queer theorist Erwin Barron challenges us to think way outside the church box in a new column introduced in this issue, “How I Do Sex.” Hopefully this issue of Open Hands will disturb the waters of our movement as well as the church. Remember the pool of Beth-zatha of John 5:1-9: whenever an angel disturbed its waters, healing was possible! How I Changed Chris Glaser Hobbes, Chris, Calvin. Calvin’s most recent book is entitled, Unleashed: The Wit and Wisdom of Calvin the Dog, by Calvin T. Dog, translation by Chris Glaser (Westminster John Knox Press, 1998). Mrs. Hobbes is an aerobics instructor for squirrels. Chris is their servant. Spring 2002 5 I have discovered to my surprise (perhaps even shock) that there is more than one kind of experience of “coming out.” That reality has resulted in a fundamental change in my thinking as it relates to the ordination of gay and lesbian Christians to the Gospel ministry. That difficult change within me has taken place in the context of a question I have not been able to ignore. “How can I withhold my love and support from anyone whom God loves and for whom Jesus died?” I cannot and I will not. That is my conclusion now. But, it hasn’t always been that way. First, An Issue My journey began in 1969 in my first year of seminary. During that year Time magazine published a major article on homosexuality and the struggle of gays and lesbians to gain acceptance. Reading that article convinced me that this issue would be one that we seminarians would have to face and struggle with once we became ordained. I spoke about this issue before a seminary class which required each of us to speak on a topic we believed important to the church. In doing so, we were asked to give our own view on the topic. Homosexuality was a difficult topic for me to speak on. It was not an issue I wanted to deal with. I wanted to deal with evangelism, a topic I loved and still do. For me, homosexuality was a distraction that would stir up deep emotions and divisions. But, it was also an issue that would not go away and I knew that I would need to prepare myself to address it. So would my peers. So would the Church. That is what I said before my peers and professor on that day in 1969. During the 1970’s the Presbyterian Church (both north and south) began to wrestle with the request of gay and lesbian Christians to be ordained to the Gospel ministry. At that time I was convinced that homosexuality was a sin that barred gays and lesbians from ordination. I said so from the pulpit. I said so on the floor of presbytery. I read literature on both sides of the issue. I studied Scripture pertaining to it. I examined my heart and mind to see if I was fearful of gays and lesbians and to discern if I hated them. I did not. Whatever view I held I wanted it to be an honest conviction, not an irrational reaction. I asked my session and church to include funds in the budget for me to attend the Presbyterian General Assembly each year so that I could become better informed on both sides of this and other issues. They agreed and I began attending each year that I could. At these gatherings I spent many hours listening to both sides plead their case. I began to appreciate the General Assembly process of debate. Then, the Families In the late 1970’s I found out that two families in the church I was serving had sons who were gay. I sensed a deep hurt within those parents who felt isolated and alone. I understood that they needed my love and support. They did not need words of judgment from their pastor. I realized that my words could either offer healing or deeper pain for those families. I decided to do what I could to help. I loved them that much. I brought these families together for a time of sharing and mutual support. The tone of my attitude softened and I found a part of me that wanted to be a presence of healing and support to these families. I had lunch with one of their sons and discovered myself wanting to reach out to him with genuine love and support instead of words of judgment. Yet, my views about the issue did not change. I became aware that my convictions about an issue and my genuine feelings toward people whom I knew and loved were at odds with each other. I hoped that time would resolve that dilemma within me. I began realizing that there was a battle between two paradigms within me struggling for dominance. One dealt with my honest convictions about issues. The other one focused on my genuine love for people. My dilemma was that I could not reconcile these two paradigms within me. I discovered that when I study an issue (such as homosexuality) I can come to an honest conviction about that issue as I understand it from Scripture. However, when I relate to people across the “table of life,” I often come to a different conclusion. During the 1980’s I went through some major and difficult changes in the way I understood issues related to life and faith. It started with a two-year program in Clinical Pastoral Education (CPE). That experientially-focused learning program enabled (forced) me to look within myself, deep within. As I began to learn more about my unexplored self, I found myself backing off from the dogmatic mindset I had developed. Working as a hospital chaplain in Houston, Texas enabled me to experience a side of myself that was more interested in people than dogma. My interest in pastoral counseling led me to a program in ego psychology and object relations. It was during that time that I was elected a commissioner to the General Assembly that met in Wichita, Kansas in 1994. My Motion Against Gay Marriages At that G.A., I was assigned to the committee that addressed an overture from the Presbytery of Southern New England. The overture dealt with the question of pastors conducting commitment services that blessed same gender relationships. The only people who showed up to address the committee were those who were in favor of the overture. Most of those who spoke told the committee that the ceremony be- “Would I Want This Person as My Minister?” An Evangelical Change of Heart and Mind Earl B. Stewart ing debated was the only “wedding” ceremony they would have and that they considered it the same as a wedding ceremony. The committee was divided on the issue and sent a majority report to the G.A. favoring same gender-blessing ceremonies. I felt that the Assembly would be as ambivalent on the issue as it had been for many years, with no side winning a convincing vote. I decided that I wanted us to settle the issue by a clear vote. I was against pastors performing same-gender blessing ceremonies because it was considered a wedding ceremony by those who spoke for it. During the debate on the Assembly floor, I made a motion that “ministers are not permitted to perform same sex ceremonies” for the reason I have indicated. I told the commissioners I would like them to vote on a motion that was unambiguous. My motion passed and, when there was a call on the floor to reconsider the motion, it passed again. But while people on the floor were applauding the passing of my motion to forbid pastors from conducting same sex ceremonies, I suddenly became aware of a deep and ominous feeling within me that caused me to utter the words, “My God, what have I done?” Though the presbyteries would later fail to ratify the prohibition, my motion has haunted me ever since. My action has been the cause of a lot regret within me. That surprised me. Meeting My Better Self Shortly after I returned from G.A., I began training in Jungian psychology. As part of that training, I saw a Jungian analyst twice a week for three years. That journey led me further into my inner being, where I was able to meet the shadow side of myself. I learned about the meaning of my dreams. I also encountered the entrenched thinking that had become my paradigm for thinking and believing. I did not like that part of me. I wanted to free myself of the entrenched thinking and faith understanding that hindered my development, but feared it was an impossible goal. In the mid 1990’s, the hospitals in the University of Texas Medical Center began to downsize. Our department would have to let a couple of chaplains go. At that time I was certified as a pastoral counselor and served in that capacity at the hospital where I worked. I was also serving as a part-time interim in churches going through transition. I noticed that my counseling background and interest was influencing the way that I related to people, the way that I preached, and the way that I was changing in my understanding of faith. Simply put, my interest in helping people grow spiritually and to move away from self-judgment was more important than whatever theological understanding I had developed. I became aware that people’s experience of God often mirrors their experience of self, and people’s experience of self is often projected on how they experience God. In fact, I recognized that my theological understanding was growing because of the counseling training I had received. In July 1995 I became the Director of the Career Development Center of the Southeast, a Presbyterian counseling center started by Columbia Theological Seminary, the Presbytery of Greater Atlanta, and the Synod of South Atlantic. One-half of our clients are ministry candidates going through an assessment program at the Center as well as clergy seeking greater effectiveness in ministry. It was while ministering at the Center that I met my better self. There are times when ministry candidates and clergy, who are either gay or who are trying to come to terms with their sexuality, come through our Center. Our clients range from conservative Southern Baptist to very liberal Unitarian Universalists. In ministering to them in our programs of assessment, I made an unexpected discovery. At the end of their assessment programs, I ask myself the same questions: “Would I vote to ordain this candidate? Would I be willing to serve alongside this minister? Would I want this person as my minister?” What I discovered was that I have always said “yes” to those who are gay, not because they are gay, but because they have been both psychologically and spiritually suited for ministry. I began to realize that I would not vote to refuse ordination to someone who was gay and who had a genuine call from God to the ordained ministry. I recognized that one paradigm was winning over the other: that God calls people to ministry, not entrenched attitudes. In January 2002, Greater Atlanta Presbytery met to vote on Amendment A. A “yes” vote would allow presbyteries to determine whom to ordain as was the case prior to 1978. As the day approached to vote on the issue, I experienced a lot of ambivalence within me. I also knew that I needed to vote my conscience. Prior to the motion being voted on, there was time for people to share their views. For the first time, I shared my change in thinking on this issue with the presbytery. I told them that my experience at the Center, where I conduct assessment programs for ministry candidates, convinced me that my thinking was wrong and that I was willing to change the way I voted. I also indicated that doing so would not eliminate the ambivalence and ambiguity and sometime contradictions that I was aware of within me about this issue. But, as I shared with them, I was no longer willing to say “no” to Chris Glaser, whom I remember praying at the 1978 G.A. of the former United Presbyterian Church. I was impressed with the depth of commitment and love that Chris and Janie Spahr and a whole host of other gays and lesbians have for the Presbyterian Church and their genuine love for Jesus as Savior and Lord. There are times when my commitment and I became aware that people’s experience of God often mirrors their experience of self; and people’s experience of self is often projected on how they experience God. 6 Open Hands faith pale in comparison to theirs. I wish I had their courage. In speaking to them I have found them to be full of grace and love. Will I Change More? I wish that I had come to this understanding before now. It has taken me thirty years to change what had been an honest conviction. That which I once was against, I now am for. I still have problems related to this issue. I still believe that sexual relationships should be restricted to marriage between a man and a woman. I do not endorse same gender marriages. Yet, I do not believe that someone should be rejected for ordination because they are gay, especially when they love Jesus and are answering a call to ministry. If God truly calls persons to the ordained ministry, and if they are both psychologically healthy and spiritually suited for ministry, who am I to say “no” to them, even with my ambivalence, ambiguity, and sometime contradictions? Will I change my thinking further on the subject? Will I someday support gay marriages? The question intrigues me. It even bothers me. I confess to wanting it to go away. However, I know that it will not. In the same way that I know that, when the Holy Spirit moves in God’s direction, it is an impossible movement to ultimately defeat. I will leave the future in God’s hands. I will trust my journey to God’s care. I will also pray that I will be open to change whatever thinking within me that hinders God’s movement among the people of God. I can do no less. Earl B. Stewart, a graduate of Baylor University and Dubuque Theological Seminary, has a D.Min. in pastoral counseling and a Ph.D. in pastoral psychology from Graduate Theological Foundation of Indiana. He has served as a church pastor, a missionary in Taiwan, a hospital chaplain, and has recently retired as director of the Career Development Center of the Southeast in Decatur, Georgia. He is married and has one son. Changed Through Solidarity Fran Nyce During a Church of the Brethren Annual Conference in Indianapolis, psychologist Martin Rock led what I believe must have been the first public meeting at an annual conference on the issue of homosexuality and the church. I remember walking out of that evening Insight Session when it was barely begun because I was so upset with the hostile responses to Martin. Now I wish I had had the words and the courage to stay and speak up in his support. It was primarily the Womæn’s Caucus in the Church of the Brethren that was the catalyst for my growing sensitivity about various oppressions in the church, not just in relation to women but also in relation to non-heterosexual persons. Even my awareness of oppressive attitudes toward women evolved slowly. I am grateful for the influence of the Brethren feminists of the 60’s and 70’s who nurtured my sensitivity toward injustice. But what propelled me headlong into active involvement in the women’s movement in the church was a dramatic personal experience during the Dayton Annual Conference, where, for the first time, I strongly felt discriminated against as a woman, in the church that I had loved from early childhood. At Dayton, I became aware of the inappropriateness of all-male leadership on the platform. I heard the maleness of the words of the hymns, the prayers, the scripture readings, the sermons. I sensed exclusion as a woman at a painful emotional level during that entire Conference week, and I resolved to work actively to help restore women to our rightful place in the church. Sometime later, Womæn’s Caucus leaders began embracing the emerging movement for acceptance of lesbians and gays in the church. Even though I was sympathetic, I was at first reluctant for the Caucus to become advocates because I feared our feminist cause would suffer as a result. I don’t remember what changed my mind. It was not as dramatic a conversion as the one around the advocacy for women. But the Spirit was working. It became personal when I saw how my non-heterosexual friends were being excluded and oppressed by the church, with even more blatant injustice and cruelty than that demonstrated against women. I wonder if change can only occur when personal relationships or experiences affect the heart as well as the mind? Now I am coming to see a relationship between sexism and homophobia, along with racism, as symptoms of a shared disease. The illusion of straight, white male supremacy has been with us a long time, and it is still hurting and weakening the Body of Christ. But I have been encouraged by signs of hope. During my tenure as a board member of On Earth Peace, I was happy to participate in the decision of that board to partner with both the Womæn’s Caucus and the Brethren Mennonite Council (for GLBT concerns). It was clear to me that we needed to offer this support to such sister agencies to be consistent with our position of working for justice, even though we understood that it might mean a loss of some financial support. I celebrate the decision of BMC leadership to claim the rightful place of all Christian GLBT persons in the church, and the continuing mission of dissolving the walls of separation. My own growth in understanding and acceptance has been nurtured by BMC’s events for education and celebration. There I have felt a welcome athome- ness, as well as a sense of the healing presence of the hospitable Spirit that I hope may someday permeate the entire church. ▼ Fran Nyce is a church volunteer who previously served on the training staff of the Brethren Volunteer Service, and is currently a member of the Westminster Church of the Brethren. A water color painter, she lives in Westminster, Maryland. Spring 2002 7 8 Open Hands That moment, and the days and weeks which followed, propelled me into a sea of anguish and searching. As my son told us of his years of solitary agony, his pleas to God to “change” him, his terror of discovery, his hurt, anger, and the temptation of suicide, my heart broke and bled. His utter aloneness as a gay adolescent with no one to whom he could turn for understanding, encouragement, or compassion, was reminiscent of the landscape of desolation I had visited several times in my own wars with clinical depression. I, too, had experienced a terror and aloneness that enveloped me in the blackness of emotional devastation. But in that existential bleakness, I was surrounded by the unconditional love of family and friends. My son was not. I was not there for him. That knowledge was my greatest source of grief. My deep love for my son, coupled with the knowledge that my then current theological position in regard to same-sex orientation demanded celibacy, compelled the beginning of my search to learn, understand, and find answers. I grieved the loss of the future I had envisioned for my son: mind-pictures of him surrounded by his own children blurred into blank grayness stamped with question marks. A father with his young son toddling along beside him unleashed such hurt that I often found myself sobbing. I asked myself so many questions! My mind debated endlessly with itself. So often I fondly remembered a dear friend I had had in high school and college who revealed his gayness to me when we were in our late twenties. He was and is gifted, loving, generous, compassionate, well-adjusted—one of the loveliest and least judgmental people I have ever known. I had never understood the fear, disdain, and loathing directed toward GLBT people that I had often witnessed revealed in the words and attitudes of various people in the church and denomination I attended. As I heard my gay friend repeatedly grouped with reprobates, child molesters, and amoral deviants by laypersons, clergy, and church leaders alike, I found myself rejecting the validity of their convictions because I knew this did not represent my friend but rather the fear and ignorance reflected by the people who held them. And yet I still believed any type of erotic homosexual love was immoral: the feelings were fine; acting on them was not. Thus, in my search to come to terms with my love for my son, the biblical imperatives that I had previously accepted as unquestionable, and my understanding of who God is and what the love of Christ compels us to do, I began the process of seeking God’s peace and coupling it with Christ’s compassion while also wrestling with my own doubts and fears. I read. First, Mel White’s Stranger at the Gate, which my son had given to my husband and me. I read the decades-old Kinsey Report. I read all the biological and other scientific information I could gather about GLBT people. I read the opinions of psychologists and psychiatrists. I called Ralph Blair of Evangelicals Concerned and spoke with him personally. I searched for biblical perspectives different from those taught by my own church denomination in regard to passages used to revile homoerotic love, and thought and prayed about the possibility of their verity. I read and re-read the passages themselves and did the same with the gospels. The most moving and beautiful book and the greatest influence on my life was Virginia Ramey Mollenkott’s original edition of Is the Homosexual My Neighbor? I began to see the contradictions in what the church taught and what it actually practiced. I read life stories written by GLBT Christians and marveled at the strength of faith revealed by people who were battered, rejected, cast out, and reviled by “righteous” believers, yet continued to cling to Christ and their faith. I sought and talked to other parents of gay and lesbian children and listened to them as they shared their journeys with me. I heard the suffering in their words and saw it in the tears of the GLBT people themselves. I talked to Christian advocates for GLBT brothers and sisters and was encouraged and given hope through our conversations, especially when they honestly and openly told me how they, too, struggled to arrive at a place of peace where they trusted and believed that God called them to be advocates for inclusion. I found that GLBT people were from all walks of life and learned that many were an unrevealed presence in my church conference. Finally, for me, the most powerful witness to the call of compassion, welcome, and inclusion was and is the Spirit of God. Months after my son told me he was gay, I attended a service at a local Metropolitan Community Church. Here I experienced the undeniable presence of the Holy Spirit. Among the men and women of this congregation, my husband and I, who attended as a couple, were welcomed and embraced without question, without suspicion, without bitterness. As one lesbian woman, weeping, held me, a stranger, in her arms after we had shared Communion, she said, “You don’t know what it means to me that you and your husband are here.” As a representative of the “straight” majority, I was received in fellowship, welcomed, embraced, appreciated, and loved, in a congregation that would have been justified in feeling suspicion at the very least, and I knew, at last, that God was telling me, “I am here. You are among my own.” Marilynn Miller grew up a Roman Catholic in Buffalo, New York, but has been a member of the Mennonite Church (Lancaster Conference) for 26 years. She and her husband have lived in southeastern Pennsylvania since 1973, and have four sons and two daughters. (Shown with her newborn grandson.) Changed by Love and Knowledge A Parent’s Story Marilynn Y. Miller In January of 1999, my then 20-year-old son told my husband and me that he was gay. Spring 2002 9 I have considered myself Christian from a very early age when my grandmother told us Bible stories. My family’s background was Swiss Reformed, Salvation Army, and Quaker. But the Riverdale Presbyterian Church was nearby when we moved in 1941 and it was there I went to Sunday School and was welcomed into Westminster Youth Fellowship. There I was baptized and joined the Presbyterian Church at age 13. It was the pastor of this church who took those young people whose parents allowed it, and many did not, to an interracial youth dinner in Washington, D.C. in 1943 or 44. Early I learned about challenging the status quo because of Christian convictions. This church, through its scholarship fund, saw to it that I was able to earn my college and seminary degrees. I was fortunate to have had college and seminary professors who encouraged questioning and thinking outside the box. Very likely, it is this background that helped me affirm the majority report that went to the 1978 General Assembly permitting ordination of openly gay ministerial candidates, only to be replaced by the minority report which opposed such ordination. I was sad, but at that time, I did not feel too involved. I didn’t know any gay or lesbian persons and told this to Bob, my husband, when he returned from General Assembly, shaken to the core by what had happened there. “Oh yes you do,” he said, naming a neighbor, a young man of whom we were both very fond. Then he added, “And some of them are married.” Silently, I gasped, and wondered, “Are you?” But we were getting ready to move to Europe, one daughter was planning her wedding, the other was getting ready to move across the country with a boyfriend. I had no time to entertain such thoughts. The truth came out shortly thereafter, however, and the world I thought was ours came crashing down around us. I was shaken, scared, angry— but, surprisingly, and unlike other straight wives I have come to know, I was not so much angry at Bob but at our church: for treating sexuality as something not to be discussed, for being so secretive that I had no idea to whom to turn for help throughout this upheaval, for having made Bob feel sick and evil, a Dr. Jekyll, Mr. Hyde, for so many years. He was one who had learned such negative ideas about who homosexual persons were that he did not even recognize his own orientation until well after we married. How he was able to serve the church so well during all this time is still mystifying to me—and to be a caring husband and father too! We did realize that our marriage was built on much more than sexual attraction. When the truth was known, we decided that family, our history, deep caring, shared friendships, and service to our church as a team in ministry, were too important to end. Since that time we have learned more about ourselves and about a host of others struggling with the same issues. And we have tried in various ways to help the church come to new understanding. While in Europe, it was my good fortune to find feminist friends. When reading Mary Daly together, I became fascinated with her image of the bound feet of Chinese women. When this custom became outlawed, those formerly bound feet could no longer grow to normal size. Have not minds been bound in like manner, making it hard to open them to new thinking? When I made my discovery about Bob’s and my situation, the two persons with whom I could share told me, “We hear your pain, but don’t know what to say.” It was then that everything I heard, read, thought, and sang began to have messages for me. Somehow God was there “in the deep waters” and was not going to let us drown in “the rivers of sorrow.” I believe God is with the church now in these deep waters. Once I heard a missionary from China tell us that we need to be careful what we sing, for if we make promises, we need to keep them. When we sing “Oh Jesus, I have promised, to serve Thee to the end”— we had better mean it! We should also remember the words that follow: “I shall not fear the battle if Thou art by my side, nor wander from the pathway, if Thou wilt be my guide.” It does seem like too long a time for our lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender friends to be truly welcomed in an inclusive church, but progress has been made in the past 25 years. I believe that those of us whose minds and hearts have been opened need to keep on working—until all churches everywhere move beyond this fixation on sex, until a person’s sexual orientation is as much a non-issue as left-handedness is today, until we can focus on what our God requires, “to do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with our God.” I believe we must stay in our church, on our own terms, as agents of transformation, and, like my feminist friends, I intend to stay, but will “defect— in place.” Hedwig (Hedy) Lodwick graduated from McCormick Seminary in 1951. She served as a Director of Christian Education in Hammond, Indiana before being commissioned with her husband, Robert, by the Board of Foreign Missions of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Together they served in the North of France, Egypt, and finally, 15 years in Europe, based in Switzerland. There Hedy worked extensively with the Ecumenical Women’s Group in Geneva, the Swiss Federation of Protestant Women, and the Ecumenical Forum of European Christian Women. Retired in California, Hedy and Bob are still very active in the church. Defecting in Place A Spouse’s Change Hedy Lodwick 10 Open Hands At the halfway point between General Conference 2000 and General Conference 2004, LGBT United Methodists and supporters find ourselves caught between hope and fear. Despite the courageous witness shown in 2000, the legislative prognosis for 2004 doesn’t look very good for inclusion-minded Methodists. What should we inclusionists1 be doing now to change hearts and minds? Perhaps more importantly, what shouldn’t we be doing? While not a United Methodist, I have had the opportunity to delve into this question for the past several years as the result of writing my doctoral dissertation on the inclusion struggle in the United Methodist Church. I watched caucuses on both sides at work at General Conference 2000, observed committee and plenary debates and votes, ate with the Evangelicals and prayed with the inclusionists. I also interviewed a number of delegates, including Evangelicals and moderates. Finally, I read literally thousands of pages, from denominational history to caucus websites, including every possible position on the issue. This article discusses some of my findings about resistance to full LGBT inclusion in the denomination, and offers suggestions for what we should do next.2 The analysis and suggestions presented here will be painful and politically problematic for many of us. They will force us to confront, individually and communally, whether our priorities should be gaining access or bringing about a revolution in the denomination, and will offer different prognoses depending on these priorities. Our first impulse when we think about resistance to inclusion is to think that the Evangelicals, led by such caucuses as Good News, are engaging in a power play. My research certainly supported this way of thinking about the problem, but it directed me to another way that I think is powerful and largely undiscussed, and that (if correct) has important implications for how we should work to win over the people in the pews. Put simply, it is that we should be focused on what the sexuality conflict has to do with the denomination as an institution: with the kind of language and logic3 that most United Methodists find appropriate to the institution, and with the need of most United Methodists to support the institution as it currently exists. Institutional Priorities: Ours and Theirs We can start with the obvious point that our language and logic is dramatically different from that of the Evangelicals. We talk about inclusion at the heart of the Gospel, second-class citizenship in the Kingdom of God, institutionalized homophobia and heterosexism, full participation in the life of the church, singling out a class of people as ineligible, being welcome or unwelcome, discrimination and oppression, and the protection of pastors’ rights. We sing, “We Shall Overcome” and compare heterosexism within the church to racism within the church. We define the condemnation and exclusion of LGBT people as a justice issue, as a matter of fairness and equality. Even when (frequently) we use religious justifications, these justifications tend to be politicized and to have an anti-institutional feel to them. Jesus is brought into the picture as one who Changing Strategies to Change Minds What we can learn from United Methodists Amanda Udis-Kessler Editor’s Note: As a good sociologist, the author focuses on one denomination for this article, the basis of research for a doctoral dissertation. Yet it is not to single out United Methodists for criticism, because what is described is essentially the same for most of our denominational LGBT groups as we approach our legislative bodies. In addition, the Reconciling Ministries Network has historically approached the United Methodist Church with multiple strategies that have included ministries of presence, education, and reconciliation, especially in local congregations and districts. The suggested shift of strategy may be one of emphasis rather than kind. The greatest vulnerability of Christian activism is that it is enmeshed in organizations dedicated to Christian worship. Conservative rhetoric of “God,” “salvation,” and “faith” has more currency in such places than talk of “human values,” “justice” and “service,” which occupies the high ground of secular discourse. (Warner 1988: 268) We should be stepping back and trying to assess how the United Methodist middle feels, how the people in the pews can best be reached. Footnotes: 1 I use this term to denote LGBT United Methodists, heterosexual allies, and LGBT supporters outside of Methodism (such as myself). 2 While my research focused exclusively on United Methodists, some of the ideas presented here may be relevant for inclusionists in other mainline denominations. 3 By “logic,” I mean values, experiences and priorities. The idea behind this section is that there is a logic that most Methodists take as basic to their connection to the faith tradition, and that inclusionists challenge this logic by “bringing politics into it.” Spring 2002 11 focused on the oppressed, broke down barriers, and held up love over against the law. Moreover, we make use of rallies and civil disobedience, support the work of Soulforce and indeed join that group, and in some cases perform holy unions in part as a matter of protesting the denominational prohibitions. In contrast, both Evangelicals and those moderate delegates I spoke with who voted against inclusion appealed to what would be considered more classically Christian moral claims. They focused on the Bible and on tradition as authoritative. They spoke at length of Wesleyanism, holiness, perfection, morality, and doctrine. They were very concerned about sustaining the church, and about the importance of maintaining a distinctive denominational identity. Consider the following quotes from post-General Conference interviews with delegates: There are times when I think people are confusing the constitution and the Bill of Rights with holiness. It’s as though there’s not a right or a wrong, but only a matter of discrimination. I get a feeling that we’re confusing civil rights issues with theological issues. –“ Dennis,” a conservative delegate My role as a General Conference delegate is to do what is in the church’s best interest…to preserve, protect and defend the United Methodist Church. And I do not think that it is in the best interests of the United Methodist Church right now to [remove the prohibitions]…I know the church back home here. I know what the church is like in other places… where the Methodist Church is at its strongest, and I do not think I’m being a good steward of the church if…I vote to change what’s in there…[To] the lives of the people whom our stance affects, I know that it’s crucially and critically important. I’m not trying to sell that short. But our main role in the world is to call people to Christ and to help them be formed in His image and that’s what we’re here for and everything else that detracts us from that is to our detriment. –“Karl,” a moderate delegate It’s not about civil rights, it’s about holiness. –“Clarence,” a moderate delegate For these delegates and many others with whom I spoke, the political framework of the inclusionists was simply unconvincing. These are not people who generally oppose LGBT civil rights in the public square. Nonetheless, they experience the church as being an institution where there are different rules about what’s right and what’s acceptable. For them, not only is homosexuality not acceptable in the church, the politicized nature of the inclusion struggle is not appropriate for the church. Now no one, including us, would deny that our inclusionist work is political in nature. And how could it not be? How else could we possibly interpret the prohibitions in the Book of Discipline except through an inequality lens? The LGBT identity developed in a context of oppression, devaluation, and violence, and the post-Stonewall LGBT movement based its strategy on 1960’s civil rights activism. We still face opposition— cultural, structural, and interpersonal. Our movement and our identity are both inherently politicized. What should we be doing if not witnessing, demonstrating, disrupting business as usual to hold the church accountable? The People in the Pews One possible answer to the question is that we should be stepping back and trying to assess how the United Methodist middle feels, how the people in the pews can best be reached. Consider, for example, the different language and logics described above. Which imagery, which priorities, which values are likely to appeal to the majority of United Methodists? Another doctoral dissertation, carried out by sociologist Dawne Moon (2000), helps answer this question. Moon, studying inclusion issues in local Methodist congregations, found that her respondents tended to have an understanding of church in which “church” and “politics” were opposites. Moon’s respondents appeared to construct marriage and the church as unmarked “zones of innocence” standing not just apart from, but in contrast to, issues of politics and inequality. Just as the home has been understood to be a “haven in a heartless world,” the church was a haven from the secular world for the Methodists Moon interviewed. The relevance of Moon’s work for us is heartbreakingly clear in the following quote: A major stumbling block for gay people in the church is that homosexuality is equated with politics, fallenness, and secularity—in short, things most churchgoers consider to be the opposite of church…When [LGBT] members begin to demand “rights” in the church, they bring in a language of political struggle, of civil rights. In other words, they import a language that many believe pertains to the world rather than God, to bodies rather than spirits, to politics rather than innocence. (Moon 2000: 110, 116) Moon’s work, and my own, suggest that the United Methodist middle is likely to prefer the Evangelical approach over ours. Because of the institutional meaning that Methodism has come to have for many moderates, the Evangelicals simply seem like better Methodists than the inclusionists. The inclusionists seem “extreme,” “radical,” and “unreasonable.” The Evangelicals seem normal, temperate, and reasonable. Inclusionists who want to keep up the good fight in the most strategically useful way should deprioritize working at the legislative level of General Conference and focus instead on local churches and grassroots networks. 12 Open Hands Loyal to the Church As It Is The following claims and points should be familiar to most inclusionists: • Legalism should be rejected since Jesus put people above the law. • Business as usual has no right to go on if it is destroying the dignity of children of God. • This is a matter of lives, not issues; it’s personal, not abstract. • Since the church has not given inclusionists any legitimate way to seek access, they should feel free to be irritating to those who refuse to acknowledge them. • Jesus was an indiscriminate lover, a boundary-breaker, and a destroyer of walls between people. • Methodism should be a community without laws, boundaries, defenses or outsiders, where everyone is welcome and to which everyone belongs regardless of how others feel. • Faithful Christians do disagree on this issue, therefore the church ought to be able to be honest and say so. However much we might agree with the above statements and find them moving, they all involve at least some degree of anti-institutionalism. They may be true, but they put personal experience above institutional survival. They may capture powerful images of Jesus, but they miss basic sociological wisdom about the need of institutions for boundaries in order to remain secure. My research suggests that inclusionists could become a lot more attentive to how troubling many Methodists find arguments such as those above. Inclusionists are not winning over the middle with such approaches, and we may be driving them into the open arms of the Evangelicals. Consider the following quote: A lot of us in the middle…do trust the Discipline, do trust the process…maybe people in the middle are voting the way they’re voting because of their loyalty to the Discipline. –“Reggie,” a moderate delegate To the extent that Reggie is typical (and his quote was certainly representative), the most heartfelt witnessing of the inclusionists may be failing because we fail to grasp how we are coming across to those we wish to influence. The degree of Methodist loyalty to the denomination as an institution, and resistance to (real or perceived) attacks on it, leads to one last point. Inclusionist strategies at General Conference 2000 may have had the unintended consequence of suggesting that inclusionists are cultivating or exacerbating their outsider status in the denomination. For example, voting on petitions is as political an action as demonstrating. However, at General Conference 2000, the politics of voting was rendered invisible before the politics of demonstrating, probably because voting is institutionalized in the denomination whereas demonstrations represent disruptions and challenges to the institution. Similarly, because of the way that “average” delegates dressed, the suits and ties of the conservatives were normalized when compared to the plethora of LGBT symbols (again, emphasizing gay politics outside the church) exhibited by the inclusionists. The rainbow gear marked off the inclusionists as different, even as the suits and ties of the Evangelicals suggested continuity with traditions of dressing respectfully for an event that is at the heart of the denomination and therefore worthy of respect. I own more than my share of rainbow iconography and wear it proudly, but if my goal were to assure a moderate that I was more like her than different from her, I would probably do well to leave the rainbows home for the day and dress like the moderate in question. What, then, should we do now to win hearts and minds? How can we honor the truths we know, yet meet the goal of changing the denomination from within? Spring 2002 13 A Matter of Priorities What we do next may depend on whether acceptance within the denomination or radical change is more important, and this decision may differ among inclusionists. We need, however, to be very clear about one thing: given the conservative lock-hold at the legislative level, our best hope now rests closer to home. Practically speaking, this means that those of us for whom a radically, structurally inclusive church is the priority, and for whom activism is a central strategy, face exceptionally hard choices. It may be time to ask whether political activism is as strategically useful as we want it to be. As already suggested, witnessing and protesting firmly link the idea of full LGBT participation in the life of the church with a logic that “the church,” rightly or wrongly, sees as different from its own. If the Methodist middle conceives of politics and church as opposites, the inclusionist movement may do better to distance itself from politics and to identify more closely with spiritual transcendence in order to raise its chances of being seen as worthy of inclusion. Given how politicized homosexuality is, any political action on behalf of inclusion has the unintended effect of amplifying LGBT difference from “normal,” “reasonable” Methodism in the same way that a fun house mirror simultaneously magnifies and distorts the image of the person in front of the mirror. A final problem on this front: when moderates feel pushed they “hold the line,” and my interviews suggest that they feel far more pushed by us than by Good News, the conservative faction. I’m not suggesting that any of us forget who we are or where we came from, that we deny the existence of homophobia and heterosexism, that we suppress our pain or our rage. I am suggesting, however, that the expression of our pain and our rage as a form of witness to the denomination is currently strategically problematic, and seems likely to remain so in the near future. When we offer up what we know to be true by demonstrating, we alienate enough moderate United Methodists to hinder our efforts, at least at the legis- Changed About “Changed” Homosexuals Lila Frazier Her name, Darlene. We met at a week-long writing camp in 1978. She told us of her struggle. For years she lived as a promiscuous, homosexual thief. Then God found her, but in a setting which told her the sin of thievery was mild compared to her sin of homosexuality. She and those around her prayed for change. Through hypnosis and healing services, she was transformed. I had never thought much about homosexuality. Intrigued by her story, I decided if Darlene wasn’t happy as a homosexual, and if she could change under God’s direction, then others could, too. I spoke out about the church needing to listen to “former” homosexuals. In my mind I labeled two outspoken homosexuals from our conference as “the enemy.” More than ten years later, in the processing room of the library where I worked, a book crossed my desk: Stranger at the Gate: to be Gay and Christian in America, by Mel White. I knew him! Mel, a keynote speaker at one of our writing camps, is a strong Christian and a good writing teacher—and a homosexual? I read the book immediately (a perk of working in a library!). Mel told of his years of struggle to not be a homosexual. But Darlene and others I’d met had changed. I wrote Darlene asking if some homosexuality was physical and some psychological. She wrote back saying she didn’t think so, with no explanation. Later she wrote to tell me she’d met and fallen in love with a woman. She now believes her “transformation” was wishful thinking. However, her acceptance of God did bring about transformation in her life. She stopped being a thief! She made restitution for what she’d embezzled from her employer. She knows God loves her. She and her partner are in a church which loves them as they are. ▼ Lila Frazier describes herself as a seventies-something, single, free-lance writer, and member of Citrus Heights United Methodist Church in Sacramento. An active Reconciling United Methodist, she proudly wears her rainbow ribbon at her regional annual conferences and when she lobbied for inclusion at the 2000 General Conference. She counts lesbians and gay men among her friends, and contributes to our movement through diversity workshops, letters to the editor, and opinion pieces. lative level. If demonstrating is not the best way of changing hearts and minds, we need to make a decision about priorities: is activist witnessing more important, or is change more important? Some will answer that there can be no compromise, and that telling the truth Soulforce-style is the only way to maintain dignity and integrity. Those who fall into this category must face the heartbreaking truth that in the current climate, the kind of witnessing done at General Conference 2000 is not productive and may be counterproductive. The issue is not whether demonstrating lacks moral valor and spiritual value, but only whether it is efficacious in terms of meeting the basic inclusionist goal of gaining access. As this article and the research on which it is based suggests, I fear that political activism within the church will not change enough hearts and minds in the short-term to effect positive legislative change. If the primary goal is changing hearts and minds, the following strategies should be on the discussion table. Strategies Focus on the grassroots: One selfidentified moderate told me that, “stateways don’t change folkways.” Behind this sociological jargon is the idea that inclusionists who want to keep up the good fight in the most strategically useful way should deprioritize working 14 Open Hands at the legislative level of General Conference and focus instead on local churches and grassroots networks. I agree wholeheartedly. We should be directing much of our energy toward making individual congregations welcoming and empowering for LGBT Methodists. As the experience of the last 30 years suggests, it is possible to have individually prophetic churches, even with antigay rules on the books. Sociologist Stephen Warner (1995:94) notes the conclusion of many gay Christian activists that the struggle for LGBT recognition must move to the congregational level. Similarly, UCC pastor and sociologist Gary Comstock’s (1996:77) study of LGBT United Methodists indicates that, “local congregations can resist and neutralize somewhat denominational policy.” This is taking place in U.S. Methodism, and should be supported with all possible vigor. Change the nature of witnessing: James Wood, a United Methodist pastor and sociologist, argues (2000:83-84) that minds are changed about homosexuality through the enlarging of personal circles. This argument is supported by research showing that heterosexuals who know LGBT people are more likely to be accepting. Perhaps the most important thing that can be done to make local congregations welcoming on this front is for LGBT Methodists to simply be present and engage in church life while being as open— yet relaxed— as possible about their sexuality. Consider this quote from “Marty,” a conservative delegate: I don’t think [LGBT Methodists] should stand on the corner and say I’m an avowed gay homosexual and wave the flag, because I think in a lot of people’s thinking that closes a lot of doors. I know within my own church we have several people who I know are gay. They’re in leadership roles. They don’t go ’round carrying that chip on their shoulder. Marty’s suggestion and language may be infuriating to many of us, but sociologically speaking, he has a point. If the goal of most inclusionists is a safe and meaningful local worship experience, Marty may be providing a sense of how to meet that goal. As politically unsatisfying as it may be, finding ways to maintain one’s dignity without formally seeking access could potentially be the solution for at least some LGBT Methodists. Accentuate the normal: LGBT United Methodists should continue to demonstrate, both in word and action, that they are as tired of this struggle as the Evangelicals are, and that their local church priorities are those of “normal, reasonable” Methodists: worship, Sunday School, evangelism and so on. Indeed, my research suggests that many LGBT Methodists already feel this way, even as they remain committed to political change strategies. Minimizing the political language and logic could only help: the more the average heterosexual Methodist in the pew sees that the average LGBT Methodist has “normal” Methodist feelings about the church, the more likely the heterosexual Methodist is to treat the LGBT Methodist “reasonably,” as a brother or sister in Christ. Evangelize: If inclusionists want to change the way the United Methodist Church views homosexuality, one key strategy is to engage in major evangelizing projects among heterosexual progressives and LGBT people, whether churched or unchurched. The denomination’s inclusionist element is not going to grow proportional to the denomination as a whole without bringing in more inclusionists from outside the church. Grieve: The denomination’s refusal to repent of its homophobia and heterosexism is heartbreaking, and we should allow our hearts to be broken over it as often as necessary. Most United Methodists don’t have “hearts of stone,” as was said by some after General Conference 2000, but most Methodists also have not had the experiences we have, and they don’t see what we see. Until we fully and deeply grasp this fact and mourn it, we will not be able to forgive those who seem bent on misunderstanding us. Until we forgive them, I fear that we will not be able to meet them where they are, rather than where we want and need them to be. Until we can meet them where they are, we run the risk of making strategically problematic decisions. A Word of Hope Following a discussion about my research, some Presbyterian inclusionists asked how, given this information, they could offer a word of hope to other inclusionists. As I have mulled over this question, I have been strangely comforted by the idea that God’s realm is simultaneously now and not yet. Sociologically, the news may be bad (though it may also be more complicated than the story I’ve told here). Nonetheless, Jesus says that all things are possible with God. One of my inclusionist interviewees, a pastor, talked about a professor in seminary who walked into class on the first day, tore the back cover off a Bible, and told the class that the story wasn’t over yet. The inclusionist story isn’t over yet either. I’d say it’s only just beginning. Amanda Udis-Kessler, Ph.D., is a Unitarian Universalist sociologist, writer, and musician completing a one-year teaching assignment at Grinnell College in Iowa. Amanda’s work (play?) ranges from writing bisexual history and theory to composing sacred choral music, and from training speakers for Boston’s LGBT speakers bureau to music directing Godspell. Her work on Jesus as holy leper has appeared in Open Hands (Summer, 1998; Vol. 14, No. 1), as have two songs (including an “open the doors” song written for General Conference 1996) and a column on class justice and queerness. References: Comstock, Gary D., Unrepentant, Self-Affirming, Practicing (New York: Continuum, 1996). Moon, Dawne, “The Limits of Christian Love.” Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Sociology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, (2000). Warner, R. Stephen, “The Metropolitan Community Churches and the Gay Agenda.” Religion and the Social Order 5: 81-108 (1995). Warner, R. Stephen, New Wine in Old Wineskins (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988). Wood, James Rutland, Where the Spirit Leads (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2000). Spring 2002 15 Because I am an Evangelical Christian and an activist who works for justice for my GLBT sisters and brothers, I am often asked questions like, “What changed your mind about homosexual people?” or “When did you decide that being gay wasn’t bad?” My answer is that I never had to change my mind because I never thought that being gay or lesbian was bad. Later in my life, when I learned that some people were bisexual or transgender, I didn’t think there was anything wrong with that either. For me, having a different sexual orientation was just that: different, not bad. I liked some gay people and did not care as much for some others, but found all of those people whose sexuality was different from mine interesting. I also found it curious that so many people I knew didn’t like them. This always made me feel sad and sometimes very angry. It has been good for me to reflect back and look for the reasons why I never embraced the homophobia so rampant in the Evangelical Christian circles where I grew up. One reason was the parents I was blessed to have. My mother and father worked as hard not to prejudge people as any two people I have ever known. For them, neither race, nor religion, nor anything else was reason to judge a person before you really got to know him or her. It was not that my parents were particularly enlightened on the subject of homosexuality. Few people were, back in the 1940’s when I was growing up. The gift Mother and Daddy gave to me was not in any enlightening words I can remember from them on the subject of homosexuality, but rather in the way they showed grace and love, even to those they did not understand. You did not “bad mouth” people at our house, and especially not whole groups of people. Bill, Eugene, and Tom Then there was my brother’s friend’s older brother Bill. At the age of 30, Bill still lived at home with their widowed mother. He was a gentle man, kind to us children, and I liked him. One day when I asked Mother why Bill was not married, I was surprised to see her eyes fill with tears. “Bill is one of those men who is not attracted to women,” she said. “He is very lonely and his life is sad. You should always be especially kind to Bill.” I learned from the other kids that, not only was Bill not attracted to women, but that he liked men. And I wondered why he did not seem to have any nice men like himself as his special friends. Bill was so very, very lonely. I heard other people say unkind things and tell jokes about Bill, and I was horrified that some of them didn’t seem to care if he heard them. Bill’s tormentors made me very angry and I felt guilty because I didn’t have the courage to tell them to stop. But courage was something I didn’t have in those days During WWII, my father was a chaplain in the Army Air Corps. I remember coming home from kindergarten one day to find Daddy sitting at the kitchen table with Mother talking about something very serious. That was the only time I ever saw my father cry. My mother explained to me later that Daddy had been crying because the young man who was his chaplain’s assistant had come to him with a problem and my father did not know how to help him. Eugene, whom I knew and liked, had told Daddy he was attracted to men, not women, and that, even though he had given his heart to Jesus, promised God that he would work in the church for the rest of his life, and prayed as hard as he could, his feelings had not changed. And my father had cried because he knew of no way to “fix” either the young man whom he loved and respected or the people he knew would ruin Eugene’s life if they found out who he really was. It was in high school that I more personally felt the sting of the injustices heaped upon those who are not “straight.” Tom was a dear friend of mine long before I knew that he was gay. We were buddies. We talked every day. Tom was bright, he was fun, and he gave me the great gift of making me feel understood. I understood something about Tom too. He was different. The way I would have said it then, and would still say it now, was that Tom was “special.” So I didn’t like it when some of the boys started to make fun of Tom. The names they called him, “fag,” “queer,” and “fairy,” were words I really did not understand. I only knew that those words hurt my friend. I watched, as though in a nightmare, as the boys who harassed Tom used those words so carelessly, and then went on to whatever else they were doing, leaving my dear friend terribly, terribly wounded. I was sure that those boys did not even think about Tom after they had passed him by, but it became increasingly clear to me that Tom thought about them all the time. He feared them, even though their only weapons were words, and I felt his fear every day. As I watched the joy go out of Tom’s life, I had questions for my parents. They did not have all of the answers I needed. Indeed, they had very few answers. But it was made clear to me that Tom’s tormentors were wrong, that what they were doing to him was evil, and that the right thing for me to do was to go on being Tom’s friend. But I already knew that. I knew too that I should stand up for Tom and speak out in defense of my friend. But I could not. I did not have the courage to do it. All that I seemed to have was a share of Because I Came to Know Jesus, I Found the Courage to Speak Peggy Campolo 16 Open Hands Tom’s great pain and a sense that something was very, very wrong. It was not until years later that I found what I needed to give me the courage to name that wrong. I learned from my parents that the way homosexual people were treated was not right. And something within me knew that what was really wrong had nothing to do with who these people were. Accepting Jesus and Rejecting Injustice When my pastor father talked to my Sunday School class of nine-year-old girls about publicly accepting Jesus and joining the church, I struggled with what to do. I did not have any spiritual feelings. God was not anything real to me and I certainly did not feel “Jesus in my heart.” But everybody in my world, everybody I loved was a Christian, so it was easier just to “go along” when all the other little girls decided to be baptized. God wasn’t part of the picture for me, but I loved my father and didn’t want to embarrass him. So I pretended to become a Christian—for Daddy and for everybody else I loved. But I couldn’t always pretend for myself. I simply learned to let other people think I was different than I really was because I feared that they would not love the real me as much as they would the Christian person I was pretending to be. I have never forgotten what that felt like, and these days it helps me to understand why some of my dear GLBT friends remain in their closets. At the same time, I told myself how good it was that I could admit to myself that I didn’t believe in God. At least I was honest with myself! But sadly, what I liked to think was “the integrity of my thinking” did not translate either into my speaking out on behalf of unfairly maligned GLBT people or my asking honest questions about Jesus of those who loved me and would have tried to answer them. I may have had convictions, but the courage of those convictions was sadly lacking in me. The story of how I encountered the Holy Spirit and met Jesus at the bedside of a dying friend has been told in more detail elsewhere. Suffice it to say here that, in my desperation to help my friend Helen, I cried out to the God in whom I was not at all sure I believed. And that day, I found not only what I needed to help Helen in her dying, but all that I myself needed for a life with Jesus Christ, a life far richer and better than I had known before. Now I not only had a hand to hold when I walked in difficult places; I found something I had longed for all of my life—the courage to speak out about what I did and did not believe. The last time I lacked that courage was shortly after Helen died. Its importance to me now is that it was the last time. My husband and I were riding in the back seat of a car on the way to one of his speaking engagements. The couple in the front seat were Evangelical Christians. I am sure that is what they would have called themselves. They wanted to talk to Tony about what they thought was wrong with this world, and guess who was first on their list? As they began to talk about “these people,” I wanted very much to be somewhere else. They were wrong, wrong, wrong, these seemingly nice but terribly misguided people. I sat in silent misery and anger, doing what I had always done in such situations: nothing! I had never said anything to upset anyone when I was with Tony on one of his speaking trips. Indeed, never upsetting anyone was part of the “pretend” religion I used to have before I found the real thing! Tony did his best to explain why they were wrong, but my own silence was so loud in my ears that I cannot remember what he said. I thought about Tom and others I knew who were victims of the words I was hearing. That ride seemed interminable, but it ended too soon, and I was left with the guilt of my silence. That night, miserable and ashamed of myself, I asked God for forgiveness and for another chance to speak out for my GLBT brothers and sisters. God answered that prayer and I found myself not only able to speak up for God’s GLBT children, but quite unable to be silent in the face of any untruths spoken about them. Advocating for understanding and justice for these brothers and sisters was the first thing that changed for me after Jesus Christ became part of my life. Welcoming Myself by Welcoming Others Then, very soon, I discovered that you can’t learn to stand up for other people without also gaining the cour- Order from Chalice Press www.chalicepress.com (800) 366-3383 “Reading this book was a profoundly freeing experience.” Tom Moore, Director of Psychological Services, University Of Illinois at Champaitn-Urbana The Bible: Faith’s Family Album lays open the Bible’s organizing theme: the call to live together in communities of peace and justice. This overview of scripture is designed for individual or group study. The author, Jack Good, recently retired as pastor of Community United Church of Christ of Champaign, Illinois, a Peace and Justice, Open and Affirming congregation. Spring 2002 17 age to stand up for yourself. That was new for me, and it felt good. I am sure that part of the reason for my deep affection for God’s GLBT children is because it was through them that I found out who God had created me to be. Some of my most precious worship experiences have been in so-called “gay churches.” Nowhere is God more real than among those who have been told that God does not want them, but who have persevered to find that, not only does God want them, but Jesus died for them, and the Holy Spirit stands ready to walk anywhere with them. “Witnessing” used to be a term I found ”icky.” I thought that “witnessing” meant that I had to tell people they were going to hell unless they said, in exactly the right words, that they believed in Jesus. So it was a very happy thing for me to find out that “witnessing” was something I really loved, something I already was doing. “Witnessing” was simply telling other people about the hand that held mine as I walked through life, about how it was easier for me to show grace and understanding to other people now that I was happily aware of the grace that God had shown to me in Jesus Christ. I started to seriously read the Bible for the first time in my life, and I confess that one of the big reasons for doing that was because some of those who were hardest on my GLBT friends said that the Bible was the reason for their words and actions. I didn’t see how this could be true, and after much reading and studying, I found that it was not true! Volumes have been written on both sides of the argument about the Bible and homosexuality by scholars far more learned on the subject than I am. I have a modicum of sympathy for those misguided people who honestly believe that the Bible says we should shut out God’s GLBT children, but am angry with that larger group in the church who speak the truth in private but lack the courage to stand up publicly for their excluded and persecuted sisters and brothers. One of the joys of my life is to belong to a Welcoming and Affirming church where nobody has to wear a “costume” to be part of us. I think of the story Jesus told about the ninety and nine sheep when I am Virginia, My Soul-Sister Malcolm Boyd I was so scared…so alone, so unattractive…in high school. All I had were my books…and the opera broadcasts Saturday mornings…and my fantasies, and my dreams of the beautiful world that awaited me—somewhere. Virginia was my friend. She was sophisticated, beautiful, sure of herself; had a theatrical cigarette voice and drove a red convertible. Virginia was outrageous…went to bars, had black friends, said clever things that were quoted. She’d pick me up and take me to the Pencol drugstore for a coke. The Pencol was where the beautiful people went for a coke. Virginia wasn’t ashamed to be seen with me. I was so unattractive in high school. Virginia was in med school. Sometimes I’d visit here at home. She wore pants, and her shirttail out. Virginia had lots of records. I played “The Man I Love.” She got married in a big wedding. It was a scandal. Three weeks later, when her husband left, I heard he was, well, a homosexual. She got kicked out of med school. They said she was a lesbian. I grew up, went away to school, never came back. But once I paid a visit. Virginia was older, of course, but still so beautiful, so sophisticated, so kind. She still loved me. I was still alone and scared, but not so unattractive. She took my hand in hers, held it, said my hand was a lovely hand, the loveliest hand. She knew a man who would love to know me, would love me. The three of us could go away together for a while. I was scared. I said no, but wanted to say yes. Years later I returned for my last visit. Virginia’s old family home had once been aristocratic and in the best part of town. Now it was in a slum, a dangerous neighborhood…the paper left on the porch was stolen unless picked up right away. On that porch, on my last night, Virginia gave a dinner party for me. She had an old card table. A fancy, faded tablecloth. The old, good silver. There was Virginia. Me. A dyke nurse, an old lover of hers. A dyke army sergeant, an old lover of hers. We ate on the porch in the slum. Candlelight flooded the scene. Virginia had suffered a stroke, spoke with difficulty, used a cane. It was a glorious dinner. We laughed, cried. Tennessee Williams would have loved it. Geraldine Page could have played it. The next morning I left. Heard the next year that Virginia had died. I was so scared, so alone, so unattractive, in high school. Virginia took me to the Pencol drugstore for a coke. Virginia was my soul-sister. ▼ Malcolm Boyd, has just published Simple Grace: A Mentor’s Guide to Growing Older (Westminster John Knox Press, 2001). An Episcopal priest, poet, spiritual director, and author of 25 books, he writes regularly for Modern Maturity. asked whether or not anyone has left my beloved home church, Central Baptist in Wayne, Pennsylvania, because we have GLBT members and bless their committed partnerships. And I am at peace in the knowledge that any of the “ninety and nine” who have left us can find hundreds of churches to welcome and affirm them, while some of those whom these people would allow to remain excluded have found a home with us. What is not right is that anyone should have to drive as far as some of our GLBT members to find the place in God’s Church on earth that Jesus died for them to have. I have no words that can fully express the great joy that my ministry of advocacy has brought and continues to bring me every day of my life. It is a gift to me to be able to say to a mother who wants to love and fully accept a lesbian daughter that she is right and that the Bible says nothing to the contrary, to affirm a young gay Christian by telling him that he should not, indeed must 18 Open Hands not do as his pastor has suggested and seek to “marry the right woman” in order to try to change the sexuality God has given him, to see the joy in the eyes of a man or woman who has been in a committed relationship for many years when I refer as “spouse” or “partner” to that dear one whom he or she has never dared to refer to publicly other than as “friend,” and to write and speak about how real family values, like monogamy and commitment, are for all of God’s children. When I sit in my living room with a college student who is struggling to accept his gay sexuality, I so appreciate being able to share my library of books written and videos made by those good men and women who have themselves been where he finds himself and have taken the time to set down their own journeys toward those places where God intended them to be. To see hope and possibility bloom in the heart of one who thought he would die of pain is a privilege I would not trade for the world. And what a blessing it is to turn to the church list that Open Hands publishes annually when a frightened person who wants to come out of the closet wants to worship in a safe place. Of all my speaking opportunities, my favorite ones are when I meet with parents of GLBT children. Some of them may be confused and upset, but most of those I meet are actively seeking ways to understand and support their children. One of my best memories is of a strong-looking Mennonite farmer standing with his arm around his gay son as our group sang the old hymn, “Come, Come Ye Saints.” Each verse ends with the refrain, “All is well, all is well.” That father had had a long and difficult journey to this place of understanding. And now he sang with reverence, yet his body language said in no uncertain terms that things would be as well for his son as he could make them no matter what anybody else said or did. Evangelism How could anyone not love taking good news to people? I thank God every day for giving me a ministry wherein I can give the good news of God’s love, acceptance and grace to people all the time. And our GLBT brothers and sisters have good news for the rest of the church too. They know in ways that most of us cannot, that Jesus really is all you need, because many of them have lived through times when Jesus was all they had. They have lost their jobs, been evicted from their homes, been asked to leave the colleges they attended, and even been told they were no longer welcome in their own families. There is a spirituality in the Christian gay community that runs deep. My most wonderful worship experiences have been with them. It was because I came to know Jesus that I found the courage to speak what my mind and heart already knew about these special children of God. I never did have to change my mind about how I felt about my GLBT sisters and brothers, but my ministry with them has certainly opened my mind to the wonder and the power of the grace of Jesus Christ. Peggy Campolo was born in Salem, New Jersey, where her father was pastor of the American Baptist Church. She taught first grade prior to spending a number of years as a full-time wife and mother. A writer and editor, she has spoken at churches, colleges, and conferences throughout the United States. She serves as an active member of PFLAG (Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays), Evangelicals Concerned, the Council of Welcoming and Affirming Baptists, Soulforce, and Central Baptist Church of Wayne, Pennsylvania, a Welcoming and Affirming congregation. She and her husband Tony live in St. Davids, Pennsylvania, and have two grown children and four grandchildren with whom they spend as much time as possible. Spring 2002 19 On Palm Sunday, April 16, 2000, history was made at Union United Methodist Church, a predominately black mainline church in Boston’s South End. On that day, the bishop of the Boston Area of the United Methodist Church (UMC), the Rt. Rev. Susan Hassinger, and the superintendent of the Metro Boston South District of the UMC, the Rev. Dr. Jerome King Del Pino, celebrated with Union United Methodist Church its becoming a Reconciling and inclusive congregation. Why is this significant? No mainline black church or predominately black church in this country had previously made such a bold step to include its lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender population into its fold. And the reason is because sexuality has never been a comfortable topic of discussion in the African American community— largely due to slavery first, and then, after slavery, to what we African Americans appropriated from the dominant culture about sexual behavior in order to deem ourselves human in the eyes of our oppressors. First bred as cattle during slavery, only to be later touted either as sexual sirens or sexual predators, black sexuality has never had a chance to evolve in a milieu free of abuse, violence, and stereotypes. The raping of black women and the lynching of black men in this country by white men also diminished a sense of control over our own bodies. Many African Americans have carved out an essentialist racial identity at the expense of leaving our bodies and sexualities behind. Often embracing a fundamentalist Christianity that fosters an asexual theology, African American bodies and sexualities that were once systematically usurped by white slave masters may now be ritually harnessed by the black church. However, Union United Methodist Church, located in one of Boston’s heavily gay-populated areas, began to ask questions about its LGBT population, especially in this era of AIDS. And it all began in late 1996 when Hilda Evans, a retired registered nurse and a member at Union for over 50 years asked the now retired Rev. Theodore L. Lockhart during a membership class, “Where does the United Methodist Church stand on the issue of homosexuality?” Within both the larger lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender population and the larger black population, African American LGBT people are the most under-served and least understood population. What is known is more anecdotal than analytical. And what we see of this segment is seldom viewed through the understanding lenses of how white queer racism and black compulsory heterosexism exact a toll on our lives. As a fractured group politically, socially, and religiously, African American LGBT people live as resident aliens enduring bifurcated existences in these respective communities. While our black skin ostensibly gives us residence in our black communities, our sexual orientation most times evicts us from Amazing Courage Irene Monroe them. And while our sexual orientation gives us residence in the larger LGBT community, racism constantly thwarts efforts at coalition-building, weakening the larger movement for sexual equality. With the black church’s theological qualifier to love the sinner— us, but to hate the sin— our sexual orientation, we are permanent souls of the black church, but we are never fully welcomed. To be only tangentially aligned to these communities dangles our lives precariously by a thin thread, having the nagging feeling of marginalization if not complete dispossession. The marginalization of African American LGBT people became a concern for Hilda Evans. In the spring of 1997, a task force was formed to explore her question, and every Wednesday evening for two years a Bible study class convened on the theme, “Just what does the Bible really say about homosexuality?” In the fall of 1999, the task force drafted and circulated a statement to the entire church body for discussion on becoming a Reconciling and inclusive congregation. The following January, the task force sent their resolution to the church council for vote. “When we took this issue to the church body for a vote, it was not unanimously yes,” Evans told The Washington Blade. “There were some reservations. But we are Christians and Christ did not refuse anyone. This is the stand we’re taking.” During Black History Month, on February 15, the church council of Union voted to become a Reconciling and inclusive church body. The statement affirms, “Union United Methodist Church is a predominately African-American congregation within the church universal, The Body of Christ…We seek to address and advocate the rights, needs and concerns of gay men and lesbians in our church and society…Given their particular invisibility within the African-American community, we further affirm the full participation of all Black lesbians and gay men, and all other homosexual persons who confess Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, in all aspects of our life together as a congregation.” I never thought in my lifetime I would witness this moment in a black church. When I got up to speak from the pulpit at Union’s celebration I was fighting back my tears and joyously thinking of the many African American LGBT people who now have a place to worship in Boston. And I considered the amazing courage it took for Union United Methodist Church to struggle against the torrential waves of homophobia still current in the black church. Irene Monroe, named one of Boston’s “50 Most Intriguing Women” by Boston Magazine, is a graduate of Wellesley College and New York City’s Union Theological Seminary. She is a doctoral candidate in the Religion, Gender, and Culture program at Harvard Divinity School. The Editorial Advisory Committee invited her to be the first annual columnist for Open Hands. OPEN HANDS COLUMNIST FOR THE YEAR 2002 20 Open Hands We welcome 800-word submissions to “My Turning Point,” a regular feature of Open Hands, told in first person, about how you changed your mind about lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender people. Please include a snapshot of yourself and a brief self-description. My Turning Point Catherine Sager-Bohnert Passion for social justice has always been an earmark of my faith. In a seminary paper, I once described Jesus as the “Liberator” who came to set us free from all forms of personal and societal bondage so that we could give ourselves fully to the task of loving God and neighbor. This image of Jesus as Liberator came to shape my theology and practice of ministry. I first recognized incongruity between my beliefs and the official position of my denomination when I was a novice ministry candidate. Through the working of the Spirit I was paired with a candidacy guide who pastored a Reconciling congregation and introduced me to the Reconciling movement. As part of the process we spent some time examining the Social Principles in the United Methodist Book of Discipline, and I stumbled over this passage: “Homosexual persons no less than heterosexual persons are individuals of sacred worth…. Although we do not condone the practice of homosexuality and consider this practice incompatible with Christian teaching, we affirm that God’s grace is available to all.” It struck me as contradictory and presumptuous to profess the sacred worth of all persons only to imply that some were decidedly less holy than others. I began to question the United Methodist Church’s stance. Resolution to my doubts and questions came when the Spirit provided a catalyst in the form a woman in one of my classes who embodied everything I thought a Christian and pastor should be. She was gentle, kind, and intuitive, with gifts of empathy, honesty, and humility that both shamed and inspired me. One day she confided that she was a lesbian. Her revelation caused me no discomfort; rather, I experienced it as I would any intimate detail about a friend. I was touched by her trust and moved by her story of struggle to live with integrity in a culture that all too often offered only suspicion, fear, and hateful rejection. Because she was my friend, her pain became my pain. But I took it a step farther and felt the anger she had moved beyond. I was angry with any and all persons, especially Christians, who would judge and condemn her on the basis of her identity. And that is, for me, precisely where the issue hinged. It was a matter of identity, not the misleading terms of “choice” or “lifestyle.” During my remaining days in seminary, my disenchantment with narrow-minded religion grew. I discovered that the ugliest form of prejudice was the kind hiding insidiously under a veneer of religious self-righteousness. In a pastoral care class, several students admitted their reluctance to counsel persons who might be gay or lesbian. Then, two of my friends who were seeking student pastorates were turned down by their prospective churches; one rejected for being female and the other because of his interracial marriage. Each of these events shocked and outraged me, but I wanted to believe that they were isolated incidents and did not reflect the nature of the institution. I clung to the hope that the church would humble itself and be cleansed of its “isms”—racism, classism, sexism, and heterosexism—so that it could move forward, healed and whole, into a new era of fairness and equality for all. Any illusions I may have had along such lines were shattered by the decisions made at the denomination’s General Conference in the spring of 2000. By a strong majority, the delegates voted to retain the discriminatory language regarding homosexuality in the Book of Discipline, including the prohibition of “practicing” gays and lesbians from ordained ministry. I took a long, hard look at the church, and saw an institution unwilling to embrace all with the same kind of gratuitous love that Jesus displayed, an institution that decried injustice and intolerance all the while using criteria such as race, gender, and sexuality to determine who would and would not be allowed to fully participate. As I struggled to comprehend, the United Methodist Church announced a nationwide media campaign to promote its “open minds, open hearts, and open doors.” I was in disbelief over the church’s hypocrisy. I also could not help wondering how I could, with any sense of integrity, represent a denomination that seemed opposed to my most deeply held commitments. The turmoil that I felt was one factor in my decision to leave the candidacy process for ordained ministry in the UMC and explore the possibility of membership and ministry in other, more progressive, churches. I felt comfortable with Unitarian Universalist principles and attended services at a local church, but the emphasis on rationalism left me cold. I then ventured into the Unity church and found some solace, but could discern no meaningful outlet for mission and ministry. I despaired of finding a place where I could truly feel at home. But the Spirit brought persons into my life who encouraged and guided me. Amazingly, each of these persons had a connection to the Reconciling congregation that had once been pastored by my former candidacy guide. I found myself returning over and over again to this small but thriving church and always receiving a genuinely warm welcome. Their sincere commitment to “do justice, practice kindness, and walk humbly with God” won me over and I became a member. Even though I still sometimes wonder if I belong in the United Methodist Church, I have found a congregation where I have no doubt that I do. The time has come to recognize that sexual orientation and gender identity are lived realities just as race and gender, not just “issues.” Empowered by the Spirit, we must call the church to forsake its distraction with transient and illusory concerns. Liberated from idolatry, the church will then be free to give itself wholeheartedly to the work of loving God and neighbor. Catherine Sager-Bohnert is a graduate of the Methodist Theological School in Ohio and is a member of Central United Methodist Church, a Reconciling congregation in Toledo, Ohio. She dreams of the church becoming a community that celebrates God’s diverse world and lives in harmonious relationship with all of creation. Spring 2002 21 Conversion, The United Church of Canada Way Changing a Denominational Mind Alyson Huntly Some conversions happen in a flash of blinding light. Some don’t. For example, I’ve never had a once-for-all-time “moment.” Instead, my own conversion has happened over decades. Personal experience, challenge, encounter, the movement of God’s spirit in my life—all this has drawn me over and over again into a new ways of seeing myself, God, and the world. Feminism, coming out, waking up to racism and economic injustice, spiritual reawakening— all these have been ongoing conversions. I think my own denomination, The United Church of Canada, is a bit like me. The United Church didn’t become converted to a queer-positive stance in a blinding flash. In fact, the United Church doesn’t seem to do anything in a blinding flash. Maybe it’s our Canadian nature, maybe it’s our history, maybe it’s the climate, who knows. But we seem to move slowly to new ways of seeing and being. In August 2000, The United Church of Canada renounced a forty-year old resolution that had declared homosexuality as sin. The General Council, the United Church’s highest elected body, made the decision after three hours of serious but respectful debate and personal sharing. The General Council also encouraged all church members and church courts to offer healing for the damage caused by the church’s historic stance on homosexuality. It affirmed that all human sexual orientations are a gift from God. It affirmed gay and lesbian partnerships and agreed to work for their civil recognition as well as to honor them in services of blessing. And, it encouraged the congregations of the United Church to enter into the Affirming congregation study process. (The Affirming congregation program is the welcoming movement within The United Church of Canada.) And so, The United Church took a few more small steps towards inclusion and justice for GLBT people. In the Beginning… It has been a long journey. In the mid-1970’s the United Church sweated and debated and studied some more, as it struggled to come to terms with emerging understandings of sexuality— human sexuality in general, feminism, and homosexuality in particular. After almost a decade of deferrals “for further study” the United Church finally faced up to the issue of sexual orientation and ministry, declaring in 1988 that all people, regardless of sexual orientation, could be members of the United Church and that all members were eligible to be considered for ordered ministry. Even though the secular media declared the ordination of homosexuals a done deal in 1988, this decision by no means ended the debate. Two years later the church revisited, and confirmed, its decision on ministry. And in the years that followed, new issues entered the arena: the blessing of samegender relationships, civil rights for gay, lesbian, and bisexual people, the situation of gay, lesbian, and bisexual youth in Canada, and the experiences of gay, lesbian, and bisexual people in ministry. The United Church continues to work on the issues, with national standing committees, study and action programs, and, for those congregations in the Affirming congregation program, study and reflection. The process goes on—personal stories, study and debate, and changes in society and individual “conversions” all combine to challenge and change the church. “Change isn’t as dramatic as sudden conversion.” Gary Boratto, a United Church minister from Waterloo, Ontario, was a delegate to the 2000 General Council. “For most of us, change isn’t as dramatic as sudden conversion,” he says. “I can’t point to any one moment when my former self suddenly wasn’t what it was supposed to be.” Gary thinks it’s like that in the church, as people and institutions slowly grow and move. He points to a danger in making the church’s decisions in 2000 seem overly dramatic or heroic. “I think we’re finally catching up to where the world is,” he says. “I don’t think we should try to make ourselves sound noble just for doing what we should be doing. I don’t think there is anything particularly noble about my own congregation deciding to become an Affirming congregation. I am proud of them but they are only doing what they should be doing. Places where there is repression— those are where the real bright lights are.” Gary doesn’t think the decisions of the 2000 General Council were hard for the church. “For all their nonsense, the media has helped. The immense amount of media coverage, and even the sitcoms, have normalized gay and lesbian relationships. Even the Simpson’s had an episode about a gay man! The comfort levels have increased, so I don’t think it was such a terribly difficult thing for the church to do.” Some parts of the process are more difficult, however. The imperative of the issues still calls people to speak out because they simply cannot remain silent. Gary recalls the bravery of people who told personal testimonies at the General Council meeting. “There was a young man who stood up and talked as 22 Open Hands a gay man, knowing that he could lose his job.” It may not be a single blinding flash, but there is still something remarkable about the change that continues in the United Church. These many little conversions that have opened the church Teresa Moysey, also a United Church minister, was another a delegate to the General Council in 2000. Even two years later there are moments that stand out in her mind. Events that have occurred in one form or another each time the church has debated homosexuality still have a ring of the miraculous about them. “As folk lined up at the microphones to debate the resolution (renouncing the statement that homosexuality is a sin), one of the folks who had been vocally anti-gay in the past said his name. Even those who didn’t know him by appearance recognized the name.” Teresa recalls. “He began talking about the history of where we’ve been on this issue and how we pledged to continue to walk together whatever our opinion. People thought he was going to say that we’d failed to do that, or something, but he didn’t. He said, ‘I think this is the next step we need to take.’ The room went dead silent.” It has happened many times before, these many little conversions that have opened up the church, but it is still awesome when it happens. It’s a reminder of the movement of God in the conversion process. Time and again as the United Church has debated the hard issues of human sexuality, people have commented on the profound spirituality of the experience. This debate was no exception. “There was an enormous sense of the Spirit in what was going on,” Teresa says. “The Spirit allowed us to listen to one another and in the midst of that to discern God’s presence. There was strong debate but always in a very respectful tone. That commission was a blessing to those of us who were able to be part of it.” In Teresa’s home congregation in Winnipeg, Manitoba, the issue of whether or not to become an Affirming congregation has been on and off the table for a few years now. It’s back on the table at the moment, with a committee looking at it once again. Some think it’s a good idea, some think it’s passé, what with all the changes in legislation that have happened in that province. Some people are pretty sure lesbians and gays would be welcome in the church regardless of what is decided. “This is all good discussion to have. It’s what we’ll be talking about,” says Teresa. “I think we’re moving on and I think on the whole we want to be more open and understanding.” Teresa thinks her congregation is fairly typical of other United Churches in her area. It’s probably quite typical of the church as a whole. Slow and steady, a bit on the cautious side, but moving. It’s what you’d call conversion, United Church of Canada style. Alyson Huntly is a United Church diaconal minister. She is the author of many books and resources on justice and spirituality, including Daring to Be United: Including Lesbians and Gays in The United Church of Canada; The Gentle Dark; and Naomi’s Daughters: Bridging the Generations. She lives in Ottawa, Canada. PLEASE SEND MONEY Yes, it’s that simple. Open Hands needs both major and minor donors to survive, and someday, come back into print. Please give generously. Invite your congregations or groups to give generously and to include Open Hands in their annual budgets. Please send donations payable to Open Hands / RMN to Open Hands, 3801 N. Keeler, Chicago IL 60641. THANK YOU! Spring 2002 23 God’s Wide Embrace LAKEWOOD L.M. Words: W J Matson Music: W J Matson 24 Open Hands More than 15 years have passed since I attended Liberty, and I must say that I have been honored to become a “champion”— but one very different than Christian fundamentalists ever imagined. I grew up in a very religious family on the island of Deer Isle, located off the Maine coast. My father passed away in a car accident when I was six years old, and I spent much of my early childhood days living with my grandparents. They were a religious couple, slow to preach, but quick to practice love and acceptance. That example was powerful as I pondered God’s call to serve others through ministry. During my high school years, my grandfather’s walking disability often prevented him from attending church. His Sunday mornings were devoted to listening to TV evangelists. His favorite was Jerry Falwell. It is hard to explain how intriguing Falwell can be. His personality can be infectious to many. Falwell was just beginning a Christian college, and in 1978, with the encouragement of my grandfather, I enrolled in Liberty Baptist College (now Liberty University). I loved it at Liberty. The rules were incredibly strict, but there was an excitement in working hard to prepare to serve God. Not only did I get a solid liberal education, I got some of the best teaching in the Bible, theology, biblical languages and church growth. By the time I finished Liberty Baptist Seminary, I was recognized as the top student in the field of theology. Liberty went through formative changes when I was in attendance. In 1979, Falwell started the Moral Majority. Nothing would ever be the same as we were encouraged not just to reach others for Christ, but to work hard to return a moral sensibility to a needful nation. Like most others at Liberty, I bought into that rhetoric and world view. Sitting in the pew, listening to Jerry Falwell preach each week, can put one in a tremendous state of denial. I experienced affectional attraction toward other guys, thoughts I always remember having, but I chose to put those feelings aside and squelch them. I knew I was called to be a minister and I believed that with enough faith, God would solve my problem. I journeyed from Virginia with an offer to work in Christian Education at a Baptist church in Waipahu, Hawai‘i. That was a great year, but in 1985, I was offered a more fulfilling position working for a Baptist church in San Jose, California. I loved my work, but there continued to be an undercurrent of struggle regarding my sexual orientation. I tried with every ounce of strength to get rid of this desire with an inordinate amount of prayer and abstinence. I began attending an ex-gay ministry. Nothing seemed to work. I was lost. I was defeated. In 1989, after many years of great frustration, I “threw in the towel” and walked away from the ministry. I walk away from the world of fundamentalism, starting my whole life over, knowing I could not change, no matter how much others said I could. I had given it my best. I finally had to come to terms with the fact that I was gay. I had a background in education and I started teaching in a middle school while working toward a graduate degree in administration from the University of San Francisco. In 1990, I saw an advertisement in a gay paper for an “Open & Affirming” congregation called First Christian in San Jose, California. I visited for nearly a year. In 1991, I was formally welcomed as a member of this new church. God began to open my eyes to a whole new view of ministry and service. I committed myself to the issues of justice and peace, and I began to truly understand what it meant to stand alongside those who are marginalized. In 1994, after working in preparation with the Northern California Region of the Disciples of Christ, I was ordained. I had no intention of going back to my “closeted” days as a Baptist, and made it very clear that I was to be ordained “openly” gay. I entered the pastoral search process for churches. I applied for several years, but soon realized that most Disciples churches were not “ready” to hire an openly gay pastor. Many Disciples’ regions would not ordain gays or lesbians. I had moved forward by leaving fundamentalism, but I had no idea how narrow the road would still be. The years I was not considered for a pastoral position were painful, but they still were good years. I had the joy of becoming a school principal, and then, most surprisingly of all, I became the executive director of the Council of Churches of Santa Clara County in July, From Falwell’s Liberty College to Gay Pride’s Grand Marshal Vaughn F. Beckman Jerry Falwell constantly reminded us at Liberty University and Liberty Baptist Seminary that we were being trained to be “Champions for Christ.” Vaughn with his grandmother at his graduation from Liberty Baptist College (now Liberty University) in May 1981. Spring 2002 25 1997. There is some irony in heading a coalition of 100 congregations, many of which I could never pastor. The Council accomplished much, including programs on homelessness, economic justice, youth assets, violence prevention, and gay ministries. We organized more than 50 affirming churches into the “Alliance of Welcoming Ministries” and held powerful gay pride worship services. I joined the Steering Committee of the Interfaith Council in Silicon Valley, was appointed to the City of San Jose Human Rights Commission and to the County of Santa Clara Human Relations Commission. In 1998, the County awarded me one of the first “Unity in Diversity” Awards, and in 1999, I was named Grand Marshal of the San Jose Gay Pride Parade. I was honored. I look back and am amazed at how much I have grown and changed over my many years since leaving Liberty. Thanks be to the Divine for opening me to see, hear, and understand all people. In 2000, I began to work part-time as Director of the San Jose Peace Center while making a commitment to re-enter the pastoral search process again. Amazing things do happen! On September 9, 2001, I was installed as the senior pastor of the First Christian Church of Honolulu, Hawai‘i. The journey toward answering the call to be a church pastor was finally fulfilled. It has been a long and unexpected road from Liberty to Honolulu. Not an easy one, but one I would not change. In the midst of this difficult and painful journey, I have found “wholeness” about who I am, but even more importantly: I have been given the gift of sharing and teaching that wholeness to others. Vaughn F. Beckman is senior pastor of First Christian Church, Honolulu, Hawai‘i, an Open & Affirming Disciples of Christ congregation. He serves on the Council of GLAD (Gay, Lesbian, and Affirming Disciples Alliance) and the Open Hands Editorial Advisory Committee. Vaughn as Grand Marshal in the 1999 San Jose Gay Pride Parade. ecumenical welcoming Bible study resource on homosexuality ✦ seven-session study series ✦ For more information or to place order contact: Reconciling Ministries Network 3801 N. Keeler Avenue Chicago, IL 60641 voice: 773/736-5526 fax: 773/736-5475 www.RMNetwork.org Claiming the Promise ▼ Examines biblical references to same-sex conduct in light of the broader biblical message which affirms that we are children or heirs of the Promise. ▼ Explores biblical authority and biblical interpretation. ▼ Discusses “gracious hospitality,” “gift-ed sexuality,” and “inclusive holiness.” ▼ Tackles hard questions of “right relationship,” lust/love, and sexual responsibility. ▼ Calls us all to live out the Promise as reconciling disciples. Includes adaptation for using with youth study book $5.95 leader’s guide $9.95 discounts for bulk quantities Shapiing Sancttuarry Proclaiming God’s Grace in an Inclusive Church ISBN # 0-9701568-0-4 Order from your denominational Welcoming organization or from www.RMNetwork.org Don’t miss this opportunity to “help the rest of the church rediscover its soul.” —from book review by James B. Nelson $14.00 A collection of essays, sermons, liturgies, and hymns from the Welcoming movement. Valuing Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender persons as an integral part of the Body of Christ. Exploring themes of embodiment theology, integrating spirituality and sexuality, and inclusive worship. Includes an eight-week group study guide. 26 Open Hands I am a reconciling United Methodist. I want to tell you why. In 1991 while my husband Oliver and I were visiting Berlin. In one of the museums we saw these words of Lutheran pastor Martin Niemöller from 1945: First they came for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for socialists and trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up, because I was neither. Then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, And I didn’t speak up, because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, And by that time there was no one left to speak up for me. More than anything else that I read on that trip, those words have remained in my consciousness and shaped my understanding of my witness in the world. Being a woman of African descent in the United States, enjoying the measure of opportunity and freedom that I have, I know that to be able to do so is contrary to the history of persons like myself in this country. Someone helped to change the course of that history. Someone who was not a person of African descent stood against slavery. Someone who was not a woman stood against oppression and exclusion of women. Someone stood up for me when I was not present or able to stand up for myself. It is a gift from each one who made that choice for which I can only express gratitude by doing the same for someone else. I experience this gift from others especially in my role as an ordained person, an opportunity that, at times in the history of the church, was denied to blacks and to women. Time has vindicated those who stood against the exclusion and oppression in the wider society and in the church of those of African descent and those who happen to have been born female. Yet there remain those who would resist full inclusion in the life and ministry of the church of either women or blacks or both. Even though the sins of racism and sexism still stain the garments of Christians, they are widely recognized as sins, incompatible with the Gospel. That has not always been so. Christians in the past were wrong and they justified their sin of racism or sexism by both the Bible and Christian tradition. In 1993, I officiated at the funeral service of my cousin, who died as a result of being infected by the AIDS virus. The pastor of the church where he had been an active member for many years should have led that service, and it should have been held in the sanctuary where my cousin had worshiped and sung in the choir until he felt excluded. But when a new pastor was selected, my cousin no longer felt welcomed and stopped attending. At one family reunion, he and I had stood together in my mother’s kitchen making homemade ice cream and trying to identify a church where he might feel both welcomed as a gay man and nourished spiritually. He had already tried all the congregations I knew anything about, but he had not found a new congregation to call home. He could not be buried from a church that had nurtured his relationship with God and to which he had given so much of his personal time and resources. Because I was on the staff of Howard University School of Divinity, his memorial service was held in the chapel there. In that reality, I experienced much pain and regret that his community of faith, my sisters and brothers in Christ, could reject him in this way. I had come a long way from my days of innocence, ignorance, and confusion about what it meant for persons to be gay or lesbians. (When I entered seminary, I was not even able to get my mind A Letter to My Sisters and Brothers in Christ By Youtha C. Hardman-Cromwell Spring 2002 27 around the concepts of bisexuality and transgendered realities.) But I had the experience of my cousin, musicians in the church of my childhood, and others whose paths had crossed mine. More persons widened my experience, proving an intellectual challenge to my thinking. I first wrestled with the issue of homosexuality being a choice. How could or would someone choose to be treated with such disdain? Why would one choose a life that led to so much pain for the person and one’s family? To do so would be to act insanely and clearly there was no other indication that these people I knew were insane. I had to take a closer look at this issue. There had to be another explanation for the existence of homosexuals in the world. For me the fact that they were created a minority did not argue for their not being a variation in God’s creative plan. I thought about my mother who is clearly ambidextrous if not a left-handed person. She uses her left hand for all those things we teach: writing, cutting with scissors, and the like. When she was a child, left-handedness was unacceptable. Children who were left-handed were forced to learn to use their right hands instead. Some people asserted that left-handedness was evil, associated with the devil. But my mother is naturally left-handed. She is not evil. She is and was and has always been a window to God for me. Through her life and love, I am able to get a glimpse of who God is. Those who made her write with her right hand were wrong. To be left-handed is not wrong. All that God has created is good, even when it is not the norm and is not understood by us. “And God saw all that had been made and it was very good.” It is not coincidental that homosexuals were once commonly, in the black community at least, referred to as “left-handed.” So it must be for all God’s children: we are all created good. I am black. I did not choose it. I am a woman. I did not choose to be female. But I love being a black woman, child of God, ordained minister of the Gospel. God did not make a mistake with me. I do not believe that God was mistaken when God created some of us gay, some lesbian, some transgender, some bisexual, and some straight. Some of us are left-handed. The mistake, indeed the sin, is in our misjudgment and in our fear of that which is different and of that which we do not understand. How, then, can I look into the eyes of my gay brothers, lesbian sisters, bisexuals, transgenders or transsexuals, and other of my brothers and sisters who may know themselves to be sexual persons in ways that I do not experience or fully understand? How can I see their exclusion and oppression and turn away uncaring? How can I leave them without my assistance, support, and love to resist those who would exclude them from the circle of God? I cannot stand by to watch them try to open doors of the church and not lend my being to the effort. I must take a stand against their exclusion and oppression. I must stand for my own sake and for the memory of my cousin and for the health and faithfulness of the church and for our shared belief in the love of God for all persons. We understand our racism and sexism better now than we did in the past. I believe that someday we will understand our homophobia and heterosexism better for what they are—sin. I want in my lifetime to have been on the right side of this issue—God’s side—affirming as good all God has created. Instead of exclusion, the energy of the church family should be directed at how we can affirm each other in all our created variety and how we can construct and live by a moral system that helps us all be more faithful to God’s purpose for our sexual energy and desire. This must be an ethic that includes the behavior of us all: heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, transgender, or …. When they came for me—black woman who sought ordination—someone had been there for me. What if they should come again? What if they come for you or for your children? Your partner in the work of our Lord, Youtha C. Hardman-Cromwell Youtha C. Hardman-Cromwell is the director of the Practice in Ministry and Mission Program at Wesley Theological Seminary. She created and taught “Sexual Issues in Parish Ministry” while on the faculty at Howard University School of Divinity, and now teaches that course at Wesley Theological Seminary. Youtha serves as the Program Chair for the Reconciling Ministries Network. Am I normal? It’s a constant question for most gay, lesbian, transgender, bisexual, and sexually questioning people. Our bodies and desires constantly raise the issue, “Am I normal?” I certainly don’t fit the standards of normality set by heterosexual society. In every magazine, on every billboard, everywhere I look, I see men with women in passionate embraces. Heterosexual marriage is expected of almost everyone; just ask my grandma who is constantly concerned that I don’t have a “little woman” in my life. Heterosexuality is assumed. One of the first questions anyone asks when meeting me is, “Are you married?” Every form I fill out asks for sex and marital status, and I don’t fit any of the boxes provided. So, no, I am not normal, not “heteronormal.” But, am I queer? This debate is raging in gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgendered communities. Most of us GLBT folks are fairly ordinary people, especially those of us who are Christian. People who take on the name “queer” are often the flamboyant and radical fringe, and few would want to identify with them. Most of us would be happy to accept conservative, gay writer Andrew Sullivan’s description of himself as “virtually normal” in his book by that title. We realize that we may not be completely “normal,” but we don’t want to think of ourselves as “queer.” We want to fit into ordinary society and ordinary churches, be treated fairly, and just blend in. Gay writer David Link describes this feeling well after a wonderfully welcoming Thanksgiving with his family: I have wrestled with myself over whether, as a gay man, I am queer. I have decided that I am not. Queer is the word of the other, of the outsider, I do not feel as if I am outside anything due to my sexual orientation.” (Link, p. 271) Yet, aren’t we outsiders? How can GLBT people not be outsiders? We can’t just “decide that I am not queer,” because that designation is something that others decide for us! Gay, lesbian, transgender, and bisexual people are the “other” in a heteronormative society. Heterosexuality is expected, is seen as normal, so then by definition of that society, a GLBT person is abnormal or queer. Queer theory recognizes and accepts that reality and works from there. It has little to do with flamboyance or radical politics. Describing ourselves as “queer” is simply recognizing the very real nature of heteronormativity in our culture. Gay writer and historian Bruce Bawer has argued eloquently against using the word “queer” and against what he understands as queer theory and politics. His book A Place at the Table argues for gay and lesbian inclusion in “normal” society and against queer theory/gay studies. He says: Gay Studies scholars are inclined to agree with anti-gay reactionaries on one point— namely, that gays will never be accepted as full and equal members of society, will never be allowed their places at the table. Indeed, these scholars tend to dismiss the idea of society as consisting, metaphorically speaking, of a single big table. (Bawer, Table, p. 210) And in another book, Beyond Queer, he quotes a lesbian, queer activist, “We don’t want a place at the table—we want to turn the table over.” (Bawer, Beyond Queer, p. 18) Bawer is concerned that radical queer politics harms the cause of gay and lesbian civil rights, overturning the table. He insists that most gay and lesbian folks are not radical, but are quietly quite ordinary. Bawer suggests that we are just like everyone else, so we deserve our rights and our place at the big, happy American table. No one would argue with the politics of civil rights for GLBT folks, but queer theory does challenge Bawer’s presuppositions. Can anyone really be “normal”? Everyone is unique in some way. Queer theorists dare to suggest that there is no “normal”! This great, big, welcoming table does not exist in American culture. We have become much too diverse, multicultural, multi-racial, and differently sexualized. Instead of trying to be accepted into “normal” society, just like everyone else, “queer” folks are trying to rethink the whole structure of how we construct our society. Queer activist Michael Warner writes in his book Fear of a Queer Planet: Many people in the last two or three years...have shifted their self-identification from “gay” to “queer.” The preference for “queer” represents, among other things, an aggressive impulse of generalization; it rejects a minoritizing logic of toleration of simple political interest- representation in favor of a more thorough resistance to regimes of the normal. (Warner, p. xxvi) These “queers” want to challenge the entire “regime of the normal,” not settle for mere toleration or simply working for political interest representation. They want to explore how the whole of society is permeated by sexuality and diversity, and not settle for a nice “normal” smile and a pat on the head. Radical queer feminist Pat Califia talks about the same idea more colorfully as she describes traditional lesbian writers: It was almost as if on some level they were still hoping to have Mom or the parish priest pat them on their heads and say, “There, there, I understand now. Being a lesbian is a good thing. You’re not a sexual misfit. You’re a freedom fighter.” (Califia, p. 15) That’s a beautiful dream, a dream where we all completely accept each other as equals, seeing no differences, recognizing every single person as “good.” But, that has never happened, and it is not going to happen! Majority society has a powerful need to create an “other” by which it can define itself and justify its practices. Women, minority races, poor people, the disabled, and especially GLBT folks have been forced into this role as “abnormal other,” and the “normals” “How I Do Sex” is a feature of Open Hands that explores how the writer reconciles or integrates sexuality and spirituality. Submissions should be 800 words and accompanied by a photo and brief self-description. An Essay in Queer Christianity Erwin C. Barron How I Do Sex 28 Open Hands feel free to ostracize, ridicule, oppress, pity, and even to kill people in these groups, thereby, giving themselves more power. We don’t have to be flamboyant queens or leather dykes or radical fairies to be queer. No, we just are queer. By calling ourselves “queer” and exploring queer theory, we are deconstructing the idea of what is “normal.” As post-normal queers, we free everyone, both “normal” and “abnormal.” When we escape the tyranny of the “normal” we prepare the world for a kind of radical new inclusiveness where we celebrate real differences, where we refuse to categorize and we recognize the queer in everyone. We can find there a totally new kind of community. There we find the radically queer Reign of God Perhaps Jesus had that in mind in his strange story about the wedding banquet in Luke 14:16-24. All the “normal” people were invited to the banquet. The places at the table had been set for the respectable, good, “normal” people. But, they refused to come! They had good “normal” things they needed to take care of. One had just been married, so the good heterosexual man could not, of course, come to the banquet. Instead, the host is forced to invite the sick, the disabled, the sinners—the queer, in a word. But not enough of them would accept the invitation. Perhaps they had trouble with being called “queer.” So, the host invited yet others to come to the table. And then, most amazingly, he declared that none of the “normal” people would be allowed to sit at this table, which believers equate with God’s kingdom! That is a radically different kind of banquet. That is a new kind of community, accepting differences in a radically new way. That is a queer banquet table, where there are no “normals.” And yet it is still the Lord’s table! May we all be compelled to come to God’s queer table just as we are, to enjoy the feast, welcomed by God’s loving arms! Erwin Barron is a Presbyterian minister living in the San Francisco Bay area with his life partner, Asher. Erwin is completing his Ph.D. in ethics and social thought at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley. He is also Director of Christian Education of Old First Presbyterian Church in San Francisco, where he tries to help folks think of themselves as being just a little “queer.” References: Bawer, Bruce, “Introduction,” Beyond Queer, Bruce Bawer, ed. (New York: The Free Press, 1996), ix - xv. Bawer, “The Road to Utopia,” Beyond Queer, Bruce Bawer, ed. (New York: The Free Press, 1996), 16-19. Bawer, A Place at the Table (New York: Touchstone, 1993). Califia, Pat, “Introduction,” Public Sex: The Culture of Radical Sex (Cleis Press, 1994), 11-26. Davis, Lennard, “Constructing Normalcy,” Disability Studies Reader, Lennard Davis, ed. (Routledge, 1997), 9-28. Donley, Carol and Sheryl Buckley. The Tyranny of the Normal: An Anthology. (Kent, OH: The Kent State University Press, 1996). Fiedler, Leslie. Tyranny of the Normal (Boston: David R. Godine, 1996). “It’s Normal to Be Queer,” The Economist, January 6, 1996, 68-70. Link, David, “I Am Not Queer,” Beyond Queer, Bruce Bawer, ed. (New York: The Free Press, 1996), 266-278. Warner, Michael, “Introduction,” Fear of a Queer Planet, Michael Warner, ed. (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1993), vii - xxvii. One Change Leads to Another Bob Brashear Excerpted from a sermon, “Reformed and Reforming,” delivered October 28, 2001 in New York City. It was a day that changed everything. Not a day of violence, like we know so well, but a simple act that changed everything. October 31st, 1517. Martin Luther went to the Cathedral at Wittenberg and nailed his 95 theses to the door. What was it that drove him to do that, that day? There was a new Cathedral to be built: St. Peter’s basilica in Rome. And in these pre-bingo days, the best fundraising scheme was the sale of indulgences, the idea that saints could pray to get our loved ones out of purgatory, shorten their stay. And for so many days on the dollar, those prayers could be sold. This didn’t sit right with Luther. And the problem is, once you start asking questions, one leads to another. His questions about the sale of indulgences led him to question the whole idea of saints, to reinterpret the communion of saints as being that gathering of all believers at Eucharist. So the day he chose to nail his theses was chosen deliberately, All Hallows Eve, the night before the feast of All Saints, the day commemorating all the little saints not big enough for their own day. His thoughts about saints led him to believe that there was a priesthood of all believers— that all believers had their own ministry, whether seminary-trained, ordained or not. And if all believers had their ministry, then the Bible needed to be in the language of the people, in the hands of the people. So he translated the Bible into German. And so the internet of his day, the printing press, was used to get the Bible into the hands of the people. And if people needed to read the Bible, then they needed to be able to read., thus the Reformation’s emphasis on education. His thoughts went to worship as well. If the Bible should be in the vernacular, then music should be in the vernacular too. He believed that on Sunday morning, people should worship with the same music they drank and caroused to the night before. Drinking songs, songs of the streets would become the source music for new hymns. Even though at the start, he had no more desire to start a new denomination than Jesus did a new religion, his action had political and theological implications that create change to this day. ▼ Bob Brashear, a graduate of Yale Divinity School, is pastor of West Park Presbyterian Church in New York City. Spring 2002 29 30 Open Hands The second Witness Our Welcome gathering has been scheduled on the University of Pennsylvania campus in Philadelphia August 14-17, 2003. The campus is readily accessible to the city’s historic district, cultural centers, and gay community. The WOW2003 Coordinating Committee is seeking recommendations for speakers, topics, and workshops. Visit the website (www.wow2k.org) and mark your calendars. Chicago Theological Seminary hosted a public reception April 26 to launch its new Gay & Lesbian Religious Archives Project (www.glra.org). The GLRA will coordinate and support the preservation of the history and records of the GLBT Christian movement in the U.S., stimulating and enabling scholarly research in the field. Founder and former publisher of Open Hands Mark Bowman serves as GLRA’s coordinator. Funding has been provided by the E. Rhodes and Leona B. Carpenter Foundation and the Riverside Church Sharing Fund. Reconciling Ministries Network announced a new online ministry on its website (www.rmnetwork.org) that will provide devotional material “to help you in your Reconciling journey.” Minneapolis-based AHS Foundation announced funding for RMN in its efforts to enlist United Methodists in northern jurisdictions who want to reclaim the Wesleyan tradition of a fully inclusive church. More Light Presbyterians expressed disappointment at the defeat this year of Amendment A to the Presbyterian Book of Order that would have deleted its anti-gay ordination provision. In the wake of the defeat has come a flurry of more than a dozen court judicial cases against individuals who are gay and lesbian or have ordained gays and lesbians, most initiated by an individual layperson living in Virginia but holding membership in a conservative church in southern California. Bishop Paul Egertson, spouse Shirley Egertson, and Rev. Reinie Heydemann were honored with the 2002 Jim Siefkes Award by Lutherans Concerned at a banquet during the Biennial Assembly of Lutherans Concerned/North America, held July 18-21 on the campus of Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. The Egertsons, long active in our movement in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, were recently featured in a video on parents of gay or lesbian children produced by Lutherans Concerned. In April, 2002, Bishop Egertson participated in the ordination of Rev. Anita Hill in St. Paul, Minnesota (see her story in Open Hands, Winter 2002, issue [Vol. 17, No. 3]). Heydemann, of Edmonton, Alberta, has been a leader of our movement in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada, strengthening Lutherans Concerned within that denomination. The Siefkes award recognizes nongay advocates and is named for Pastor Jim Siefkes, who initiated the meeting which led to the founding of Lutherans Concerned in 1974. The Brethren Mennonite Council has welcomed Gloria Kroph Nafziger of Kitchner, Ontario, to serve as the first Director of the Supportive Congregations Network Ministries. From her local Publicly Affirming congregation and broader Mennonite Church leadership to the board of Christian Lesbians Out Together (CLOUT) and chair of the BMC, she has been an energetic contributor to the Welcoming movement, speaking and publishing widely. Nafziger will be providing support and resources to SCN congregations, pastors, and others who are supportive. Creating this position frees up other staff to focus on GLBT outreach, and was made possible by a challenge grant from the Gill Foundation of Colorado (www.gillfoundation.org) and BMC donors. The Gill Foundation, with an endowment of $260 million, is the largest funder of LGBT organizations in the U.S. Movement News God’s Sense of Humor —The rainbow banner celebrating Gay Pride in Columbus, Ohio, was mounted on the city’s light posts alongside Presbyterian banners commemorating the denomination’s annual legislative session meeting there in June. General Assembly was relatively quiet on LGBT issues this year; but pro-GLBT meals, meetings, and worships were very well attended. The More Light Presbyterian luncheon focused for the first time on transgender and bisexual concerns with speakers Rev. Erin Swenson of Atlanta and Rev. Susan Halcomb Craig of Los Angeles. Jack Hartwein-Sanchez Spring 2002 31 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 Open Hands Vol 17 No 4 - How I Changed My Mind: Profiles in Grace and Courage https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/ea519b9bc7b0d95857e86ab192c32007.pdf 14388435b367c77803f7462c7dbdb968 Issue An issue of a recurring publication. Volume Number The volume number of the issue 18 Issue Number The number of the issue (within a volume) 1 Publication Year The year the issue was published 2002 Publication Date The date the issue was published Summer Text Any textual data included in the document OPEN HANDS Vol. 18, No. 1 2002 RACISM OUR INCOMPLETE RAINBOW editor’s word Chris Glaser Now It’s Time to Say Goodbye A description of the theme of this issue and a farewell from Open Hands. wow 2000 Three views of “the racial incident” during the first Witness Our Welcome gathering in the year 2000: How It All Began Donn Crail “What color?” I asked. Witnessing Our Unwelcome Irene Monroe Open Hand’s 2002 Columnist describes what was offensive at the gathering and offers suggestions for WOW 2003. White Privilege Chris Paige The description of a white lesbian’s conversion experience about racism as a result of the episode. other feature articles Born to Belong Mab Segrest Born into segregation, a Freedom Writer describes her journey toward truth. Teaching the Roots of Racism A Guide for Discussion Mab Segrest The history of colonialism invented the notion of race. The Way Things Were Reflecting on the Life of Bayard Rustin Lila Frazier An authentic gay African American civil rights hero. A True WOW Experience A Dialogue Eric H. F. Law The dialogue that should have happened at WOW 2000. sustaining the spirit Reflections for a Service of Confession and Repentance for Racism Ralph Williams Two churches separated by race long ago reach out to one another. columns you’re welcome! “The Play’s the Thing...” Clergy Dramatize the Church Conflict Over Homosexuality Ron Skidmore leadership How I Spent My Summer Vacation Matt Smucker Being ordained Brethren style. editor’s word Now It’s Time to Say Goodbye This will be the final issue of Open Hands. Together we grieve the loss of a unique quarterly magazine that served as the voice of the Welcoming movement—individuals and congregations across many denominations seeking to include lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people. There are a host of reasons for any publication’s demise, of course, but the main cause is financial. Yet with what a vital theme for us to go out on: “Racism: Our Incomplete Rainbow.” The Open Hands Editorial Advisory Committee, whose work through our more than seventeen-year publishing history I hereby commend with gratitude, chose this theme as a result of issues raised during the first Welcoming movement gathering: Witness Our Welcome, WOW 2000. An incident occurred at WOW 2000 which made some question how truly welcoming we were. Though invited, the offended party chose not to write of the episode, but it is well represented in Irene Monroe’s reflection on what happened. I personally asked Donn Crail to submit his own version of the experience, which I had heard from him some months later. Regardless of how one interprets “the incident,” Chris Paige, publisher of The Other Side, found it opened her eyes to something the Welcoming movement must recognize, and something we’ve tried to address in the other theme articles of this issue. I believe the three opening pieces together remind us that, as with any justice issue, both intentions and perceptions must be taken into account. As the prophet Samuel was told when anointing a second leader for Israel, God looks on the heart (1 Samuel 16:7). It’s the heart that intends and perceives. We must look into one another’s hearts to resolve our conflicts and find healing among us, the commonwealth of God in our midst. As a writer and an editor, I believe words help us do just that, thus the value of magazines like Open Hands. Ending my four years as Open Hands editor with an issue focused on racism feels like coming full circle. It was the U.S. civil rights movement that prompted my involvement with justice issues and ultimately the LGBT justice movement. I became a Presbyterian because a local church was wholeheartedly addressing racism and the denomination had then recently produced a confession that focused on reconciliation, especially among races. As I resisted racial prejudice, I became aware of the prejudice that kept me from accepting my sexual identity. The courage of those who fought for racial equality challenged me to struggle for LGBT acceptance. The golden words of a deeply spiritual African American high school principal made me want to speak and write with such meaning and clarity and inspiration. And the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. demonstrated that the church could be key to social change. As I say goodbye with this issue, I acknowledge with gratitude Open Hands founders Mark Bowman and Beth Richardson, as well as Mary Jo Osterman, my immediate predecessor, and Jan Graves, who served as designer with both Mary Jo and then with me. I have such enormous respect for all of them. Jan became a special friend over the years (really, we were “sisters”!), and I will miss working with her. I want to thank the Reconciling Congregation Program and the Reconciling Ministries Network, which, under the leadership of Mark Bowman and Marilyn Alexander, published Open Hands. RCP and RMN and their ecumenical partners (the Welcoming programs of other denominations) have made an outstanding contribution to the literature of the LGBT movement with their support. I thank the writers, artists, and photographers who graciously and generously contributed content without compensation, the readers whose subscriptions and contributions and feedback kept us going, and the donors and advertisers who believed in Open Hands and an open church. May God bless you all. Chris Glaser Editor, Open Hands How It All Began Background to the WOW 2000 Controversy Donn Crail Lest the reader think I’m nursing a grudge, the incident at the Witness Our Welcome (WOW) 2000 conference I describe here I put behind me soon after the conference ended, though I had found the experience “educative.” Learning of my experience some months afterward, the editor of Open Hands, Chris Glaser, asked me to share it so that any similar misunderstanding might be avoided at a future conference. The “incident” occurred on the first evening of the conference during the opening plenary session. Someone on the platform was giving us a visual experience of how denominationally diverse we were by asking those from various denominations to stand, and then those from various regions of the country. Someone from the back hollered out that we should also ask “people of color” to stand. It was obvious that there were a number of racial groups present. Feeling the term in that situation lacked specificity I hollered out, “What color?” The intent was to show sensitivity to the racial diversity in the room, but that was not its effect. An African American behind me said angrily “Any color but white.” Had the question come from an Asian or Hispanic person, it perhaps would not have been negatively perceived as it did coming from a “white-not of color” person. I came very soon to regret having asked “What color?” the way one regrets having put one’s finger in a live socket. To some I apparently had been grossly “politically incorrect.” The next morning I came into the hall as someone who had requested the privilege of the floor was speaking about the “incident” the evening before. “What incident,” I wondered? Within a few minutes I realized that she was very angry and that it was because “someone” there had asked “What color?” Immediately after she came off the platform I went to her to tell her that I was the one (I thought then that I was the only one though it turned out I was not) who had asked the question. I hoped of course that in explaining why I said those words the misunderstanding would be cleared up. What happened instead was that 8 or 10 persons pounced on me, shuttled me into the hallway because another program was starting, and began lecturing me about institutional racism (something I myself have preached and written about over many years). I am accustomed to being attacked from the right but was woefully unready for this attack from the left—by persons I did not know (with one exception) and persons who did not know me. Defensively I tried to tell them something about myself; that I had hated racism virtually all my life, that I had been active in the Civil Rights movement, that I participated in the 1963 March on Washington, that I had directed an interracial ecumenical project in Roxbury, Massachusetts, that my sister-in-law and several of my nieces and nephews are African American, and that I live in an interracial neighborhood. All that was perceived as white defensiveness and seemed only to evoke rage from the two or three African Americans and several women who formed a semi-circle around me. This issue came up either directly or obliquely at virtually every plenary session thereafter. Each time there was some inference to “the thing that had happened” (though very few people knew exactly what that was), I found it increasingly painful to attend the large gatherings (though many of the speakers and panelists were excellent). Through the week the situation grew more and more surreal with a more general accusation being made that the gathering was “too white.” Since anyone who chose to attend would have been welcome it was difficult to know how those present were the cause of that. The planning group for the conference had been interracial, and the leadership of the conference was very interracial, including many African Americans in significant and high visibility roles. Although it was said to me, and said from the platform—and applauded—that “intent” is not all that significant if the “output” offends, I believe that such an idea is at least worth some examination. Though I would certainly agree that persons must consider and take some responsibility for the effect of their words as well as the words themselves, I have a problem with that which places all the burden on what is said and removes all burden from how it is heard. Pentecost was an experience not only of how persons spoke but of how persons heard one another. If perception counts for more than reality, intent, or facts, then that will certainly work against GLBT persons, since their opponents often count their perception as being more significant than the reality of those persons’ lives. To quote my own denomination’s position on homosexuality as but one example: “It appears that what is really important is not what homosexuality is, but what we believe about it” (Statement of the 1978 PCUSA and 1979 PCUS General Assemblies). In retrospect, I think that perhaps intentionally or unintentionally, the question, “what color?” was used as an opportunity to leverage the interracial issues to greater significance at this conference on homosexuality and ministry. I hope in the future any such issues will be brought forward directly. GLBT persons and their allies have enough on their plate without generating conflict among themselves. Donn Crail is the executive director of the Lazarus Project, a ministry of reconciliation between the church and LGBT community in Los Angeles, supported by the West Hollywood Presbyterian Church. Witnessing Our Unwelcome Another Perspective on WOW 2000 Irene Monroe Racism chokes the spiritual and political life out of a people and a movement. The toll racism exacts up close and personal takes me back to the Witness Our Welcome (WOW) 2000 conference. WOW was a historic ecumenical gathering celebrating the nearly quarter century growth of the Welcoming Churches Movement, a movement of congregations and communities that have publicly declared they welcome persons of all sexual orientations and gender identities. To date there are over 1,500 Welcoming churches and ministries in Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom. The conference was held at Northern Illinois University in Dekalb with nearly one thousand lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and heterosexual religious activists in attendance. And I was excited to be there. WOW had every intention of being welcoming. It had an impressive list of racially diverse speakers. It had just about every Christian denomination represented. And unlike an era of lesbian and gay politics that once viewed bisexuals as “fence-sitters” who were believed not to want to give up their heterosexual privilege and transgenders who were seen as weak links in the struggle for sexual equality, both were enthusiastically invited. And they came. But WOW’s intentions did not match its outcome. Two years later many of us are still reeling from its fallout. While the list of racially diverse speakers was impressive, the number of people of color in attendance at the conference was shockingly low. Was it because the number of people of color was so low that this racial event could happen? On opening night the facilitator, Mary Hunt, a white lesbian, named all the oppressed groups included in WOW’s celebration of diversity. When the facilitator concluded her list and asked what groups had been omitted, an African American woman yelled out “people of color.” After several shouts from the African American woman, people of color and a few whites in the audience to get the facilitator’s ear, several white men shouted in response, “What color?” As a fractured group both politically and spiritually, African American LGBT people reside as resident aliens who too often live bifurcated existences in two communities. While our black skin ostensibly give us residence in our black communities, our sexual orientation, most times, evicts us from them. And while our sexual orientation gives us residence in the larger LGBT community, racism constantly thwarts any efforts for coalition building, which weakens the larger movement for sexual equality. To be tangentially aligned to these communities dangles our lives precariously on a thin thread with the nagging feeling of marginalization, if not complete dispossession. For so long, African American LGBT people and other people of color have excoriated the white queer community for their flagrant forms of exclusion. But WOW purported to be different, and many African American LGBT people and other people of color came to WOW to be fully acknowledged. How WOW handled the conflict was antithetical to its welcoming statement. “We know that at times our various traditions complement each other beautifully and at other times they crash against one another with great force. We acknowledge and ask God’s blessing on both the challenges and gifts of this ecumenical gathering. In fact, we celebrate the opportunities the challenges and crashes will bring. In our openness we will know God’s creative and renewing power...” But the gifts and challenges people of color brought to WOW were dashed by the conference’s inability to address the racial incident immediately. Too many days went by and too much struggle ensued to be heard on the issue. The Rev. John L. Selders, Jr., an African American bisexual man and founder of Amistad UCC in Hartford, Connecticut attended WOW 2000 and said that “WOW called us black folks and people of color together to not have to systematically deal with race and their own racism. When we show up to these kind of events they think they have done their job and they can just totally drop race off their map, and then they get surprised when we raise it.” WOW as a Welcoming Church Movement must include the varied spiritual expressions of the life of LGBT church people where we embrace the image of the sacred in ourselves, the image of the sacred as ourselves, and the image of the sacred in each other. WOW must also embrace the various hues, sexual orientations, classes, denominations, and gender identities of the sacred to become a “unified plurality” where no one is left behind and every voice is lifted up. WOW must ask itself the question, “How do we,” as Rev. Selders phrases it, “hold together our particularities in the holding of our commonality? WOW 2003 is coming up and will people of color return? “I would go back to WOW but it must look within itself by giving up the fear of having to give up power. These white organizations create environments that mirror themselves and they must move out of their comfort zones,” says Pam Selders, an African American heterosexual woman and Selders’ wife. For WOW 2003 to truly be an ecumenical conference, it must shift its paradigm of leadership by becoming racially responsible. In order for WOW 2003 to be racially responsible it must be committed to anti- racist work not just in some things it does, but rather, committed to anti-racist work in all things it will do in putting together the upcoming conference. Who WOW says it is as a movement must be followed up by its actions in order to be taken seriously, in order to have its own self- respect, and in order to invite people other than themselves into the fold. It is not enough for WOW to say it is a justice-seeking movement, and not be a justice-doing movement. White people who are involved with WOW must know that anti-racist work is intrinsically tied to their personal freedom as individuals and it is intrinsically tied to their collective freedom as an LGBT Christian movement. For WOW 2003 to be racially responsible it must ask itself these three questions: 1. What would be the theological and spiritual fall-out for WOW 2003 should it not engage in anti-racist work? 2. What might be the ways WOW 2003 can incorporate anti-racist work as a priority in all its developmental stages of the conference? 3. And, what spiritual practices or ritual or liturgies should WOW 2003 develop in order to strengthen its commitment in doing anti-racist work? Racism in the movement will separate us in this Herculean struggle against heterosexism that cannot afford to underutilize any of its people. The racial divide between white and LGBT people of color that existed in WOW 2000 cannot continue and must stop because we must understand that we all carry multiple identities into the world. The belief acted out among some of us that one oppression—sexual oppression—is greater than another person’s oppression only sets up a hierarchy of oppressions. This not only keeps us broken from one another, but it also keeps us fighting with one another. We must also remember that as LGBT religious activists, our queerness is a prophetic call for justice not just in our home churches, but in Christian churches throughout the world. This calls us out at this specific time and place in history to unveil the parochial understanding of human sexuality. But it also calls us to challenge other structures and systems of domination by looking at the world from an involved, committed stance, in light of a faith that does justice. With this perspective, we must dismantle all discriminatory practices that truncate the full participation and livelihood of any people. And our call, which we must take up for our own survival, is not self-appointed, but God given! As LGBT religious activists let us remember that the longing for God is also the longing for social justice. This moral and political imperative placed before us for WOW 2003 is to do anti-racist work. And consequently, this moral and political imperative will also show us that united we will stand as a prophetic movement or divided we will fall as a petty people. Irene Monroe is a doctoral candidate in the Religion, Gender, and Culture program at Harvard Divinity School. She has spoken in wide ranging settings, including Harvard, MIT, Brandeis, the American Academy of Religion, Outwrite, and the National Conference of Christians and Jews. We thank her for this final contribution as Open Hands’ Columnist of the Year 2002. White Privilege The Challenge of the WOW Incident Chris Paige I have a lot of experience talking about what it means to be a woman and a lesbian and a queer in a sexually oppressive culture. I’ve wrestled quite a bit with understanding my own marginalization. But as a white person in a racist society, I have almost no experience talking about what it means to be white. That’s something about being privileged that’s really different from being marginalized. By and large, I just don’t notice my privilege. That’s part of the privilege: being able to take my identity for granted without any self-examination. When I talk about being marginalized, it’s empowering—finding my voice, standing up to be counted, coming out of the silence. But when I talk about being privileged, it’s unsettling and scary in a very different way. It’s one thing to say that I (or another marginalized person) deserves better. It’s somehow quite different to talk about how I (or another person of privilege) somehow deserves less. Or that we have a responsibility to actively deal with our privilege. Somehow liberation is just a lot more romantic than accountability. In the last 30 years, the language of marginalization has increasingly become a part of mainstream white American culture, in ways that I suspect it hadn’t been before. In places like church, we talk pretty comfortably about the disenfranchised, the poor, the oppressed, prejudice, discrimination, stereotypes, protests, press conferences, movements, civil rights, equality, solidarity, and struggling for justice. There’s quite an extensive vocabulary of marginalization and liberation. Yet when I begin to reflect on white privilege instead of just racial oppression, I lose my bearings quite quickly. I barely have any vocabulary to work with. I mean, let’s see, there’s: privilege, responsibility, accountability, guilt. My concern for racial equality is still there. But all of a sudden, I don’t know where I am or how to find my way around any more. I know almost nothing about how racism and white privilege have affected and shaped my life, my story, my self image, my view of the world. I just don’t have the words or the understanding. Shifting my focus to my own white privilege instead of the racial oppression of others definitely moves me into unfamiliar territory. But my experience at the WOW conference helped me to make that shift—out of the familiar and into the wilderness where I have begun to find new vision. On the opening night of the WOW conference, there was a racial incident during an ice-breaker. It was an incident that most of us—most of us white folks, that is—hardly noticed. No one used the "N" word or any other racial slur. There was no coercive racial segregation. And no physical violence. It was "just" the silence of certain voices being ignored. Now, I was vaguely aware of it when it happened. Mostly through a sense of discomfort that something was a little out of whack. An awareness of tension in the room. Tension that I couldn’t quite put my finger on. And that I didn’t quite know how to name or address. I noticed the tension, but it didn’t rise into my consciousness as something in need of follow-up in any way. About 36 hours later, on the morning of the third day, a young woman took the microphone. Apparently, she had lobbied the organizers hard to get this 5 minutes to express her grief about that first night and the conference so far, and it had taken a day and a half for them to fit her in. Squeezed her in. Into those distracted minutes between breakfast and morning worship when people are mingling and eating and waking up and arriving late. In those 5 minutes that she was given, she expressed her sense of alienation. She talked about her pain and frustration in attending the conference as one of a handful of people of color, surrounded by an overwhelming majority of white people. And as she expressed her experience, she was actively interrupted and confronted by white people from the audience. She proceeded to issue an invitation to further dialogue at a caucus time later that day. But when she left the stage, she was followed. By more white people. White people who wanted to argue with her and confront her and defend themselves and assert their innocence. And apparently many or most of the people of color attending also followed her out of the main event space. People of color, who, I suspect, didn’t feel safe or supported or heard by their white sisters and brothers in the "welcoming" movement. Of course, I didn’t notice. I didn’t notice them leave. You see, I’d been one of the white people in the crowd clapping for her. We gave her a standing ovation, in appreciation of her courage, I think. Or perhaps because we’ve been well trained that you clap after seeing a good performance. I think it might have been easier to react as if it were a performance –easier than it would be to sit in the emotional tension and confusion of what had just happened. It would have been harder to sit in the dissonance and the conflict. The conflict between our own self-understandings as good white liberal church activists and this woman’s bold assertion of a deep racial divide between and among us. So, after we clapped, I found my seat, finished the orange juice I’d carried in from breakfast, tried to let go of the discomfort, and directed my attention to the worship leader and the singing of songs. I wanted to get back to where I knew my way around. We sang nice multicultural songs with Hawai’ian or Native American words—I can’t remember which anymore, but it felt good to be back in familiar territory and able to breathe again, leaving the wilderness of the tension and conflict behind. I certainly didn’t consciously think to myself "Oh good, the people of color have left. Now I can relax and enjoy what I came here for." But that is what happened. It was not my intention to disregard or patronize or minimize this woman’s sharing and the experience she was offering for our consideration. But that is what happened. Later in the day, I listened in the dialogue time to which she had invited us, a relatively small group. I learned that many if not most of the people of color had left the room after that early morning moment. Some had spent quite some time in confrontation in the outer hallway, with the white folks who were arguing with their experience—all while I was back in the conference hall singing multicultural hymns and feeling comfortable again. And maybe some others went out and got coffee someplace where they could talk freely, without white arguments, white defenses, and white deflections—probably while I was sitting in a plenary session nodding my head that yes, we must fight not only against heterosexism, but also against racism and other forms of oppression. And maybe some went to their rooms to cry, or scream, or to pack their bags to leave for home. Because I think that’s what I might have wanted to do in their place. I don’t actually know what they did while I sank back into the oblivion of my white privilege. And I don’t deserve to know. What matters to me, is that I didn’t notice. I couldn’t see it. Wouldn’t see it. Somehow, I’d learned not to see it. And the little bit that I did notice, I sat through in silence. I tried hard to put it behind me. It was both a public silence and a private silence. I tried not to think about it. And I tried not to feel about it. An emotionally charged disconnect over race had occurred and been publicly acknowledged. The acknowledgment of that experience had been resisted, invalidated, patronized, and essentially sent from the room. And I hardly noticed. Even though it was right there in front of me. I went on with the day’s events without questioning what I had experienced, why it felt awkward, or why I had no framework for understanding it. I was missing something—only I didn’t even know it. I didn’t know enough to go looking for healing. It took someone else’s invitation for the process to begin. And that healing process finally began when someone took my hand and walked with me away from my comfort zone, and started pointing things out to me—started pointing out the hard realities all around me that I had learned to ignore. And it was confusing. I’m still not sure what all I’m seeing from day to day, but it’s uncomfortable and strange. I’m beginning to see my own white privilege and a deep, deep racial divide. And it’s really unnerving to be this far from the familiar, and aware of such a need for healing. The hard thing about being white is that we just don’t notice it. My vocabulary for understanding privilege is finally starting to grow. Although I have to admit, it’s still something of a mess to sort through. It includes words like: silence, denial, my best intentions, silence, oblivious, numb, clinging to my innocence, silence, disconnected, resistance, silence, silence, silence. I’m beginning to see the things I’ve learned not to notice, and to feel the things I’ve learned not to feel. Racism is an integral part of my life, clouding and obscuring my vision on a daily basis, preventing me from seeing the world clearly. But I’ve started a new journey. A new coming out journey. Another journey of following Jesus and relying on God’s grace and my companions on the journey, instead of my own wisdom as I seek healing and liberation. I’d like to invite you to join me in this journey. In my opinion, the biggest weakness of the LGBT welcoming movement today is the dominance of white privilege within it. I’d like to invite us to become as well educated and outspoken about racism as we are about heterosexism. We need to come out about racism. We need to find the words to talk about it—about how it looks in the 21st century and about how it looks in our own lives. We need to talk openly and vulnerably with one another, to talk honestly and lovingly with each other. We need to look deep and hard at ourselves. And if we do, it will change us. It will definitely take us out of our comfort zones, but that’s where Jesus is waiting for us. Chris Paige is an elder at Tabernacle United Church in Philadelphia and publisher of The Other Side magazine (www.theotherside.org). This article was adapted from a sermon preached April 22, 2001 to her church, a federated Presbyterian and United Church of Christ congregation. Born to Belong Mab Segrest Copyright © 2002 by Mab Segrest. All rights reserved. Excerpted by Open Hands with permission from the prologue to her new book, Born To Belonging: Writings on Spirit and Justice (Rutgers University Press, 2002). We heartily recommend the full book to our readers! I was born into segregation in Birmingham, Alabama on a late afternoon in February, 1949—four years after the end of World War II, when my father had returned home from a German prison camp, and five years before the U.S. Supreme Court would issue Brown vs. Board of Education, declaring segregated schools unconstitutional. I was born into a culture in which race colored everything, into a town saturated with anxiety and anger, with fear and hope of Jim Crow dying. Nor did that culture yet have public language for my deepest impulses, which twenty years later I would recognize in the word lesbian. At fifty-something, I am writing this book of travels, on the track of capitalism and white supremacy and heterosexism and misogyny. I am trying to get them in my sights from multiple locations to a point of convergence as yet beyond our ken, while a rampant and unchecked “free market” brutally reshapes the globe. To put it differently, I am trying to peel the onion: to find beneath the political, the economic, and the psychological, the spiritual questions that open into emptiness. … I began the travels recorded [in the book] in 1995, heading out to Beijing to the largest gathering of women in the history of the world, then to Atlanta to write an article on gentrification and the 1996 Olympics, to Memphis for the twentieth anniversary of Elvis’ death, to Honolulu for a gathering on linking queer and sovereignty struggles, to Johannesburg and Harare for the General Assembly of the World Council of Churches, and back and forth to visit my brother Tim, who was dying of colon cancer. It was a serendipitous assortment of destinations, to which I set off on a variety of missions–to attend conferences, on contract to write stories, to remain faithful and say goodbye. … My meditations on these journeys involving memory at a moment of danger are quirky and tentative efforts at a hard-won and fluctuating faith: that neither I, nor you, are born to segregation, separation, domination, subordination, alienation, isolation, ownership, competition, or narrow self-interest. The phrase that most resonates for me in this enterprise is the translation of a South African term, ubuntu, which I came upon like a revelation in a Delta Airlines magazine article on Nelson Mandela. Ubuntu translates as “born to belonging.” It’s a simple notion: we are all born to belonging, and we know ourselves as humans in just and mutual relationship to one another. It makes more sense to me as a political self-description than the term queer. It also offers a perspective from which to examine other concepts and practices, such as democracy or the free market. And what might our economic and political systems be like if they were based on an assumption of belonging? … At the center of my inquiry is the question of soul, or spirit, and justice. … Everyone should have the luxury, the time and space, to think about what they do. And everyone should realize that their ideas have effects that can be tested in concrete situations. What we have more often now is a truncated process. We have on the one hand academics theorizing in universities and think tanks—theories that breed more theories; and on the other community organizers and advocates acting in non-profit organizations, often without resources for adequate reflection. Freire points the way to an engaged action—acting and reflecting as an integral, an essential component, not only of what we do, but of who we are (our ontology), how we know (our epistemology) and of how we act from within and also to shift our reality (our metaphysics). This praxis engages us at the deepest, spiritual level of meaning in our lives, of how we constitute our humanity, of what my friend Marta calls our “I AM-ness.” Then there emerges what I am calling a praxis of belonging that is both a political and a spiritual practice. This is the biblical mandate to do justice, to love mercy, and to walk humbly. It is the tradition from the Torah of tikkun olam, the completion of a just world or by other translations repair of a tattered world. It is what Jesus meant when he said “love your neighbor.” Indians brought down the British empire with the soul-power of satyagraha. It is the freedom to which the philosopher Sartre, also part of the French resistance to German fascism, said we are condemned. It is the “creative will” of Martin Luther King, Jr., that enables people to hew from a mountain of despair a stone of hope. It is Audre Lorde’s recalling for us the erotic power of our work when it engages our deepest desires. It is what Adrienne Rich meant when she said we must find an end to suffering. It is Alice Walker’s reminder that anything we love can be saved. It is the engaged Buddhism of monks and nuns who challenged French then U.S. imperialist wars, some of them maintaining their zazen postures even as they burned themselves to death in protest. “Once there is seeing there must be acting,” Thich Nhat Hahn explains. “Otherwise, what’s the use of seeing?” … What’s at stake? Let me put it another way. Do you, dear reader, ever feel alienated? Scared? Anxious? Mistrustful? That you don’t really belong? Do you have such a profound distaste for that to which you belong that you prefer exile? Have you gone into some form of internal exile already? Do you ever find yourself reenacting those very behaviors that you deplore, that you have set your life to change? Do you ever despair that you have internalized stereotypes about yourself so deeply that they seem to have infected your very soul? Did you ever think that those feelings might be an effect of living in a racist system, a misogynist system, a heterosexist system, a class system, a colonial system shaped for centuries by domination, by masters looking for slaves? Deep questions. I think many times we are so lost that we don’t even know it. … From my thirteenth year, there are two moments that return. I was coming home for lunch. We had been studying atoms, neutrons, protons, electrons—matter as maya, an illusion of solidity when all is space and energy. My foot on the top step, my hand on the screen door’s handle. I turned my head to the right, Mrs. Fort’s yard beyond the bamboo, oak leaves still lush from summer, azalea bushes, shades and depths of green. Suddenly none of it was familiar but as if in motion. I saw all the whirring molecules, heard a low oohhmmm. My eyes widened, I breathed in. It was gone. I turned my head back, opened the door, and went inside. That moment’s vision of molecules in grass and leaves came to me after and because I had recently also finally seen white supremacy as a structure that had shaped me. I saw it because I was looking past its limits to black children moving freely in my segregated school. Alabama, 1963. Integration, it was rightly called. How many times have I circled back to that moment lying on my stomach in the grass, looking out through the legs of policemen to the black children integrating “my” school. That moment something shifted: the crack in the cosmic egg, sensation equally delight and terror. I saw that I saw it, the violent limitations of my white culture, and knew that I knew. With that knowledge came a sudden surge: what else was possible? … Here at the beginning of a new century, we are compelled, as Gramsci was, to re-envision transformative work for justice out of any narrow determinisms into which it has been cast. … Those of us who know ourselves perhaps do not yet have language to explain clearly that what we call justice is the door to wider realities, fuller modes of being. Marx was wrong. All politics, ultimately, is also metaphysics, matter and energy constantly shifting forms. What does it mean to be a materialist, anyway, after twentieth-century science has shown matter and energy are interchangeable and matter itself in its subatomic forms is either waves or empty space or both? “The arc of a moral universe is long,” said Martin Luther King, drawing on Einstein, “but it bends towards justice.” Mab Segrest teaches at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina. Her third book, Born to Belonging: Writings on Spirit and Justice, was published this past summer from Rutgers Press. Teaching the Roots of Racism A Guide for Discussion Mab Segrest (Extrapolated by Open Hands from her notes for a plenary workshop entitled, “The Prophetic Voice and the Consciousness of History: 500 Years of Colonialism,” led by Mab Segrest during the gathering of That All May Freely Serve, Stony Point, New York, April 6, 2002. Copyright 2002 © Mab Segrest. All rights reserved.) “One of the main premises…is an understanding of colonization. We might have used the word oppression. But we use the language of colonization because it brings to mind a picture of one people invading another and systematically taking over—economically, culturally, racially, sexually. Using this notion of colonization—the systematic takeover of another—we have applied it to sexuality and have explored the notion that sexuality, like race and economic class, is both a tool of colonization and has been colonized itself.” (From the Spirit of the Lakes newsletter, Currents, Vol. 12, #2). In colonialism, all of the resources of the colony were/are sent to the colonizing/dominant country for use in their development. What is the result? Economically, patterns of permanent poverty and underdevelopment; emotionally/spiritually: not being able to live for or as oneself, a sense of huge constraint by systems we did not put in place; a loss of ourselves. How did this come about? (The leader may want to chart a timeline for the group, beginning with 1500 and ending with the present year. A simple drawing of a world map may also help your group in visualizing the relationships of continents and nations described here.) Phase One: The Genocide of Indigenous People and the Enslavement of Africans 1492 “Columbus sailed the ocean blue,” “discovering” a “new world” in a search for trade routes to India. Spain and Portugal became the first two European countries to colonize Latin America and the Caribbean. Columbus’ journals reveal the colonizer’s mentality that he brought to these shores: (1) he thought it remarkable that people indigenous to this new territory had no private property, and took it as a sign of their childishness; (2) he remarked on how beautiful their bodies were and concluded, “they would make good servants.” Questions How did Columbus’s initial responses indicate how colonialism would work? Issues to point out: Private ownership was crucial in the colonizing process. For colonizers to extract the most profit for the “mother” country, they needed to own the land and its resources, and have a source of exploitable labor. Indigenous people were in the way of this scheme, because they had a different, spiritual relationship to land. 1500s The beginning of the slave trade in the Caribbean. By 1650, the indigenous population of the area Spain and Portugal controlled shrank from 66 million to 3.5 million people, due to diseases and people being worked to death in silver mines. The silver sent back to Europe would be used to finance the beginnings of industrialism. One Jesuit priest remarked, “Who could have know that so many people would have died in so short a time.” Questions How could they have known? Did they care? What happens to body/mind/spirit when some bodies are worked to death? Bartoleme de las Casas campaigned to protect indigenous people, arguing that they had souls, part of a debate within the Catholic church on this question. He suggested, given the huge death tolls of indigenous people, that colonizers bring in Africans as slaves instead. Slave labor did not become profitable in the “new world,” however, until Europeans began putting sugar in coffee and cocoa, raising the price of commodities of sugar, coffee beans, and chocolate being grown on plantations in the Americas. Questions What was the relationship of addictive substances (coffee & sugar, later tobacco as the main cash crop in Virginia) to the development of slavery? What implications are there for us today in terms of our relationship to addictive substances such as tobacco, alcohol, sugar, cocaine? What is the impact on our communities when addiction is profitable? Phase Two Beginnings of Colonialism in the United States 1619 The first Africans are brought as slaves to Virginia (the first slaves in the English colonies). The English came to the Atlantic coast as part of their colonizing process. In the first several decades of slavery, it emerged in Virginia in its American form: lifetime servitude, inherited status, and dehumanizing attitudes and ideas about Africans as justification. Rape and sexual violence were characteristic of the treatment of Africans on plantations, with plantation owners asserting almost total control. There was no recognition of marriage or custody rights for enslaved people, whose families were often divided when members were sold to other owners. Questions What did such a system of domination and concentrated power do to mind/body/spirit? To definitions of the family? Is there a difference in the legal family, the theological family, the biological family, and the emotional family? 1664 The Virginia legislature debated whether Africans had souls. They decided that they did but could/should still be enslaved. For both indigenous people and Africans, the alternative to being considered “human” was to be considered “animal,” including being more and wrongly sexual. Questions How was the church complicit in colonialism? Should any religious institution have the right to decide who is human? What does slavery—one person and group owning another—do to mind/body/spirit? 1679 Bacon’s Rebellion was an uprising of slaves and poor whites in Virginia against the white plantation elite. It was repressed, and showed the danger of cross-racial class alliances. Slave owners began to stress a common European identity, and the term for Europeans in Virginia shifted from “free” or “Christian” to “white.” Questions What was the cost to poor white people of bonding around power and oppression? What are methods today that “divide and conquer” oppressed people? Phase Three Manifest Destiny of the New Country 1776-89 The English colonies break from England, the “mother” country, resenting that their resources are being used for England. “No taxation without representation” was part of the issue. Keeping the benefits of colonial processes on American shores was another. The Declaration of Independence named “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” as inalienable rights. The U.S. Constitution did not abolish slavery and designated African slaves as 3/5 human for the purpose of determining propertied white male votes. 1787 Captain James Cook “discovers” Hawai’i. 1803 The US purchase of the Louisiana territory opened up the South and West. Settlers pushed West, believing that it was their destiny to conquer and colonize the continent. Thus began the long series of wars with Indian nations and broken treaties that ended at Wounded Knee in 1890. 1808 The international slave trade was abolished. 1830 Abolition struggles intensified. The tension between slave labor and “free”/wage labor heightened as settlers spread west. 1832 The removal of Southern Indians began in President Andrew Jackson’s administration. 1845-48 The U.S. went to war with Mexico, winning and claiming the Southwest in the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. 1848 In Hawai’i, colonizers instituted the Mahele, or division. Land was privatized, divided up into parcels for individual ownership, dismembering the ‘aina and the dislocation of Kanaka Maoli people. Promoted and designed by the missionaries, white ruling families claimed 4.2 million acres of the island, and indigenous Hawai’ians were forced into labor on the growing plantations. Privatization of the land paralleled privatization of the body. Heterosexual marriage was being enforced by the church and displaced more fluid expressions of sexuality and more diverse ways of partnering. 1850 The Gold Rush in California brings more settlers, including immigrants from China fleeing destabilization of China, whose markets and resources were being forced open by European powers. Phase Four Reasserting Control 1860-65 The slave states secede, and the Union wins the battle of slave v wage labor, industrial v agricultural system, North v South. The 13th amendment abolish slavery; the 14th guarantees that “life, liberty and property” not be taken without “due process of law, that people born in the U.S. are citizens, and that the Bill of Rights applies to the states. The 15th amendment protects the vote. 1893 The Hawai’ian monarchy is overthrown by thirteen white planter elite, backed by United States troops. They imprisoned Queen Lili’uokalani in the Iolani Palace. The Blount Report, by Special Investigator James Blount sent by President Cleveland, condemns the illegality of the overthrow. Cleveland calls for a restoration of legitimate government that never happens. The indigenous resistance movement intensifies, and in 1897 95% of Kanaka Maoli sign a petition resisting annexation. 1898 Having completed its “manifest destiny” by taking over all the land between the Atlantic and Pacific, the United States wins a war with Spain and takes over Hawai’i, Cuba, the Phillipines, and Guam. 1900 After a brief period of Reconstruction in the South, whites reassert control through violence and fraud, establishing segregation (“Jim Crow”) and voter disenfranchisement. The Dawes Severalty Act divides land on reservations into individual parcels of “private property” more easily bought or stolen. Asian immigrants complete the transcontinental railroad. Industrialism and finance capital create huge divisions of wealth and poverty, cycles of boom and bust. Corporations are granted the status of “bodies” under the 14th amendment, at a time when black and brown bodies/souls/spirits are losing the rights gained in the years after the Civil War. Questions What is the relationship of capitalism to racism during this period? Should corporations be considered bodies in legal terms? Phase Five Decolonizing and Recolonizing in the 20th Century The first half of the twentieth century brought a surge of movements in European colonies for independence. Europe controlled 80% of the globe by 1913, and power conflicts among European nations caused two world wars. Gandhi’s campaign for Indian independence was one such anti-colonial movement. The struggle of the Vietnamese was another. In 1919, with the Russian Revolution, Russia emerged as a large Communist counterforce to European imperialism and capitalism. The “Cold War” that erupted between capitalist and communist—or “First” and “Second”—worlds, brought “Third World” countries into its conflict. The War in Vietnam was a major example of this tendency. Newly independent countries had few economic resources and were brought back into neo-colonial relationships with the developed world through loans. The Civil Rights Movement in the 1950s and 1960s challenged the Jim Crow laws and voter disenfranchisement in the South, and was fueled by the example and energy of liberation movements all over the globe. The freedom movements of “people of color” helped to ignite a “second wave” of feminism, gay/lesbian liberation movements, and the disabled at a time when US products faced increasing competition from overseas markets. Faced with falling profits, increasingly large and powerful corporations decided to cut production costs by attacking labor and lowering wages and environmental standards. This lead to huge numbers of corporate mergers, “downsized” workforces, and factories automating or moving overseas for climates “friendlier” to business. A huge increase in deficit spending by the Reagan administration in the 1980s and a huge increase in the military budget were co-factors. The fall of the Soviet Union in the late 1980s brought the emergence of “globalization,” the freedom of capital to move across borders. Costs of Colonization: A More Intimate Look Invite your group to spend time looking at the following particularly powerful passage that shows on many levels the cost of colonization and racism to people caught up in its systems. What happens to the body/mind/spirit as a result of colonization, the facilitator can ask again, or recap. A summary: extreme systems of control, personal and social alienation, huge “boundary” violations, addictive patterns of consumption; splits in which privileged groups (men, the rich, white people, heterosexuals) are seen as having more “mind” or “spirit” and oppressed groups are seen as being primarily, or only bodies; extremes of wealth and poverty; economic “development” dependent on patterns of deliberate “underdevelopment.” Divide the group into pairs and give each pair a copy of the paragraph below. Explain that it is taken from Mary Boykin Chestnut’s Diary from Dixie, civil war diaries written by a white upper-class woman whose husband was a Vice President of the Confederacy. Be sure people understand the context: The scene is a slave auction, where Chestnut witnesses the grief of an African enslaved woman whose husband and children have just been sold to another slave owner, guaranteeing their separation. Ask each pair to spend 10 minutes reading and thinking about the quote together. What does it show about the cost of racism and colonialism to the black woman? The white woman? Have the group come back together, and discuss the responses. You can work through the paragraph one sentence at a time, or ask each group to report what it made of the quotation. “A mad woman taken from her husband and children. Of course she was mad, or she would not have given her grief words in that public place. Her keepers were along. What she said was rational enough, pathetic, at times heart-rending. It excited me so much I quietly took opium. It enables me to retain every particle of mind or sense or brains and so quietens my nerves that I can calmly reason and take rational views of things otherwise maddening.” Questions Why is the woman “mad” (crazy, or angry, or both?)? What view of sanity does Chestnut have? Does she associate the madness with the loss of her family, or with her public grief? (It seems to be the latter). What is Chestnut’s spontaneous response? Why does her response—her sympathy and “excitement”—scare her? What does she do then, why opium? What are the constraints or limits that Chestnut is under as a woman? Is there a gender element to her fear of expressing herself in public? A class element? What happens to her under the influence of opium? Is it a failure of courage on her part? What is the difference in “mind,” “sense,” and “brains”? What is the effect of a rationality that is split from feeling and from sensation? What is the effect of taking rational views of situations of extreme oppression and pain? What might she have done instead of taking opium? (Draw out a range of responses, small and larger). In general, acknowledge the extreme system of domination and control that both women were operating under but assert that each of us in whatever situation still has responsibility for our own humanity, and to uphold the humanity of others. Now bring the discussion to the present. How are we like the women in this drama? When have we had people numb themselves to our pain? When have we numbed ourselves to theirs? Ask for examples of such moments, and how participants responded. Emphasize the political importance of action in such moments, and the spiritual importance of such action. What spiritual resources do people have to keep them from turning away from pain and exploitation, to strengthen their resolve and courage to act? How might the group help each other with/in/through such moments? Find a way appropriate to your group to close your gathering ritually, such as, standing or praying in a circle, or singing a song, or a ritual created or reinterpreted specifically for this theme. Mab Segrest is a writer, teacher, and organizer who lives in Durham, North Carolina. She has been active in anti-racist, feminist, lesbian/gay and economic justice movements for more than 20 years. Her second book, Memoir of a Race Traitor, narrates her work against Klan and neo-Nazi movements in the 1980s. She teaches at Duke University. (For more, see her other article in this issue, “Born to Belong.”) The Way Things Were Reflecting on the Life of Bayard Rustin Lila Fraizer Before Racism Was Named Bayard Rustin spent his life fighting racism, though that term was not in use in the early days of the struggle. People talked about segregation, discrimination, prejudice, bigotry. Rustin believed in integration. Being raised in a Quaker home he made a commitment to nonviolence. His grandmother, who raised him, influenced his life more than anyone or anything. She taught her family that God loves everyone, that all people must be treated with love and respect no matter who they are, and that nonviolence is the only way to fight for one’s causes. These Quaker beliefs provided the foundation for everything he did. Bayard grew up feeling loved and accepted and secure, even when, in sixth grade, he learned his “Ma and Pa” were, in reality, his grandparents. As a child Bayard didn’t understand what lynchings were until his grandmother explained that even though no lynchings occurred in his hometown of West Chester, Pennsylvania, they occurred often in the South. But no one called it racism. At Gay Street Elementary School, Bayard learned about slavery, the efforts by some to educate the slaves, and by others to free the slaves. His class visited stops on the Underground Railroad in his area. After Reconstruction blacks were often forced to work in agriculture. As World War I ended these same farm workers could no longer find jobs on farms so they moved north to look for work in industrial plants. This “great migration” led families to the Rustin home where Bayard and other family members had to give up their beds for travelers. He may not have understood at the time, but he was living with racism on a grand scale. The welcome mat was always out at the Rustin home, whether for farm workers or famous persons traveling where no hotels accepted Negroes (the proper term then). As a child, Bayard met W. E. B. DuBois, Mary McLeod Bethune, James Weldon Johnson. He probably heard conversations about the segregationist policies toward Negroes in the United States. With his grandmother’s example how could he not be aware of racism and the need to fight it? Learning About Prejudice At age 16 Rustin decided to work for the election of Al Smith for president. He soon learned of the prejudices against Roman Catholics. At the integrated West Chester High School, segregation touched him personally. Bayard loved music. Well liked by his classmates, they thought he had the best tenor voice in town. And his prowess as an offensive lineman on the football team added to his popularity. Thus he was successful instigating a revolt during an away game—the black players refused to play unless they were pulled out of their Jim Crow accommodations and moved in with their white teammates. In winter when the team went to the YMCA for extra practice, Bayard couldn’t join them. No Negroes allowed! When they went to the movies Bayard, assigned to the “Jim Crow” balcony, resented not being able to sit with his white friends. One time he decided to defy the rule, and this resulted in his first arrest. At a lunch counter Bayard could buy a sandwich and then eat it outside. Otherwise he would have been thrown out. Bayard’s friends were welcome in his home but it was not reciprocal. One special friend would not go in Bayard’s home either because of his family’s rules, so they studied together in the library each evening. Bayard received top grades and graduated with honors as valedictorian of the class of 1932. He had hoped for a recommendation for a scholarship. That didn’t happen. This probably hurt more than the discrimination at the lunch counters, the movies, and the YMCA. Through his grandmother’s efforts Bayard received a music scholarship to Wilberforce University in Xenia, Ohio, an African Methodist Episcopal school. However, his desire to speak up for his classmates in the form of a protest against the bad food served in the dorm caused him to lose his scholarship during his second year. (Some biographers have questioned if Bayard’ s recognition of his homosexuality while at Wilberforce created the loss of scholarship funds.) He once said he lost his scholarship because he refused to join the ROTC. He transferred to Cheyney State Teachers College, a Quaker school. He sang in the choir and was a member of the debate team, but got expelled after two and a half years. Again questions arise as to the cause of his dismissal—was it his homosexuality? These colleges were both church supported. Denominational schools in the late 30's were certainly not welcoming, let alone affirming. In the spring of 1937 Bayard Rustin moved to Harlem to live with his aunt. In Harlem he found acceptance for his Quaker beliefs, his pacifism, his nonviolent stance, as well as his race and his homosexuality. Here a whole new world opened up for him. He attended City College night school. As a member of the Young Communist League, Bayard worked on the school newspaper and traveled the state organizing YCL cells. But in 1941, when the YCL changed its emphasis, he quit the Communist party. He dropped out of school to pursue political activities. He found a job with the Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR) as Youth Secretary. He wrote and produced an Interracial Primer, ways whites could help advance the cause of black equality, which included addressing blacks with respect, and the media paying equal attention to the race of accused criminals. (Blacks were identified by race, whites weren’t). “I am fortified by truth, justice, and Christ.” When most Americans thought of “us and them,” Bayard’s worldview centered on anyone being discriminated against. The year 1942 found him in California to protect the land holdings of Japanese Americans being interred. Once, in 1942, when traveling from Louisville to Nashville, he decided to sit in the front of the bus. Refusing the driver’ s request to move back at each stop, thirteen miles out from Nashville the police stopped the bus and ordered Rustin to move. In his own words Rustin said, “As I would not move they began to beat me about the head and shoulders. I forced myself to be still and wait for their kicks.” He said to them, “There is no need to beat me, I am not resisting you.” When a police officer asked why he wasn’t scared, Rustin replied, “ I am fortified by truth, justice, and Christ. There’ s no need for me to fear.” The district attorney, upon hearing his story, addressed him as “Mister” and released him. (In those days in the South, whites generally resisted calling black men “mister.”) Rustin believed his release and good treatment in the D.A.’ s office were due to his lack of resistance. Over and over he stated his philosophy that refusal to respond with fear or anger had a disarming effect. Rustin went to prison in 1943 as a conscientious objector. He soon organized the prisoners against censorship of the books they were allowed to read. He was also instrumental in integrating the mess hall. He believed in integration, even in prison! Upon his release from prison, in the fall of 1945, Rustin traveled for the American Friends Service Committee speaking about his prison experience as a conscientious objector. His speaking abilities were outstanding. His belief in nonviolence never wavered. Rustin talked about “white privilege” long before that term came into general usage. Racism was always there, a part of his life, in the forms of discrimination and segregation. After the U.S. Supreme Court Morgan Decision came down in 1946 declaring segregation on interstate travel unconstitutional, Bayard Rustin and George Houser, co-secretaries for Race Relations of FOR, knew the Morgan Decision needed to be tested. They convinced the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) as well as FOR to sponsor what they called the Journey of Reconciliation. Rustin and Houser determined it was not safe to travel in the deep South, so a plan to travel from Washington, D.C. to Tennessee and back to Washington emerged. Cooperation from the NAACP gave them recourse to lawyers along the way. Rustin and Houser set up speaking engagements at NAACP meetings, colleges, and churches along the way. The two of them traveled the route complying with the Jim Crow laws in order to make the arrangements for the real test. Sixteen men volunteered for that test, eight blacks and eight whites. Two days of training included role-playing and other techniques to help them remain nonviolent. On April 9, 1947, in Washington, D.C., the sixteen men boarded two buses, one Greyhound, one Trailways, sitting in prearranged seats. No incidents occurred between Washington and Petersburg, Virginia. From Petersburg on, several times riders were arrested and most simply charged a fine. However, in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, things got scary when cab drivers made threats and four participants were arrested. Rescue came from a local pastor, who arranged to get the men to Greensboro by private cars, where they were scheduled to speak that evening. When the cases came to court the conviction meant a fine or 30 days on a chain gang. One, a college student, paid his fine so he could get back to school. The other three, including Rustin, hoped to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. It didn’t happen. In 1949 they ended up in prison, Rustin in segregated Roxboro Prison in North Carolina. Rustin had just turned 37 and he was not only in prison, but on a chain gang. He kept notes, and, upon his release 22 days later (shortened for good behavior), he wrote about the conditions on a chain gang. The piece, serialized in the New York Post, led to reform and the end of chain gangs for prisoners in North Carolina. The 50's may have been the most explosive decade in Rustin’ s life. In 1950 he worked with Peacemakers, a consortium cosponsored by FOR, War Resisters League, the Catholic Worker Movement, and the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom. They were zealous for unilateral disarmament. Rustin proposed a week-long Fast for Peace as a protest against building nuclear weapons and American involvement in the Korean War. Though it had no effect on policy it brought public attention to pacifists and their willingness to put themselves at risk for their beliefs. All This and Homosexuality, Too Early in 1953, Bayard Rustin had just finished a speech at the Pasadena Athletic Club about political developments in West Africa when two young men approached and invited him to a party. Police investigating a parked car near Rustin’ s hotel discovered him in sexual acts with the two young men and arrested them on morals charges. Though he never tried to hide his homosexuality, Rustin was generally discreet about his sexual activity. He felt he had a right to be who and what he was even though homosexual activity was a considered a crime. But he wondered, did these two young men just happen to be at the place where he spoke? Did the police just happen to be walking by the parked car? Were these merely coincidences? Was this a “gay” thing, racism, or just two cops doing their duty? Rustin made a wrong decision, he would have to pay for it, and so would his fellow FOR workers. Bayard’s resignation came with a promise to A. J. Muste, friend and leader of FOR, to seek treatment for his “condition.” The War Resisters League recruited Rustin in the summer of 1953 as executive secretary (chief program officer), and he held that position for 12 years. He allied WRL with the international crusade against nuclear weapons, bolstered its relationship with the civil rights movement, and associated it with the African struggles. The American Friends Service Committee assigned a group in 1954 to shape a pacifist stance toward the nuclear arms race and threat of American-Soviet confrontation. Meeting for one week, they produced “Speak Truth to Power.” Rustin asked that his name not be listed with the other writers’ names because of the bad publicity it might cause. Bayard claimed that he and his partner “colonized” the apartment they rented on West 107th Street, he being the only black tenant. When the super objected, Bayard’s partner reminded him that the lease allowed a roommate of his choice. Advisor to Martin Luther King Jr. Rustin was urged in 1956 to go to Montgomery, Alabama, as an advisor to Martin Luther King Jr., who was relatively new to Gandhi’ s philosophy and technique. The War Resisters League gave Bayard a leave of absence. King accepted Rustin’ s offer of help with the bus boycott sparked by Rosa Parks’ refusal to give her seat to a white person. Rustin advised on proper Gandhian procedures, handling correspondence and publicity as well. He composed songs for meetings, organized car pools and other alternatives to riding the city buses. He raised funds by calling on friends for support, cars, and money. Rustin told them, “This is an effort to avoid a race war.” Some members of the Montgomery Improvement Association didn’t want Rustin working with the boycott, fearing unflattering publicity. When asked to leave, he first went to Birmingham, secretly continuing to keep in touch with Dr. King. In March of 1956, just before his 44th birthday, Rustin returned to New York City but continued to aid King with fundraisers. On December 21, after 381 days, the boycott ended with a favorable decision from the U.S. Supreme Court. The next step was formation of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) to maintain a broad strategy for protest in the South. This group of black southern ministers elected King as leader. From New York, Rustin continued to help organize within the movement. He also traveled to Europe for pacifist organizations. Rustin believed the struggle against weapons of mass destruction was related to the struggle of blacks for their basic rights. Back on U.S. soil in 1960 Rustin planned demonstrations for the national conventions of both political parties, demanding progressive civil rights planks in their platforms. Bayard Rustin saw African American icon A. Philip Randolph as his mentor—always supporting him in every adventure he undertook. One of Randolph’ s dreams had been to have a march on Washington for jobs and freedom. In 1963 a coalition of organizations fighting racism came together to plan the march. Randolph was chosen to be the head. He then chose Bayard to plan and organize it. The goal was to have 100,000 peaceful marchers walking from the Washington Monument to the Lincoln Memorial where key players would deliver speeches. Rustin made all the arrangements—for food, water, sanitation, transportation, cleanup, and program. Nearly 250,000 people came that August 27 from across the country and Martin Luther King delivered his rallying “ I have a dream” speech. Rustin said later that this was the most exciting project he ever worked on and the most rewarding. Globetrotter for Peace and Justice During the 60's Rustin became a pacifist globetrotter, traveling to such disparate locations as England, India, and Africa. His work in the peace movement of Europe, and against colonialism in many African countries exemplified his world view. But in the 70's Black Power and the separatist movement seemed to go in the opposite direction of Rustin’ s approach to racism. By this time he was using that word. Writing in 1970 he said, “The word racism is thrown about too loosely these days, but considering what has happened in the last few weeks [Kent State killings], I think it accurately describes much of what goes on in white America.” Rustin believed racism to be an economic problem. He felt trade unions were a step toward economic liberation. He also saw the need for African Americans to get involved with politics. Rustin was deeply committed to the triumvirate of democratic social reform, nonviolence, and racial justice. He believed you couldn’t have one without the other two. Everything he did, every job he held, every committee he worked on, were always to further his belief that segregation/discrimination is wrong and he must nonviolently do whatever he can to fight racism. From 1977 to 1987, the last ten years of his life, Rustin traveled with his partner and administrative assistant, Walter Naegle, fighting for justice and democratic values worldwide. In July of 1987 they went to Haiti to study the prospects for democratic elections following the downfall of the Duvalier dictatorship. Upon their return to New York City in late July, Rustin became ill with what he believed to be dysentery. The medications prescribed only made matters worse. When Rustin entered the hospital on August 21, a surgeon found a perforated appendix. Two days later he went into cardiac arrest and died the next morning, August 24, 1987 at age 75, just one month after his last struggle for humanity. Bayard Rustin recognized the interrelationship of peace with justice, and justice for one with justice for another. We may parse our causes into discrete movements, but the Movement of the Holy Spirit is one, even as God is one. Few have demonstrated this truth so potently in their life’s work as Bayard Rustin. Lila Frazier describes herself as a seventies-something, single, free-lance writer, and member of Citrus Heights United Methodist Church in Sacramento. An active Reconciling United Methodist, she proudly wears her rainbow ribbon at her regional annual conferences and when she lobbied for inclusion at the 2000 General Conference. She counts lesbians and gay men among her friends, and contributes to our movement through diversity workshops, letters to the editor, and opinion pieces. A True “WOW” Experience A Dialogue Eric H. F. Law When I was invited to contribute to this issue of Open Hands addressing the relation between racism and the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) community, I struggled to give voice to the different perspectives that reside within me. Obviously there are complex issues involved and therefore, to write about them in such a short form without trivializing the different perceptions is a difficult task. I have chosen to address these issues in the form of dialogue between a GLBT person of European background and a GLBT person of color (in italic.) My purpose is to raise some of the issues through the voices of these two fictional characters. The context of this conversation take place at an ecumenical conference for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender Christians. To understand the full dynamics of this dialogue, read it with another person, each taking a part, like reading a play. Be sure to continue this dialogue by sharing your reflections with each other afterward. Wow! Isn’t it wonderful to see so many queer people in one place? I suppose. And we are all Christians! They can’t really ignore us, can they? I guess. Hey, are you okay? I don’t want to talk about it. Come on, you can talk about anything here. This is the most accepting and welcoming community I have even been in. How can you say that? I thought it was a very good evening. In fact, I thought the whole conference so far had been so well put together. (Silence.) Okay, tell me what’s wrong. What’s the use? I want to know because I am on the planning committee. Oh, God! I’m supposed to find out how people are feeling about this conference and report back to the committee every night. (Silence.) How are we going to improve ourselves if you won’t tell me what we did wrong? Did you see what went on in there now? What? Which part? When the facilitator asked people of color to stand up, to be recognized I guess, a few people in the back yelled, “What color!” I thought they were trying to be funny. Apparently, quite a few people thought that it was funny too. I guess it wasn’t for you. It was very offensive. And the facilitator didn’t do anything or say anything. I didn’t think they meant any harm. I guess they felt that since we are in this welcoming and accepting community, we don’t need to make distinctions between color and race. You know, in Christ there is no Jew or Gentiles, male or female. But in this community, even though we are all GLBT, as we now say, there is still white and people of color. You can’t get away from it. We are gathered here as GLBT people – to support and encourage each other. Why focus on things that divide us? But, we are supposed to be a welcoming community and I don’t think the people of color here felt welcomed by what went on in there. Out of over a thousand people in there, how many people of color did you see? I don’t know – about 50? That’s less than 5 percent. There must be more people of color who are GLBT. I know. We really tried to recruit people of color to come. We sent out brochures to Christian communities of color. We even made sure we had people of color in the planning committee. I guess we can do better. Hey, you came. I guess I am one of the naïve ones. Naïve? The rest of the people of color knew better. What do you mean? I thought coming here and being with all the gay and lesbian Christians, I would feel accepted. But judging from what I see, this so-call welcoming community is the same as any white community. Doesn’t matter whether they are gay or straight. I’m confused. I saw people of color as our speakers. Every time anybody up front spoke, they always included people of color in their remarks. It’s not what you say. It’s a look here, a whisper there. And supposing funny remarks like “What color?” that indicated to me that this community is just as racist as any. Wait a minute. I wouldn’t go as far as saying we are racist. What would you call it? We might be little insensitive but . . . If you don’t believe me, talk to other people of color in this conference. Don’t you think you’re a little too sensitive? I thought the whole racism issue is over with in this country. I don’t believe what I’m hearing. Hey, at least the government has laws against discrimination based on race. So, you think having these laws and policies, we have gotten over racism. Yes, . . . No. I mean, there is of course work to be done to make them enforce these laws. My point is that we, as GLBT people, we don’t have the same civil rights yet as people of color in this country. People can say awful things about gays and lesbians, not to mention bisexual and transgender people, and there is no law to stop them. No one will dare to make the same kind of remarks about race in public anymore. That’s why we must stand together to work for justice for the GLBT community just like we did in the civil rights movement in the sixties. Yes, we must stand together and work together. But when we are standing together, we have to know and admit that there is racism even among us good-hearted welcoming folks. Why are you buying into what the conservatives want us to do? And what is that? Every time, the gay and lesbian movement tried to push a policy through in one of the mainline denominations, the conservative always argued that if we accept gay and lesbian as NORMAL people in the church, than we are rejecting the cultures of our ethnic Christian communities. They are saying that homosexuality is against their cultures. So, if we accept gays and lesbians, we must be racist. May be they are right. They can’t be right. To be gay does not mean I am a racist. But the gay and lesbian movement basically was a white movement from the start. Wait a minute. Yes, the whole concept of coming out is a privileged white concept. What? All this talk about being courageous, being yourself, telling the truth and to hell with your family, your friends or anybody who can’t accept you, are but ideas from very privileged people. You lost me. In order to come out, you have to believe that you do have some rights as an individual to start with, am I right? And these rights are protected by society. Right. To believe that you have these basic rights is a privilege that is not shared by many people of color in this country. You have as much rights as I do. The civil rights movement changed that. We might have changed some laws, but people of color sure get checked at the airport more, still get stopped by police for wearing the wrong clothes in the wrong neighborhood. I guess there is something to that. Since most of us don’t have the basic rights to start with, we rely on our ethnic communities to support us. We don’t have the luxury to come out and risk losing what little security we had. That’s why in many communities of color, we don’t talk about who is gay or lesbian, we just know and we accept it. If we come out in public, that would give the racist system another excuse to take another beating on us. That’s more the reason why we have to work together. But as long as you want people to be out as the only way to be a good gay person, as long as there are TV cameras in this conference, as long as your mailing has your conference title on it, many people of color will not come. With all due respect, won’t that be homophobic on the part of the communities of color? No, that is your perspective. To us, the white gay and lesbian movement is not sensitive to our situations, our cultures and our needs. So, what do you suggest that we do? Affirm the conservative position and let them divide us again and again? No, work with communities of color on their terms. Support the GLBT persons of color with full appreciation of our contexts. Okay, I can buy that. But this thing about making the distinction between whites and people of color—I still have a problem with that. While we are here, isn’t there something we can do together? I don’t know. You have to know that even though we are mostly white here, we do care about dismantling racism. Yes, I don’t question that. But again it’s not what you say, it’s how you behave that counts. So, what do we do? I don’t know. That’s for you to figure out. (Silence.) Liberation theology! What? Like the speaker said in the last session, as GLBT people, we are an oppressed people, but God is on our side. God will liberate us and empower us to bring justice to our people. Surely, we can work together on that! That was another thing I had trouble with in the last session. Oh, no. That too. I’m not sure it’s appropriate for a group of mostly white people in this context to talk about liberation theology. We might be mostly white but we are still oppressed as gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. Okay, I agree that in the bigger scheme of things, the GLBT community should live and practice liberation theology. But in the context of this conference, when we are together as the GLBT community, who are the powerful and who are the powerless? We are all powerless. No, I mean, in these three days we are together, who are the majority, who are the ones with influence and power? I guess the majority here is white. Yes, so, for the powerful majority to practice liberation theology is inappropriate. But you can also say the same for gay men and lesbians who are the powerful majority in relation to the bisexuals and transgender people. I would agree with you on that too. So, it is not appropriate for gay men and lesbians to practice liberation theology too? When they are working with bisexual and transgender people here. If liberation theology is not the theology the most of us should practice here, what theology should be use? (Silence.) What does Jesus say to the powerful and rich in the Bible? To sell what they had and give to the poor. Take up the cross and follow Jesus. How do we do that? By letting go of control and power and listen. Listen to GLBT of color. Yes. Listen to the experiences of the bisexual and transgender folks. Yes. I have a proposal. What? I am the speaker for tomorrow’s worship. I would like to invite you to speak instead. What? I want you to address the whole conference. In front of a thousand people? Are you mad? What am I going to say? Say what you just said to me in the last conversation. I think everybody in the conference should hear that. What will the organizers of this conference say? They’ll just be surprised, won’t they? Are you sure? Yes. I am sure. (Silence.) I have a proposal. I really want you to do this. Why don’t we do it together? No, as you said, they don’t need to hear from me—a white person. Yes they do. They need to know how we came to this—how you arrived at giving up your power so that someone like me can have a voice. Wow. This is what liberation is about, isn’t it? Wow. Eric H. F. Law has been a consultant and trainer in multicultural organization development helping educational, health care, and religious institutions deal with issues of cultural diversity for over ten years. An Episcopal priest, he has authored three books, including Inclusion: Making Room for Grace (Chalice Press, 2000). sustaining the spirit Reflections for a Service of Confession and Repentance for Racism Ralph Williams On Palm Sunday, I was asked to be one of the representatives of my congregation, Foundry United Methodist Church, in a service of confession and repentance for racism. The service took place at Asbury United Methodist Church, a predominantly black United Methodist congregation that broke with the Foundry Congregation in 1836 because of the prevalent racism of the time and the specific racism within the congregation. Below are my remarks, some of which were quoted in one of the local papers. The poet Maya Angelou writes that, "History, despite its wrenching pain, cannot be unlived, but if faced with courage, need not be lived again." These words, which she spoke at the first Clinton presidential inauguration, speak of the past and of the future. Today, we the members of Foundry United Methodist Church are here to repent of the sins of the past and to join with you, the members of Asbury United Methodist Church, to envision a new future. As I have brooded over the historical events for which we now offer this service of repentance, I have asked myself, how could they have happened? How could so many of those who understood and proclaimed the transforming love of Christ and God's Good News to all of humankind have been so blind to the profound sin of racism? How in the mid-19th century could the community of Christ known as Foundry Methodist Episcopal Church not know and not act to affirm God's love to red and yellow, black and white? How, when other voices were screaming out for the end of slavery, could some bishops of the Methodist Episcopal Church have condoned slavery? How could the community of Christ relegate others and indeed fellow Christians to positions of inferiority? Was it ignorance, or greed or pride or the simple desire for lives of privilege and comfort? For those who call themselves the followers of the Christ, how could they not have known? I grieve when I think of these sins of our past. We are here today to confess that the Foundry United Methodist Church, through acts of commission and omission, participated in acts of racism. One of the specific ways we practiced racism was in our discriminatory acts that caused and encouraged black members of our Foundry Church Community in the 19th Century to establish a separate congregation because of their race. Today we acknowledge and celebrate the great work that God has done here at 11th and K Street NW in Washington, DC. And, we wish to declare in this time and place that those acts of racism were wrong and had no place within the community of Christ. We are here to say that we do not intend to practice acts of racism any longer. But … we wish to do more than that. We wish to join with you, the members of Asbury United Methodist Church, to begin to envision a new community of faith and love. What would it look like if 11:00 o'clock on Sunday morning was not the most segregated hour in our city and country? How might it effect the complexion of our prisons and jails? Could it reduce the academic achievement gap, or the economic gap, where we are stratified largely by race? If the gifts of all were welcomed and used in the community of Christ, could we better realize the potential of all our people? If our congregations were not separated by race, how might we see and teach our common history differently? Who would be our heroes and sheroes? How might we re-conceive our role as salt of the earth? Who would be friend or foe? When we see rich Christians in a world of growing economic inequity, might we even see God's purposes and our actions in the world differently? My friends, the segregated pews we have created and maintained in this city and nation have a profound impact on our psyche, our national life and our vision of the world. We cannot, we will not begin to move toward a new vision of our future unless we squarely face what is wrong with our past. We must completely renounce this legacy of racism in church and society which continues to distort our lives down to the present. We must, furthermore, acknowledge that we, as Christians, are not immune from inflicting injustice and atrocities upon fellow Christians and our fellow humanity…all of whom are children of the one Creator. We must look honestly at our history and how at times and in profound ways we have simply missed the mark of that higher calling. We must carefully reconsider today's policies and practices and the words and acts that flow from them. We must look at how we, the Christian church, often stigmatize and marginalize and stereotype. We are, at times, the ones who provide the moral justification for government actions which inflict harm or cause harm to be inflicted on God's people—and we are all God's people. While we cannot unlive the wrenching pain of our past, that past need not be lived again and again. Together, with courage, we the members of Asbury and Foundry United Methodist Churches, can leave a new legacy to succeeding generations. We can say, like the Apostle Peter, that: "I now see how true it is that God has no favorites, but that in every nation the one who is godfearing and does what is right is acceptable to God." (Acts 10: 34-35.) We can leave a vision of a God whose grace welcomes all with full equality. The Peace of God and the Love of Christ be with us all. Amen! Ralph Williams is an African American member of Foundry United Methodist Church and its Reconciling Congregation Task Force, as well as the founder of Foundry’s Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Group. you’re welcome! “The Play’s The Thing…..” Clergy Dramatize the Church Conflict over Homosexuality Ron Skidmore In a small café, in an unnamed town, two men, David and Jim, sit drinking coffee and talking. David, a minister, has just finished a rather heated conversation with another man named Randolf, a leader in his church who is homophobic. Randolf is upset that David has been “going too far with this ‘diversity’ business.” As far as he is concerned, homosexuality should not even be discussed in the church. Randolf leaves abruptly when Jim, a gay man, comes in: Jim: Did I interrupt something? David: Yeah, I guess you could say that. Jim: Old-time religion, huh? David: Yeah. Good thing you didn’t come in five minutes earlier. You would have been at his throat for what he said. Jim: Well….I don’t think there would be any point in trying to out-hate him. My philosophy is to try to out-love them. Love the sinner and hate their sin… ….Change is scary to a lot of people. Anything different is scary to a lot of people…..When I first figured out I was gay it scared me. I grew up in a world where gay was bad. Gay was perverted. Gay meant eternal damnation. So naturally, when I started adding up two and two and realized that the textbook definition for everything I felt and thought and everything that seemed natural to me was “homosexuality,” I panicked. I panicked worse than – what’s his name? – Randolf? David: Yeah. Did it challenge your faith? Jim: Yes, I had to re-learn that God loves me. That God made me this way. The world, as I grew up to know it, was wrong. That’s a huge, mind-blowing revelation. David: How did it make you feel? Jim: Like Randolf. David: Excuse me? Jim: We’re not that different, you know. Why do you think people like him resist so strongly? Why do you think it’s so important for them to protest anything or anyone that questions the way they look at religion or God? Because it’s all so close to not being true. It’s the unknown factor. Nobody really knows. It’s all fear. Pure and simple. If your religion is different than mine, if your sexual orientation is different than mine, then your world is different than mine…and it’s easier to defend my world than it is for me to live in yours.” This scene is an excerpt from a play entitled Come in from the Rain, by Michael Smolinski. The play was commissioned by a local clergy group in Grand Rapids, Michigan and ran for two weekends to sell-out audiences in October 2000. The local clergy group, known as “Concerned Clergy of West Michigan” is an inter-denominational group of ministers of “mainline” Protestant churches. We began to work together in 1996 because we shared a concern about the fact that when “Christian” responses to sexual orientation issues were presented in our local media, they were almost always speaking from a perspective of condemnation of gay or lesbian “lifestyles.” We knew there were plenty of us who did not share this perspective and did not believe that a faithful understanding of the Bible demanded it. We felt that we needed to make our voices heard. The first thing we did was to draft a “Pastoral Letter” stating our concerns and position, which was signed by more than 30 of our colleagues. Much to our surprise and gratification, this letter made front page news in Grand Rapids in June of 1996. The letter said, in part: We are a group of Christian pastors and church leaders from several denominations. We are concerned about what has often been represented as the only Christian response toward gay and lesbian people……we believe it is to the peril of the Church that it neglects the humanity and gifts of people strictly on the basis of sexual orientation… Subsequent to this letter we sponsored two workshops, in 1997 and 1998, with nationally known figures in Biblical scholarship and theology. Both were attended by nearly 300 people. Following the success of those events, we began to wonder if there was a way (using the language of a later press release)“to explore this issue using a medium that touched both the head and the heart.” It occurred to us that a play might be the perfect vehicle. In 1999 we commissioned an original play from a local playwright who was a member of one of our churches. We wanted the play to be about the experience of gay and lesbian persons in the church and the struggle of the church to come to terms with gay and lesbian persons who were (and always have been) in our midst. It was a tall order, not just for the playwright, Mike Smolinski, but for “Concerned Clergy.” We were a very loose affiliation, a kind of an ad hoc group gathered around this single issue. We had no real structure except to assign tasks as the previous projects we had undertaken required. We had no real budget or financial backing. This project required us to stretch our organization and energy beyond anything we had done before. It meant fundraising, advertising and most importantly, working with Mike to help shape a script that fairly and realistically represented the struggles of the church without being either polemical or “preachy.” Mike was an ideal partner in this project, open to many of our suggestions regarding certain details, such as how real ministers behave (more like actual human beings than lots of people seem to think). He was able to take (or leave) our prolific suggestions (can you imagine trying to write a play with a committee—of clergy!—looking over your shoulder?) and shape them creatively with his own dramatic sensibilities? His humor, both in our meetings and in the play itself, never flagged as the play went through at least four revisions in a little over a year. By the summer of 2000 we had a script we all liked, which many of us felt we had helped influence in some detail or another, yet which was clearly the result of Mike’s own understanding of the issues and his considerable skill as a playwright. We also had secured the services of two experienced directors who assembled a cast of some of the best actors in Grand Rapids. And we had found we had an ideal venue in a recently renovated historic theater that seated about 300 people. We also had a certain amount of anxiety. We had taken on a considerable financial obligation and faced the unavoidable question, “What if nobody comes?” We scheduled “Come in From the Rain,” for four performances on two successive weekends in early October, 2000. We arranged for the playwright, directors, and actors to be available for a “talkback” after each performance. Members of our clergy group, as well as the playwright and directors, were interviewed on local radio and TV programs discussing and promoting the play. Having built it, we waited to see if they would come. They did. Not only were the performances a sell-out, but also, every night, at least half the audience stayed to participate in the talkback. The play succeeded beyond any of our expectations. Actors and audience alike spoke of being moved deeply in their experience of both performing the play and watching the performance. So often we approach this issue in both church and community only by argument and analysis of Biblical texts or psychological, sociological or medical “evidence.” Argument and analysis have a place, but our experience with this play showed us again the power of drama to humanize a debate. In Shakespeare’s Hamlet, the Prince arranges a play to be performed that he hopes will reveal, by its emotional impact, the identity of his father’s murderer. He says, “The play’s the thing wherein I’ll catch the conscience of the King.” Come In From the Rain caught the consciences of many who saw it with its emotional impact. There were no one-dimensional characters in the play. Those characters that embodied the most problematic attitudes toward gay and lesbian persons were shown to be human beings struggling with their own wounds and fears, including three teenage boys, members of David’s church, who attack a gay man. The more sympathetic characters, including the minister, were shown to have their own points of narrowness, their own process of gradual growth in understanding the perspectives of others in which they learn, as Jim says, what it really means to “Love the sinner and hate the sin.” In one of my favorite scenes in the play Clarence, an African-American man, addresses a gay pride rally and says: White people see a black guy like me walking toward them and you can see them get nervous and hang on to their wallet or purse. Because that’s what they know. That’s what they’ve been taught. Well, I found myself asking white people, “What if…? Just what if everything you were taught about black people turned out to be untrue? What if…? That usually got them thinking. Then one day a gay man said to me: What if…? What if everything you were brought up to believe about gay people were untrue? And that got me thinking… It used to be very easy for me to be prejudiced when I thought I didn’t know any gay people. But someone came into my life—our life—and introduced us to gay people. And ever since then [he jokes], my wife has a better hairdo, and we get better service at restaurants and clothing stores. We also learned a lot about love. And I became a better person. My life has been enriched.” Come in From the Rain showed us that all “sides” in the debate over sexual orientation in the church have a lot to learn about love. It showed us that, if we are willing, the church is the right place for us engage this issue and learn love’s lesson together. Ron Skidmore has been an ordained minister in the United Church of Christ for 19 years. He has lived in Grand Rapids, Michigan for 12 years and is currently working as the Adult Education Minister at First (Park) Congregational UCC. leadership How I Spent My Summer Vacation Matthew J. Smucker It did not feel like I had a vacation this past summer. But it did begin with an unexpected emotional and spiritual high. The first week of June I was planning my ordination service, scheduled to take place on June 9 at Skyridge Church of the Brethren in Kalamazoo, Michigan. With a sense of great joy as well as numbness, I outlined with my pastor, Debbie Eisenbise, the components of a remarkable celebration; one that I never expected to occur for me in the denomination of my childhood. Earlier, on April 29, the Michigan District Board had approved my candidacy for ordination through an intentionally thoughtful discernment process. This group of risk-takers affirmed my call to ministry in seminary administration at Chicago Theological Seminary. It marked the first time that an openly gay man was received in ordained ministry in the Church of the Brethren. As I anticipated their decision, I was prepared for a negative outcome, not expecting that God would open the hearts and minds of the Michigan district board. I was shocked when I learned the results of their discussion, and I had no idea what the rest of summer had in store for me. While there were protests and objections, my ordination service moved forward with the official support of the district and jubilant surprise of my faithful congregation. For the past three years, the Skyridge congregation had supported and nurtured me through this journey, yet always expecting that each milestone would be the last. In the spring of 1999, the district ministry commission had approved me for license ministry, also a first for the denomination. Together we walked faithfully together, trusting that God would guide and protect us without knowing where our path would lead or where it would end. During the Sunday morning worship, my ordination service took place with the love of family and friends celebrating the transforming power of God’s Spirit. The service was amazing; full of music, dance, scripture, prayer, joy, and thanksgiving. One of my seminary professors delivered a message using images of living water (John 7:37-39) and the story of Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:26- 40), to offer her thought that “Maybe it is all about you.” Yes, the gospel of Jesus Christ is radically inclusive. The joy of this day was quickly suppressed by objections from across the denomination. The news of my ordination spread rapidly. In early July, the Brethren’s Annual Conference gathered in Louisville, Kentucky. A query was on the agenda calling for discussion of the licensing and ordination of gays and lesbians. The query had been sent by another district the previous summer in reaction to my licensing, my graduation from Bethany Theological Seminary (Richmond, Indiana), and my search for congregational employment. While the query came with a particular bias, it did present an opportunity for the denomination to move into dialogue, both theoretically and practically. It was time for the Church of the Brethren to break the silence about homosexuality. In the pre-conference discussion, the standing committee was clearly divided on how to proceed. But the conservative faction of the church prevailed. A motion was brought to the delegate body which called for the Church of the Brethren not to recognize the licensing and ordination for homosexual ministers. Without insisting on further study and deeper conversation, a delegate vote was called after less than an hour of conversation. The motion was passed with a 70 per cent vote of the 900 delegates. While this quick action provided comfort for some, it created deep distress for others. This action stirred up various concerns in terms of our congregational polity. I was shocked that a vote occurred so rapidly. While I had hoped for more thoughtful discernment and openness to God’s leading, I realize that fear and ignorance prevailed. In concern for my spiritual well-being, I had previously decided not to attend Annual Conference. Yet separation from my spiritual family and the negative vote created a sense of isolation and loneliness for me. My ordination and the decision at our Annual Conference attracted the attention of the national media. It compounded my sense of isolation. As time progressed, the story felt less and less like my own. As friends from across the country informed me that they had seen it in their local paper, the breadth of the publicity dumbfounded me and I felt frustrated by the lack of my personal participation in the process. To my surprise, I have not received one piece of negative correspondence as a result of this publicity. By mid-August, church leaders and members were voicing their reactions and opinions. Some called for the withdrawal of my ordination; others affirmed the district board’s bold decision. For some, the Annual Conference vote drew a distinct line in the sand, while others questioned the action and raised questions about the local church’s authority. The battle lines were drawn as the Michigan District Conference approached. The district leadership embraced the gathering with a faithful, discerning spirit. Unlike the process at Annual Conference, they hoped to provide a space for more dialogue and less action. As one side brought a petition to affirm the annual conference vote, the other side drafted a query for clarification to send back to next summer’s annual conference. Knowing that this gathering would be even more heated and more personal, I again decided to stay away to nurture myself and protect my spirit. As expected, the district gathering was well attended. Unlike most district gatherings, virtually every church sent delegates and Skyridge had nearly 20 members present. Leaders from the national body were there, including a church parliamentarian and the general secretary. In the business sessions, the conversations and speeches were passionate. The final outcome was that the delegates tabled the petition for one year and passed the query. These two actions allowed more time for dialogue. My summer never felt like a vacation. It was a time for great joy as I was recognized for my gifts and ministry. I am grateful for the love and support of my family and friends. The Skyridge congregation and the leadership of the Michigan district boldly proclaimed their love and support for me. Emotionally and spiritually, I experienced pain in the silence of the spotlight and isolation as an instrument of change. I learned that those who oppose my gifts and ordination often retreat from personal engagement as they fear me and my story. As a result, they don’t see me as an authentically gifted and called servant of God. I learned to remain grounded and strong, watching and praying for the in-breaking of God. This summer I caught a glimpse of Jesus’ life when he was taunted by the Pharisees and discovered why he took time in the wilderness to rest and recuperate. At this point, I am still grateful for the opportunity to continue to walk this road less traveled. I am blessed to do work and ministry at Chicago Theological Seminary, where my gifts are affirmed and I am not under the daily stress of church conflict and commentary. I am hopeful for the possibilities for this year. I pray that this fall will provide opportunities for me to share my story and describe the amazing moments in my journey toward ordained ministry. I hope for safe places where I can proclaim the ways that God has been present to me. While I cannot say that my summer had the qualities of a typical vacation, it was nonetheless a journey down a wilderness road with unexpected turns and blessings. Matthew J. Smucker is a member of the development and external affairs staff at Chicago Theological Seminary. He and his partner, David, live in Chicago. 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 Open Hands Vol 18 No 1 - Racism: Our Incomplete Rainbow https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/1511f36a7b1e2fa20c8306fa3d389538.pdf 39f469bd263b78170ab815c35bc56322 Issue An issue of a recurring publication. Volume Number The volume number of the issue 2 Issue Number The number of the issue (within a volume) 1 Publication Year The year the issue was published 1986 Publication Date The date the issue was published Summer Text Any textual data included in the document 1t!J11 your"ea rl Irue -10 m y "earl al --I Inune If 0 youn __ ___ ';Jf il iI, give m e 90ur "and:· 2 ';]("ingJ 10:15 Vo'-2, ~o_1 ~ummer10S0 'iJour al 01 t"e~concilingCongregation~ogram ~ The Reconciling Congregation Program is a network of United Methodist local churches who publicly affirm their ministry with the whole family of God and who welcome lesbians and gay men into their community. In this network Reconciling Congregations find strength and support as they strive to overcome the divisions caused by prejudice and homophobia in our church and in our society. These congregations strive to offer the hope that the church can be a reconciled community. To enable local churches to engage in these ministries, the program provides resource materials, including Open Hands. Enablers are available locally to assist a congregation which is seeking to become a Reconciling Congregation. Information about the program can be obtained by writing: Reconciling Congregation' Program P.O. Box 24213 Nashville, TN 37202 Open Hands (formerly Manna for the Journey) is published by Affirmation: United Methodists for Lesbian/Gay Concerns. Inc., as a resource for the Reconciling Congregation Program. It seeks to address concerns of lesbians and gay men as they relate to the ministry of the church. Contributing to This Issue: Jeanne Barnett Bob Moon Mark Bowman John Moor Joanne Brown Julie Morrissey Nancy Carter Beth Richardson Morris Floyd Ben Roe Merrill Follansbee Bradley Rymph Mary Gaddis Eric Schuman Rick Husky Jeffrey Snyder Bill Johnson Randy Kimler Graphic anis!: Gene Leggett Brenda Roth Open Hands (formerly Manna tor the Journey) is published four times a year. Subscription is $1 0 for four issues. Single copies are available for $3 each. Permission to reprint is granted upon request. Repnnts of certain articles are available as indicated in the issue. Subscriptions and correspondence should be sent to: Open Hands PO. Box 23636 Washington. D.C. 20026 Copyright 1986 by Affirmation: United Methodists for Lesbian/Gay Concerns. Inc. ISSN 0888-8833 IPJII ~our"earl true -fo m'l "eart al ,,,i,.,e il to 1l0ufJ/. ... ';J.f it ii, give me 'lour "a,.,d:' : ';](i"'OI "':1; TJournal of fl.Je~concilingCongregation ~ogram Contents Just two decades ago, few (if any) Christian denominations had formal policies related to homosexuality. Any church law was, in essence, informal and unwritten. Clearly, that is no longer the case. The United Methodist Church and other denominations have adopted ordinances and statements of principles covering a variety of subjects of specific concern to gay men and lesbians. In this issue of Open Hands, we examine some of these policies and the theological questions behind them. Morris Floyd opens our discussion with "The Need for a Coherent Theology ofSexuality" (p. 5 ). Floyd puts these church policy questions in their broader context, arguing that institutional Christendom's difficulty in being inclusive of gay men and lesbians stems largely from its discomfort with dealing with sexuality in general. The United Methodist Church has adopted several statements and policies related to the role that lesbians and gay men are welcome to play as its members. John V. Moore discusses this history and specifics of ordination policy in "Struggle for Justice: Ordination in the UMC" (p. 10). Robert W. Moon, in "Contradiction Codified: The UM Social Principles" (p. 7), and Nancy Carter, in "Ignorance vs. Education: The UM Funding Ban" (p. 8), discuss other important actions of recent General Conferences. I n "Spiritual Gifts Lost" (p. 6), Ben Roe recounts the cost to the church in lost human talents caused by these policies. Perhaps the central issue among these church policies is whether gay men and lesbians should have the same ordination opportunities as other church members. Drawing on personal experience, four authors discuss varying aspects of this question: Richard E. Husky, in "Baptismal Covenant Broken" (p. 19); F. Gene Leggett, in "Whose Life Is Disrupted?" (p. 20); Jeff Snyder, in "The Cost ofthe Closet" (p. 21); and an anonymous lesbian, in "Responding to God's Call" (p. 23). Other denominations face challenges similar to those within the United Methodist Church. In "Journeys in Other Denominations," other churches' struggles to be inclusive of gay men and lesbians are noted: Unitarian Universalist, Eric Schuman (p. 12); Episcopalian, Randolph B. Kimler (p. 14); Presbyterian, Merrill M. Follansbee (p. 15); and United Church ofChrist, William Johnson (p. 16) Elsewhere in this issue, SUSTAINING THE SPIRIT (p.18) presents "Affirming Our Ministries, " a responsive reading originally compiled for the commissioning of Affirmation leaders and adapted for Open Hands by Julie Morrissey. RESOURCES (p. 24) offers opportunities for further study and reflection on the theme of the issue. The RCP REPORT (p. 3) offers news of interest to readers. We present this issue in a spirit of reconciliation and love, daring to hope that our vision of the church as a Christian community encompassing the diversity of God's glorious creation will continue to unfold. 2/0pen Hands OUR NEW NAME! With this issue we begin publishing under our new name, Open Hands. This is not indicative of any changes in content or style with Mannafor the Journey-just a change in name. As we announced with an insert . in our last issue, our legal use of the ti tle M anna for the Journey was challenged last fall by the United Methodist Renewal Services Fellowship (UMRSF), a charismatic group in the UMC. The UMRSF has a federal trademark on the title of its newsletter, Manna , and requested that we change our title, contending that the two publications were likely to be confused. Believing that such confusion was unlikely because ofour different audiences and different full titles, we felt we-had reasonable grounds to obtain a federal trademark on Manna for the Journey. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, however, disagreed and denied our trademark application this spring. Rather than pursue our case through appeal, we have decided to change our name. The image of Open Hands is derived from John Wesley's sermon "The Cathoic Spirit." The text for that sermon is from II Kings 10: 15: And when he [Jehu] departed thinking. Wesley concludes by stating that a person of "catholic spirit" is one whose heart is enlarged toward all mankind, those he knows and those he does not; he embraces with strong and cordial affection neighbors and strangers, friends and enemies.* We find this image to be particularly meaningful for the Reconciling Congregation Program and this journal. As women and men of faith, we lay claim to the promise of the church as the inclusive Body of Christ. On behalf of those who have been cast out by the institutional church, we extend our hands to those who remain inside the ecclesiastical structures and those who are now without, welcoming them to our common bond of love in Jesus Christ. Hands joined together span divisions and brokenness, even if they do not erase them. It is through God's saving and liberating grace that we can say "Is your heart true to my heart as mine is to yours? . . . Ifit is, give me your hand." On a practical note, be assured that subscriptions and correspondence can be addressed to either Open Hands or Manna for the Journey for the next several months as we complete this transition. Crescent Heights performs a ministry to the community through the use of its facilities. Groups which use the building include lesbian/gay Alcoholics Anonymous and Overeaters Anonymous groups, a mental health support group, AIDS support groups, and the Coalition for Economic Survival. Crescent Heights has also made its sanctuary available for memorial services for those who have died from AIDS. SI. Paul's Supports Julian Rush St. Paul's UMC (Denver) publicly declared its support for one of its pastors, Julian Rush, in the latest round of challenges to Rush's appointment as an openly gay pastor. Rush is appointed to St. Paul's and to the Colorado AIDS Project. I n response to formal charges filed against Rush by other pastors in the Rocky Mountain Annual Conference, several laypersons at St. Paul's drafted a statement ofsupport. This statement was approved by the congregation's Administrative Council on March 30, 1986, and signed by 45 members of the congregation (the text of the statement is below). The statement was subsequently printed in the annual conference's newsfrom there, he met Jehonadab the son of Rechab coming to *The exclusively masculine language is retained from Wesley:~ writing but is intended to include paper. After grievances against Rush meet him; and he greeted all persons. were filed in July 1985, the investigahim, and said to him, "Is your tion ran into an obstacle-there was heart true to my heart as mine is to yoursT And Jehonadab answered, "It is." Jehu said, "If Welcome to a New Reconciling Congregation no established definition of what constituted a "self-avowed, practicing homosexual." (This term was it is, give me your hand." Crescent Heights UMC of West used in the 1984 General Conference (RSV) Hollywood, California, recently belegislation prohibiting the ordinaWesley's interpretation of this came the 16th Reconciling Congretion and appointment of openly gay passage states first that Jehu is not gation and the first located in southand lesbian clergy in the UMC.) inquiring ifthe two ofthem are ofthe ern California. A special committee was apsame opinion or worship in a similar Crescent Heights was formed in pointed by the annual conference to fash ion. Instead, the question simply 1914. Located in an "urban village," define and apply the term. At a is, "Is thy heart right with God? .. the neighborhood is comprised priJanuary executive session of the Dost thou believe in the Lord Jesus marily of Old World Russian Jews annual conference, the definition Christ? .. Is thy faith filled with the and lesbians and gay men. Crescent was presented and approved. It read: energy of love? . .. Is thy heart right Heights is currently the only main" A self-avowed, practicing homosextoward thy neighborT According to line Protestant church in this neighual is a person who engages in, and Wesley, the statement "give me your borhood. A large number of the conopenly acknowledges, genital sexual hand" is a bond of faith and love and gregation's 60 members are lesbians behavior with a person or persons of does not convey a unity of belief and or gay men. (continued) Open Hands/3 the same sex." Under this definition, the proceedings against Rush were discontinued. Three pastors in the annual conference then filed formal charges that Rush is gay and, thus, disobeying church law. St. Paul's letter of support was in response to this continued "harassment" and asked that the charges be dropped and the process of reconciliation begun. The letter said: The undersigned members of St. Paul's United Methodist Church of Denver and the Administrative Council are taking this means to attempt to reconcile differences of opinion relating to charges being brought a second time against the Rev. Julian Rush and, therefore, St. Paul's. This charge by the Revs. J.L. Penfold, Eaton; Ed Bigler, Peetz; and Edward R. Rousset. Mancos, seems to us to be harassment and interferes with our ministry. We feel these charges are being encouraged by a group outside the Rocky Mountain Conference who have no concept of the ministry of St. Paul's UMC and other similar places and we respectfully, prayerfully, and in the spirit of love and reconciliation, request it to cease and desist. We invite other United Methodist members and congregations to join us in this request. St. Paul's United Methodist Church of Denver is growing at a time when other churches are losing members and when the entire church is being requested to double its membership. We are an all-inclusive, reconciling congregation ministering to the people of Capitol Hill in Denver. The church has experienced refreshing new life with new people addressing the needs ofthe city's homeless and the chronically mentally ill; the state's farm crisis; Central America's civil strife; Mexico's earthquake; Cheyenne's flood as well as addressing the needs of the congregation. St. Paul's has paid full apportionments in support of the Rocky Mountain Conference • and the connectional system of the United Methodist Church. United Methodists and non-United Methodists continue to join and members refuse to drop out of the church in spite of actions advocated by specific vocal groups encouraging rejection and isolation. We invite the Reverends Penfold, Bigler and Rousset. and any others who are willing, to visit St. Paul's and worship with us. [The congregational Covenant appears here.] The vast majority of the group who wrote this covenant are heterosexual members of St. Paul's. The lay ministry of St. Paul's United Methodist Church of Denver feel we are all in ministry whether ordained or not. We believe Julian Rush is an example of ministry in this present age of reformation based on love. People have been afraid of tuberculosis, polio, cancer and now AIDS. The change in thinking has come about thanks to persons like Julian and many Colorado AIDS Project volunteers who attend St. Paul's who have been called to serve an unpopular position in the face of extreme adversity today. We, St. Paul's United Methodist Church of Denver members and Administrative Council, sincerely hope and pray for reconciliation in this matter. Wisconsin Annual Conference Commends RCP The Wisconsin Annual Conference, meeting in late May, approved a resolution in support of the Reconciling Congregation Program. The resolution stipulated that information on the program be sent to every congregation in a conference mailing and the Reconciling Ministries Committee of the conference Board ofGlobal Ministries include the program in its work. More information on this resolution and happenings in other United Methodist annual conferences will appear in the next issue. Affirmation Meeting Brings Developments for the RCP The annual spring meeting of Affirmation: United Methodists for Lesbian/Gay Concerns was held in Seattle in April. Portions of the meeting were held in each of that city's Reconciling Congregations (Wallingford and Capitol Hill). Among the decisions made at the meeting were several concerning the Reconciling Congregation Program. Specifically, a decision was made to hold a national Reconciling Congregations event in the spring of 1987. The event would bring together representatives of the Reconciling Congregations, members ofprospective congregations, resource persons from the gay/lesbian community, and observers from annual conferences and the national boards and agencies. The event will provide an opportunity for networking among local congregations, visioning for the RCP, and witnessing to the national church about the important mInIstries that Reconciling Congregations perform. Reconciling Congregations will be consulted in the planning of the event. Others who wish more information should contact the Reconciling Congregation Program, P.O. Box 24213, Nashville, TN 37202. News From Reconciling Congregations -Bethany (San Francisco) celebrated lesbian/gay pride with a car in the Freedom Day parade, complete with their pastor in a clerical collar. -Capitol Hill (Seattle) marched in the Gay Pride parade and distributed bookmarks describing their ministry as a Reconciling Congregation. -Crescent Heights (West Hollywood) houses the Triangle Project, which identifies and supports lesbian and gay couples wanting to be foster parents. -Edgehill (Nashville) recently began a Luke 14: 12 program. On Tuesdays and Fridays, 50-100 people are served lunch in the church building. -University (Madison) engaged in a corn-picking ministry this past winter. When late fall rains and an early snow kept farmers from using machinery to pick the corn crop, several southern Wisconsin churches organized groups to work in the fields picking corn by hand. Members of University spent several weekends picking corn. Also, University's Administrative Council recently approved performing "holy unions" for lesbian or gay couples in their church. In addition, the worship committee drafted a sample worship service to be used. 4/0pen Hands The Need for a COHERENT Morris Floyd is a member of the California-Pacific Annual Conference of the United Methodist Church. Floyd lives in Minneapolis and is one of the official spokespersons for Affirmation: United Methodists for Lesbian/Gay Concerns. The presence of lesbians and gay men in the church is not new. Policy issues resulting from that presence, however, have been on the United Methodist agenda and that of other denominations for a relatively short timeroughly since the famous Stonewall riots in 1969. Since 1972, the basis of the UMC's position has been its Social Principles statement. That statement affirms the dignity and worth of "homosexual persons no less than heterosexual persons;" acknowledges their need for "the ministry and guidance of the church;" and calls for the assurance of their human and civil rights. Nevertheless, the statement adds, "we do not condone the practice of homosexuality and consider this practice incompatible with Christian teaching." Theology of Sexuality By Morris Floyd The "incompatibility clause" set the stage for later prohibitions against "the use of national church funds for gay/lesbian groups or in ways that "promote the acceptance" of homosexuality; and the ordination or appointment of "self-avowed, practicing homosexuals." It maintains a dualistic understanding of personality and a genital focus in matters of human sexuality. This dualistic understanding can be seen in the moral distinction the policy makes between homosexual orientation and same-sex activity. The argument usually goes something like this: Homosexual orientation may be regrettable but is not to be condemned. However, the behavioral expression of that orientation, which is under the control ofthe individual, is not acceptable. It is a variation on the theme "love the sinner; hate the sin." Furthermore, since homosexual "practice" is seen primarily in terms of genital activity, genital behavior defines what it means to be a "practicing" lesbian or gay man. This dualistic approach to human experience and the obsessive focus on genital behavior is not limited to the church's response to homosexuality. At least vestiges of these shortcomings can be observed in traditional Christian approaches to nonmarital sexual expression, birth control, and abortion. These problems result, in large part, from our failure to have developed a coherent theology of sexuality. The Wesleyan approach requires that theology be informed by scripture, tradition, reason, and experience. United Methodist policy with respect to homosexuality lacks theological coherence because it is consistent neither with what is known about homosexuality from medical and social sciences nor with the biblical view of humankind. For more than 10 years, it has been the scientific consensus that a same-s~ orientation is neither chosen nor pathological. On this basis, sexual orientation is seen as one or more ofthose categories in which people differ. Based on a selectively literal reading of a few verses in the Bible, a viscerally negative reaction to gay/lesbian sexuality, a lack of information about gay and lesbian persons, or some combination of these factors, many church people ignore the scientific consensus. This allows them to deny the biblical view of persons as whole creatures called to be responsible stewards ofall the gifts they have been given, including their sexuality. Gay and lesbian persons are urged to isolate themselves from their sexual nature, deny its goodness, and suppress genital expression. This urging reflects and reinforces the naive notion that sexuality is only expressed in genital ways. Like persons who are heterosexual, lesbians and gay men express their sexuality in many ways, even if they never have a genital sexual interaction with another person. The church, however, is interested only in what they do with certain body orga ns. Developing a coherent theology of sexuality is important not only for its own sake and for what it will enable in terms of a more just policy regarding lesbians and gay men in the church. It is important also because of what it will mean for the ministry of the church to the whole human community and with respect to lesbians and gay men in particular. There are few areas of our lives where people have greater need for support than in dealing with concerns related to their sexuality. Heterosexuals, like lesbians and gay men, experience a powerful link between their approach to their sexuality and their own sense of self-identity and self-worth. Uncertainties and guilts in this important area limit persons' abilities to hear or fully respond to the Gospel ofJesus Christ. The church can give neither effective guidance nor a useful pastoral approach with respect to these concerns while its resources are limited to the narrow and unbiblical approach illustrated by its present response to persons who are gay, lesbian, or bisexual. Open Hands/5 Spiritual Gi Tonight I cried. I grieved the loss to my church of the spiritual gifts of one of God's children. My church had no room for my friend, because he is different. My friend joined another church where he is openly wanted, welcomed, appreciated, and understood. Ifmy church had been open, we could have heard of his struggle of over 30 years to be included and his uniqueness affirmed. Time after time, church after church up to his teens, he was branded different. One Lutheran minister in an attempt to "heal" the differentness singled him out for special Bible study classes. Ifmy church had been willing to listen, we would have heard of his long-time, little-expressed dream of being a minister. We would have heard of his deep appreciation for God's little creations: the bugs, the flowers, the plants, the rocks. We could have heard him call the plants by their scientific names. But my church is afraid of him. He looks a little different, acts a little different, believes a little different. We can't imagine God's love including his differentness in God's plan. You see, my friend openly affirms his sexuality-his gay sexuality. In one United Methodist church, more recently, my friend was sitting in church with his wife (yes, homosexual people do marry) and heard the minister talk about how homosexuality is a danger to families. My friend, in order to retain his hard-won sense of dignity and composure, got up and left. We understand ourselves as one of the most inclusive and pluralistic denominations. Yet for the last 14 years we have debated heatedly whether those who are attracted to persons of the same sex can be included-not only in United Methodism, but in Christianity! Our Social Principles now insist, for example, that homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching. Our statement on the ministry now says that self-avowed, practicing homosexuals are not to be admitted as candidates, ordained as ministers, or appointed to serve. The spiritual gifts of many gay, lesbian, and bisexual men and women are lost to almost all churches because we in those churches are unwilling to listen. We are unwilling to learn about the full range of human sexuality, which includes homosexuality and bisexuality. We shut our ears by not listening to those who knock at our doors in their writings. We shut our ears by not attending educational events. We shut our hearts by denying funds to any endeavor which might even sound like it might promote the acceptance of any sexuality different from our own. The spiritual path of gay, lesbian, and bisexual people can have a significance that could enrich us all. But because we don't listen, we miss Ben Roe is a United Methodist minister. pastoral counselor, edu and executive director of Ministry in Human Sexuality. a counseling, By Ben Roe education, and advocacy agency in Lincoln, NE. some of the depth of our common spiritual journey, and our church is the poorer for it. Ifmy church, the United Methodist Church, had been willing to listen, we could have heard of my friend's latest journey to affirm his sexuality fully in the context of his spiritual journey. He has finally been able to celebrate his maleness, his combination of femininity and masculinity, and his gayness. He has found a new appreciation of his body which had long been a source of confusion and pain. We could have heard of my friend's growing understanding of his spirituality and his longing for communion with God. We would have heard his joy at finding God and a new wholeness in spirit, mind, and body. But we weren't open to hear. Someday I hope this church that has given me my hopes and dreams, my faith perspective, the undergirding to my spirituality-someday I hope my church which has the possibility of being one of the most balanced spiritual and justice-seeking churchessomeday I hope my church will open up eyes to see, ears to hear, and hearts to love, and perhaps even seek out those gay, lesbian and bisexual persons who so long ago went out of the church when they "came out" in the church. The joy I find in my grief is that at last my friend is finally fully a part of the body of Christ, which transcends all our human denominations. This editorial was first published in the January 1986 issue of The Nebraska Messenger and is used by permission. 6/ 0pen Hand~ The United Methodist Social Principles say: 'We recognize that sexuality is a good gift of God, and we believe persons may be By Robert W. Moon f ully human only when that gift is acknowledged and affinned by themselves, the CONTRADICTION Church, and society. We call all persons to disciplines that lead to the fulfillment of CODI.IEDI themselves, others and society in the stewardship ofthis gift. we encourage the medical, theological, and humanistic disciplines to combine in a determined effort to underT he UM Social Principles stand human sexuality more completely. "Homosexual persons no less than heterosex ual persons are individuals of The story on legislation affecting the declaration about homosexuality in the Social Principles of the United Methodist Church is quickly told: There has been no change since 1972. sacred worth, who need the ministry and guidance ofthe Ch urch in their struggles for human fulfillment, as well as the spiritual and emotional care ofa fellowship which During a period when attitudes toward homosexuality were becoming more flexible in many parts of society, the official position of the United Methodist Church has held rigidly to the words" . . . incompatible enables reconciling relationships with God, with others, and with self. Further we insist that all persons are entitled to have their with Christian teaching." human and civil rights ensured, though we This indicting phrase was added from the floor during the debate in the General Conference of 1972. Though attempts to remove these words have been made every four years since 1972, the document remains do not condone the practice ofhomosexuality and consider this practice incompatible with Christian teaching. ,. The Book of unchanged. We can hope for changes. Through the centuries we have witnessed significant changes in Christian Discipline, p.90, par. 71 F, ''Human Sexuality. ") teachings. Take the teachings about divorce, for example. The early position of the church banning divorce was This Social Principles statement was adopted at the prompted by the words attributed to Jesus. Though 1972 General Conference of the United Methodist Jesus was silent about homosexuality, his words about Church. The last phrase" .. . though we do not condone divorce are clear and unequivocal (Mark 10: 11 ft). Today the practice of homosexuality and consider this practice the official statements and the practice of many denomincompatible with Christian teaching" was added as an inations are accepting toward divorced persons. amendment to the statement from the floor of the conAgain, Christian teachings about racism and slavery ference and was adopted. have changed through the centuries. So have the The original statement as proposed was an affirming teachings about participating in war. statement, which understood and accepted our human Given the fact that Jesus neve r addressed the subject diversity in sexuality as a good gift of God. The of homosexuality, and given our greatly enriched " .. . incompatible with Christian teaching" amendment understanding of the nature of sexuality today, it is was an abrupt contrast to that original statement. reasonable to expect a change in Christian teaching here. Since the incompassionate rigidity prompted by the words "incompatible with Christian teaching" has been The Social Principles are neither church law nor rules in any binding sense. They are statements of so costly in pain and anguish and fractured community, social conscience of the church on subjects of concern. we must do all we can to see that this change does not They have varied greatly over the history of the United take centuries to be accomplished. Methodist Church and will vary during the coming years. Because the Social Principles speak to issues of Rohert W Moon. a United Methodist minister, was on the platform at General Conference in 1972 making the presentation fo r the majority report at the time the amendment was made. today for each time in the life of the church, this statement today reflects the contradictory views held by individuals within the United Methodist Church. Open Hands/ 7 By Nancy Carter Nancy Caner is chairperson ofthe Administrative Council of Washington Square UMC (N<*' York), a Reconciling Congregation, where she has been a member since 1977. During the closing hours of the 1976 General Conference, when the rules had been changed to suspend debate, repressive new legislation was added to The Book ofDiscipline. In what is now known as paragraph 906.12* the conference gave the General Council on Finance and Administration the responsibility for ensuring that no board, agency, committee, commission, or council shall give United Methodist funds to any "gay" caucus or group, or otherwise use such funds to promote the acceptance of homosexuality. The council shall have the right to stop such expenditures. The same General Conference refused to authorize a national church study of human sexuality and only by a slim majority voted to authorize voluntary sexuality study efforts by local churches, for which resources would be provided. By adding paragraph 906.12 without adequately discussing it and before conducting any serious study of human sexuality, that General Conference was, in effect, preferring ignorance to education and thus endorsing the continuation of public prejudice. The legislation was seen by many as a weapon not only to stop education about sexuality and gay/lesbian people but also to exclude gay/lesbian persons from various aspects of church life. Early I nterpretations of Paragraph 906.12 Paragraph 906.12 was invoked many times in the first quadrennium of its enforcement as people tried to determine its implications. One of the first impacts of the new clause was to stop the minimal funding that had been going to groups that could be labeled "gay," such as the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches (MCC), a predominantly (but not exclusively) gay/lesbian denomination, and to prevent future funding of such groups. The new disciplinary clause was also quickly used to try to control educational materials and events, with any "positive" information about gay/lesbian people considered by some to be against the Discipline if it received national denomination funds: • An article in The Christian Home about Rick Husky, "One of Our Family is Gay," in its May 1977 issue, was attacked by Charles Keysor, top staff person *The original numbering in 1976 was 906. 13; I use the 1984 numbering throughout. 8/0pen Hands of Good News, a conservative UMC caucus. Keysor charged that the article violated paragraph 906.12 because "Homosexuality is not declared to be wrongthe only wrong which this article declares is the narrowminded attitude of the church which will not ordain homosexuals. " • The United Methodist Reporter, in its February 2, 1979, issue, attacked the General Board of Discipleship (BOD) for producing a packet on homosexuality as part of the local church study approved by the General Conference. The-[newspaper charged that the packet "promoted" homosexuality, and, as a result, the packet was altered, including the removal of a "pro-gay" pamphlet published by the Gay Activists' Alliance. • Still in turbulence from firing Joan Clark in 1979 after she came out as a lesbian, the Women's Division of the General Board of Global Ministries sent three recommendations to the 1980 General Conference: deletion of paragraph 906.12, as well as deletion of the negative statement in the Social Principles (see article, p. 7) and adoption of the division's document on Human Sexuality for study (see RESOURCES, p. 24). Ruth Daugherty, the Women's Division president, said that the deletion of the two paragraphs would allow the UMC to study sexuality "with openness, clarity, and Christian charity." Afterward, Good News suggested that the study would violate the Discipline, as (it said) had the human sexuality workshops the division sponsored for its directors and staff after Clark was fired. • A 1977 educational conference, "Homosexuality and the United Methodist Church," sponsored by 'Washington Square UMC in New York City and Gay United Methodists (now Affirmation) was even questioned. Unlike the BOD and the Women's Division, however, Washington Square could say that it was a local church carrying out the General Conference mandate to do study; no national denominational funds were involved. (This differentiation between national and nonnational funds became important; some people tried to use paragraph 906.12 to block local, district, and annual conference studies.) Exclusion of Gay and Lesbian People Paragraph 906.12 was also used to justify the exclusion of gay and lesbian people in church-related institutions. Had Joan Clark been retained, for instance, some people were prepared to say her employment constituted a violation because her salary came from national church funds. This argument was never tested. UMC seminaries became the major focus of exclusion, particularly in relation to the ordination process. Some persons argued that, since UMC seminaries received national funds, they could not have gay or lesbian students in their professional programs. The first publicized case of exclusion was Garrett Evangelical Seminary's dismissal of two United Methodist "selfavowed homosexuals," James Mason and Terry Colbert, in June 1978. A few months later, Iliff School of Theology refused to admit Lucius Allen Grooms, a candidate for ministry in the MCC denomination. In May 1979, St. Paul School of Theology placed five students on probation for distributing a pamphlet that seminary officials claimed could be interpreted as the school's approval of homosexuality. New Directions in Interpretation Paragraph 906.12 seems to be invoked less than it once was but continues to do damage. Fortunately, it has lost some of its initial power in the area of education. Last year, the paragraph was cited in an attempt to block a study on homophobia, sexism, and the church by the General Commission on the Status and Role of Women (COS ROW). In response, Sharon Howell, the COSROW president, drew a distinction between advocacy and education. "Advocacy is the predetermination of support. Education-which is what we are struggling with-is coming to a better understanding and knowledge of an issue. Advocacy doesn't always come from education. We are not dealing with homosexuality, but the fear of it and all the implications." Analysis of the Issues The serious ethical issues raised by the adoption of paragraph 906.12 have not been adequately analyzed. Implicitly, the paragraph supports homophobia and rejects reconciliation. It denies that "promotion of the acceptance of homosexuality" can be based on facts, truth, and Christian love. It assumes that advocacy for gay/lesbian people has no Christian basis and supports an uneducated viewpoint of gay men and lesbians. Since national funds cannot go to "any 'gay' caucus or group"-and since that phrase has never been defined-important new work of parts of the United Methodist Church might be denied funding. Attempts could be made to use the paragraph to block funds for AIDS service groups, even though they help all persons with AIDS, not just gay men. A project gathering information about violence against lesbians and gay men might also be denied funds. The Reconciling Congregation Program might have trouble receiving funds, even though it is _essentially a network of individual UMC congregations across the country, not a gay/lesbian organization. Ideally, paragraph 906.12 should be deleted at the next General Conference. The funding processes of agencies, which include guidelines, policy approval by directors, and financial disclosure, should be trusted to make decisions on a case-by-case basis. Unfortunately, however, it is much harder to take legislation out of the Discipline than to put it in. Paragraph 906.12 was inserted into the Discipline at a time when distrust of denominational agencies was increasing. As often happens with distasteful actions, however, some unintentional good has also come from the legislation. One such result is that, after it was adopted, it helped prompt more grass-roots work on human sexuality to be done by local churches, districts, and annual conferences. In the long run, this examination may help lead to the dismantling of the very barriers that paragraph 906.12 was meant to reinforce. Open Handsl9 ggle For Justice: By John V. Moore he sanctuary of Glide Memorial UMC inTsan Francisco was packed, more crowded than on Easter. My sermon that day 20 years ago carried the title "Church, Community, and Homosexuality." The congregation was largely gay men and lesbians who had come specifically to hear what I had to say. After I called for deleting from the California code those statutes that dealt with private sexual acts between competent, consenting adults, news services reported my sermon as far away as New Zealand and Australia. The sermon had stemmed from a consultation on "Religion and the Homosexual" sponsored by a foundation of the congregation in June 1964. The consultation had attempted to bridge the gulf between churches and the thousands of young lesbians and gay men living in San Francisco, many of whom had grown up in the church and some of whom were still active in it. Approximately an equal number of heterosexual persons and gay men and lesbians had participated in the event. Two decades later, our concern is rightly with where the United Methodist Church is today in relation to the issue of ordination of gay men and lesbians and the larger issue of sexual orientation itself. Nevertheless, a sense of history can empower us for the continuing struggle for respect and justice for all persons. In 1965, issues related to lesbians and gay men were not even on the church's agenda. It simply had not occurred to the church that the issue needed addressing. Later, when the 1972 General Conference asserted that "the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teachings," it assumed that this was not only true of past and present teachings but of all Christian teaching in the future as well. The 1976 General Conference was the first to address the issue of homosexuality and ordination. There, at the meeting of the legislative Committee on the Ministry, opponents of any change in the church's official stance on homosexuality and ordination argued that the UMC already had a reliable process for examining the character of its ministers. During consideration of the matter, the committee asked two of us to prepare a draft making explicit the way the denomination dealt responsibly with matters of character. We hastily wrote an addition to a Book ofDiscipline footnote* on tobacco and beverage alcohol. By affirming the denomination's overall process of dealing with matters of clergy character, this footnote helped forestall any effort to expressly forbid the ordination of gay men and lesbians. The ordination issue was again on the General Conference agenda in 1980. The debate in committee and in lO/Open Hands · · Of,dIMtwn John V Moore is pastor at First UMC, Sacramento. California. He has been a delegate to five General Conferences and was a member ofthe General Board ofChurch and Society from 1972 to 1980. the plenary session centered on the same issues. The appeal to trust annual conferences to act responsibly in the matter of ordaining homosexuals carried the debate and prohibition was again defeated. It was not long before it became clear that the concept of any lesbian or gay man seeking ordination or serving as pastor was intolerable to many United Methodists. When Bishop Melvin Wheatley of the Rocky Mountain Conference was vindicated by the UMC judicial system for his appointing a pastor who acknowledged his homosexual orientation, church members who opposed ordination of gay men and lesbians began crying, "Let's resolve this issue once and for all!" In response, the 1984 General Conference first enacted a proposal calling for commitment of clergy to "fidelity in marriage and celibacy in singleness." After the Judicial Council ruled that "The addition of [those] words [did] not establish absolute requirements nor affect the right to appointment of ministerial members in good standing," the conference also expressly prohibited the candidacy, ordination, or appointment of "self-avowed, practicing homosexuals."** In November 1984, the Judicial Council ruled that the second action did not violate the UMC constitution. The council explained that: 1) the General Conference has legislative authority in such matters; 2) annual conferences are responsible for interpreting and implementing General Conference legislation; and 3) because the constitutional rights of clergy who belong to annual conferences must be respected, bishops cannot refuse to appoint individual clergy unless their annual conference has acted to rescind their membership. Now that the General Conference and the Judicial Council have both spoken, flexibility exists solely with the annual conferences in how they interpret the rules. These conferences will have to define for themselves (continued) *The committee and the conference accepted thisfootnote with the understanding that it would be placed in The Book of Discipline. Despite this actiol7. the footnote was not prillled in the 1976 Discipline. It appeared. however. in the 1980 Discipline. **This wording made it clear that. to be deniedordination or have one's ordination revoked. agay man or lesbian must be both "selJ-avol1'ed" and "practicing" When a delegate to the General Conference offered an amendl1lelllthat wouldhave deleted ·~5elf-avol1·ed. .. arguingthat the words weakened the language. his lIlotion was defeated by a show ofhands. the "self-avowed" and to decide whether single people (either homosexual or heterosexual) who cannot in good conscience affirm celibacy meet the law of the church. In the past, annual conferences have variously interpreted the Discipline. For example, when the pledge to abstain from the use of tobacco and beverage alcohol was the law of the church, it was rigorously enforced in some sections of the country and ignored in others. The 1984 pronouncements probably will be in the Discipline for a long time. Both the precedent of the church's hesitation to delete references to tobacco and beverage alcohol and the constancy of the Social Principles on "the practice of homosexuality" point to this likelihood. Still, it should always be remembered that little is immutable about Christian teachings or church policies. The United Methodist Church is not likely to write blank checks for lifestyles. Still, an understanding of human sexuality and a feeling for fairness will push the church eventually to stop asking gay men and lesbians to deny or hide their identities or to remain celibate. The final test will be in local congregations. In many ways, church law has been changing more rapidly than the hearts and minds of the people in the pews. When the day comes that church law affirms the ordination of qualified women and men regardless of sexual orientation, little will have been gained if the congregations resist their leadership. Effective pastoral leadership in a parish requires some degree of acceptance and support by the people. Given the current homophobia and conscientious objection of many church members, the most important task is to win the hearts and minds of the people. This means continuing on the educational frontier. Iremember with feeling my own struggle 20 years ago as I prepared that sermon on "Church, Community, and Homosexuality." I didn't know if what I was going to say was right or wrong. I didn't know of any precedent. I read and reread the scriptures. I read contemporary literature. Two factors were most powerful. The first was coming to know and respect women and men whose sexual orientation was different from my own. The second was my gut feeling where the spirit of Christ was leading me. My sense of Jesus' acceptance and inclusiveness of people was decisive. Later I realized that I had been conditioned to feel and think about homosexuality in the same way I had been conditioned in matters of race and class and in issues related to women and men. I felt that, in preach- United Methodist POLITY Having developed in the same historical period, the polity and decision-making structure of the United Methodist Church (UMC) parallels that of the United States government. Both have three basic branches: legislative, executive, and judicial. The General Conference is the legislative body of the UMC The General Conference enacts church law governing all aspects of the denomination from the local congregation to national boards and agencies. This church law is printed as The Book ofDiscipline. The General Conference is the only body which can make statements on behalf of the whole UMC The only constraints on the General Conference are that it must act within bounds of the Constitution of the UMC The General Conference meets every four years and is comprised of approximately 1,000 representatives of the more than 100 annual conferences in the United States and overseas. The conference delegates are evenly divided between laypersons and clergy. The Annual Conference is the basic unit of United Methodism, formed along geographical lines. The annual conference is the body which ordains candidates for ministry and confers their membership into the annual conference. (Each UMC clergyperson is the member of an annual conference.) Representatives of each pastoral charge and all the clergy members of the annual conference gather once a year to hear reports and act on r commendations of the conference boards and agencies. The annual conference can adopt rules and regulations that are not in conflict with The Book of Discipline. The Council ofBishops, the UMC executive branch, oversees the ongoing life of the church, "all matters temporal and spiritual." Bishops are elected for lifetime terms and each serves as the presiding officer of an appointed annual conference or area. The bishop appoints all clergy members of the annual conference to their pastoral charges and nominates personnel for the general church boards and agencies. The judicial branch of United Methodism is the Judicial Council. The nine members of the Judicial Council are elected by the General Conference. The Judicial Council interprets church law and rules on whether legislation conforms to the Constitution of the UMC ing that sermon, I was standing over against all that had conditioned me. It is in remembering where I was and the road I have traveled that enables me to identify with people who stand today where I stood 21 years ago. My change of mind and feelings did not come quickly. The struggle for justice for women is ages long. Black Americans must still demand and work for justice after 400 years on this continent. The puhlic struggle for justice for lesbians and gay men in our society is not yet a generation old. I do not minimize the hidden pain and suffering of the centuries. My counsel is not "Patience!" It certainly is not "Wait!" My counsel is "Perservere with hope remembering that we have come this far by faith." Open Hands/11 I M ost of the articles in this issue look specifically at policies regarding lesbians and gay men within the United Methodist Church. In this section we explore more fully the situation in other denominations-Presbyterian, Episcopalian, Unitarian Universalist, and the United Church ofChrist. In identifying the divergent perceptions of and responses to lesbian and gay concerns within these denominations, an understanding of the nature of each denomination's polity and faith tradition is relevant. The polity-ordecision-making structure-of these denominations ranges from the decentralized locally autonomous Unitarian Universalist and United Church of Christ to the more centralized Presbyterian and Episcopalian denominations. (The United Methodist Church falls in the latter category.) In general, the mainline denominations giving more congregational autonomy have been less restrictive in their official policies toward lesbians and gay men, deferring such policies to the local church level. Denominations that have had to mold national policies to guide all congregations have generally opted for the path of least resistance-maintaining the status quo which excludes and alienates lesbians and gay men. Other factors in comparison are: the nature of biblical interpretation and degree ofbiblical authority inherent in the theological tradition; the existence or absence of a strong tradition for involvement in social justice concerns; the emphasis the denomination has historically placed on personal piety and morality; the degree ofhierarchy in the denominational structure and decision -making. The denominational lines dividing American Christians also extend to the various groups supporting and advocating lesbian and gay concerns. Little dialogue has occurred between these denominational support groups or caucuses over the years. Such dialogue and cooperative efforts may play a significant role in a reconciliation of the general church's ministry with its lesbian and gay constituency. Eric Schuman is former president of the Prairie Star District of the Unitarian Universalist Association. Schuman is a physician's assistant and lives in Topeka. Kansas. He is active in the Unitarian Universalist Lesbian/ Gay Caucus. My friend Charlie and I were driving home from the 1969 General Assembly of the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA). The denomination was embroiled in a black empowerment controversy. The upshot of it was that the church voted $500,000 to fund a black Unitarian Universalist organization called the Black Affairs Council organized to fight racism and promote community development projects. The controversy had nearly split the denomination. As we drove Charlie and I were discussing what it meant to be gay and Unitarian Universalist. I made a preposterous hypothesis-what if the UUA were to fund an organization of gay UUs, give it a half million dollars to fight prejudice against homosexual persons, and call it the Gay Affairs Council? Of course, we never got the half million dollars. But in 1970 a group of gay UUs began meeting, formed a caucus, and proposed to that year's General Assembly that the denomination take a stand condemning prejUdice against homosexual persons and calling on the denomination and its churches to end discrimination in employment practices against gay men and lesbians. As so often happens in emotionally charged debates over controversial issues, the opposition created a climate that was partly responsible for our success. A leading, outspoken minister from New York, a gubernatorial candidate with a record of commitment on other civil rights concerns, compared the proposed resolution to the advocacy of affirmative action for those practicing bestiality. As the story was related to me, following this speech, the proponents of the resolution closed debate, and the measure was adopted overwhelmingly. During the next two years, the caucus members worked to develop another proposal to bring before the General Assembly, this time to establish a Unitarian Universalist "Office of Gay Affairs," which would be responsible for implementing the 1970 resolution by assigning a staff person at UUA headquarters. This Office of Gay Concerns was created in 1974. In 1977, it was Anita Bryant's anti-gay "Save Our Children" campaign in Miami that was responsible for a resolution on a gay topic. The General Assembly called on "all Unitarian Universalists to use their efforts in stopping such biased persecution and intolerance." While a significant number of lesbians and gay men had been graduated from the UUA's three seminaries, until 1980 no openly gay or lesbian person had been "settled" in a UUA pulpit, although at least a dozen gay persons served as parish ministers and were known to be homosexual. Both gay men and lesbians had the experience of candidating for parish positions while openly gay, being unable to find work, then returning to the "closet" (i.e., changing their written 12/ 0pen Hands biographical material) and quickly thereafter landing a position. How to address this problem? In typical UUA fashion, by passing a resolution, of course! So, in 1980, the General Assembly urged the churches to renew their commitment to end discrimination by "lending full assistance in the settlement ofqualified openly gay, lesbian, and bisexual religious leaders." The results: none. Openly gay men and lesbians continued to be frustrated in their efforts to find parish positions despite verbal and moral support from the Department of Ministry. Interestingly, settled gay male ministers one by one began to come out in their churches. Although stirrings were plenty in their congregations, none was fired as a result. By 1983 five or six openly gay male ministers were serving congregations, but no open lesbians were. Only one man had candidated for a pulpit as openly gay and been hired. It seemed that the problem of settlement could be addressed at the denominational level by conducting a workshop on homophobia in hiring for the "ministerial settlement representatives" who assisted congregations seeking the services of religious professionals. The then UUA vice president agreed to implement that idea, and the homophobia training workshop was held in February 1984 for ministerial settlement representatives from around the continent. Out of those meetings a new proposal to help openly gay/lesbian ministers in the settlement process was implemented, and the settlement representatives were sensitized to the challenge of the task they faced. 1984 marked the adoption of a "Services of Union" resolution at the General Assembly. This resolution had been rejected in 1982 and 1983, partly because it was competing with other resolutions of global importance for a place on the agenda, but also because many UUs (including lesbians and gay men) believed it was unnecessary because everyone knew that many UUA ministers commonly performed such services. However, the resolution was important because of an incident in Washington, D.C. in 1981. A gay assistant minister had conducted a service of union for a lesbian couple in the church sanctuary. A fullpage picture of the ceremony had been published in a national periodical without the minister's knowledge. Some members of the congregation strongly objected, and a policy was adopted there which prohibited gay/lesbian services of union in the sanctuary and which permitted the assistant minister to perform them elsewhere only under the direct supervision of the senior minister. The assistant minister was subsequently fired, although the public reasons given by the church had nothing to do with the incident. We worked hard for the passage of the Services of Union resolution because we felt it was important for the General Assembly to make a statement that supported the freedom of choice for ministers who chose to perform gay unions. When the resolution came to the floor, debate was extended to two hours. When the question was finally called, the resolution was overwhelminglyadopted. The UUA supported the Office of Gay Concerns for 11 years. When Robert Wheatly retired as the director in 1985, after several years of service, it was recommended that $10,000 be given to the Lesbian/ Gay Caucus to fund its own programs and that the amount granted each year be decreased as the organization generated its own sources of income. The denominational newspaper, the UU World, has become increasingly sensitive to gay-related issues over the past several years. The editor personally covered the winter 1984 gay/lesbian UU convocation. The November 1985 issue devoted nine articles to the topic of AIDS, which represented the most space ever given to a single subject in the paper's recent history. Some gay men and lesbians continue to be alienated and deeply hurt by the church. Nevertheless, the church remains the place many of us will stay. We love it, and we hate it. We strive to make it more perfect, more loving, and to make it more closely represent the ideals we hold dear in our religious lives. Open Hands/13 I Ten years ago, at its General Convention in Minneapolis, the Episcopal Church went on record with its pastoral concern for homosexual persons and expressed its conviction that such persons are entitled to equal protection of the civil laws that apply to all other citizens. A resolution passed by the convention stated that "homosexual persons are children of God who have a full and equal claim with all other persons upon the love, acceptance, and pastoral concern and care of the Church." Another resolution not only said that they have equal rights under the law but called upon society to see that such protection is "provided in actuality." These two principles have been reaffirmed by each succeeding triennial General Convention of the church. Although stated and approved in resolution form for the first time in 1976, these principles actually grew out of a concern long felt by many persons across the denomination about human sexuality in general and homosexuality in particular. The Committee on Human Affairs and Health (CHAH) of the House of Bishops had been delving into the matter for several years. At that same General Convention, that committee presented another resolution calling for a churchwide study and dialogue in every diocese about human sexuality "as it pertains to various aspects of life, particularly living styles, employment, housing and education." S ome dioceses did indeed engage in such study and dialogue, although not all. Many, including the Diocese of Los Angeles, appointed task forces for in-depth study, and those Randolph B. Kimler is programs manager for Cathedral Ministries in the Diocese of Los Angeles, Episcopal Church in the U.SA. task forces in turn held conferences or seminars for the rest of the diocese. There is no doubt that many church members' consciousness about sexuality was raised considerably as a result of these three years of study. However, in some quarters, alarms were raised as well. In 1979 the General Convention was asked again by the CHAH to consider the matter of ordaining gay men and lesbians to the priesthood. A majority of the church was not ready to make a statement of its willingness to do that. However, in acting on the matter the Convention came up with an unusual resolution that for the first time specifically related homosexual celibacy to marital fidelity or heterosexual chastity outside marriage. Reaffinning the traditional teaching of the church on "marriage, marital fidelity, and sexual chastity as the standard of Christian sexual morality," the resolution, passed by the House of Bishops and the House of Deputies, said that, "it is not appropriate for this church to ordain a practicing homosexual, or any person who is engaged in heterosexual relations outside marriage." This resolution received a large opposition vote in the House of Bishops, and a group of 21 bishops signed a statement saying that they couid not in conscience abide by its restrictive wording. A growing number of bishops subsequently found that 1979 resolution more restrictive than they would like for it to have been regarding the ordination of lesbians and gay men. However, at the rI 1985 General Convention it became clear that the majority of the denomination is not willing yet to take a further step. A resolution that would have admitted homosexual persons to the process that could lead to ordination was defeated in the House of Deputies. Meanwhile, the general pastoral concern of the church for gay persons has increased as the nation has faced the increasing problem of AIDS, first seen as a homosexual disease and later recognized as a health problem for all persons. The 1985 General Convention offered a forum for education, public awareness, and dialogue about AIDS. The convention urged each diocese to establish a pastoral concern committee on homosexuality to foster better understanding, dispel myths and prejudices, provide pastoral support, and give life to the claim of gay men and lesbians upon the love, acceptance, and pastoral care of the church as established by the 1976 convention. 'l'.,e convention also spoke to .I. ~he tragic human suffering and loss of life in the AIDS epidemic. It charged the church's Executive Council to develop special intercessory prayers and also programs of awareness, education, prevention, and identification and to fund those programs by March of this year. Also by resolution the convention repudiated all indiscriminate statements that condemn or reject AIDS patients and asked the presiding bishop to urge the president of the United States to provide long-term, substantial federal funding of research about the disease. 14/0pen Hands e 1976 General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church~Church (U.S.A.) was asked by the Presbytery of Western New York and by other presbyteries to give "definitive guidance" concerning the eligibility for ordination to the professional ministry of persons who openly acknowledge homosexual orientation and practice. In the Presbyterian system, ordination of local church elders and deacons is the responsibility of the local congregation and the ordination of ministers is the responsibility of the presbytery. In response to these requests the 1976 General Assembly established a task force to make a two-year study of this question including such issues as concept of ordination, biblical background for the understanding of homosexuality, and psychological conclusions regarding homosexuality. The task force studied its mandate and prepared study materials for use by local congregations, presbyteries, and synods and also conducted hearings across the country to gain input into its report. The report of the task force was sent to the 1978 General Assembly which then appointed a standing committee to review it and to make recommendations to the General Assembly. The report of the task force recommended ordination for gay men and lesbians who were qualified according to the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) The report also contained an extensive review of the various positions on the authority and interpretation of the Bible, psychological studies on homosexuality, recommendations on social justice Merrill M. Follansbee is assistant pastor at Westminster Presbyterian Church in Sacramento. California. Mr. Follansbee is an outspoken activist for lesbian/gay rights and an active leader in Parents and Friends ofLesbians and Gays. for gay men and lesbians, dialogue and ministry to and with gay men and lesbians, combatting homophobia, and a continuing study of the subject in local congregations, presbyteries, and synods. The General Assembly adopted the report of the task force, with the exception of the recommendation in favor of ordination of gay men and lesbians as elders, deacons, and ministers. The assembly further diluted the message of the report by adding some words, including: "We do conclude that homosexuality is not God's wish for humanity." (See RESOURCES, p. 24, for information on obtaining a copy of the report.) The report also recommended that the church continue to study the subject of homosexuality. The extent to which this had been done is disappointing. However, there are some developments that should be noted. Gay men, lesbians, and others who support them have organized Presbyterians for Lesbians and Gay Concerns (PLGC). This group has chapters throughout the country, publishes resource materials, holds conferences, and has status as an affiliated organization within the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). It seeks to have an impact on the denomi nation. In response to a program InItiated by PLGC, several local congregations have become "More Light" churches and have taken a position ofwelcoming gay men and lesbians into their life, leadership, and ministry. In response to overtures from presbyteries, two General Assemblies have requested the general church to provide study resources. A consultation on homophobia was held at Stony Point, New York, in October 1984. The report of this conference has been published and made available as a study resource to congregations, presbyteries, and synods. * In Buffalo, New York, the Westminster Presbyterian Church (a More Light congregation), believing that the 1978 General Assembly exceeded its authority regarding ordination, notified the Presbytery of Western New York that it intended to ordain gay men and lesbians as elders and deacons in the local church. Agreeing with that congregation, the Presbytery of Western New York voted to approve this action. On appeal from some of the local churches in Western New York, the Synod of New England sustained the Presbytery and upheld the local church action. The General Assembly referred this appeal to its Permanent Judicial Commission. In January 1985, this commission announced its decision reversing the synod and the presbytery, thus upholding the 1978 General Assembly directive prohibiting such ordinations. (continued) *"Breaking th e Silence. Overcoming th e Fear: Homophobia Education" can be obtainedfrom the Program Agency. Presbyterian Church (USA.). 475 River<;ide Drive. Ne~v Yo rk. NY 10II5. Open Hands/ 15 (presbyterian, continued) 'l'.,e struggle within this denomi.I. ~ation remains an emotional and intense one. It is part of the wider struggle for human dignity In 1985, the General Synod of the United Church of Christ (UCC) overwhelmingly adopted a resolution calling on all congregations and agencies of the denomination to adopt a policy of openness to and affirmation of lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons. This vote was the result of several years' work to encourage more active dialogue on lesbian/gay concerns in local churches. This resolution has initiated an official denominational program for local churches to declare themselves "Open and Affirming," thus differing from the independent efforts of the More Light (Presbyterian), Reconciling Congregation (United Methodist), and Reconciled-inChrist (Lutheran) programs. Lesbian and gay issues came to the forefront in the UCC in 1972 when I was ordained as an openly gay minister by the Golden Gate Association of the UCC. The national and religious media coverage of that event resulted in a number of letters being sent to me. From those initial contacts the United Church Coalition for Lesbian and Gay Concerns (UCCL/ and freedom in our society. Many gay men and lesbians, desiring to combine their God-given sexuality with their commitment to Jesus Christ and the church, feel that they have been treated as lepers, and they have left the church. Some remain as members but are deeply Dr. William Johnson, a UCC minister and certified sexologist, is founder of the United Church Coalition for Lesbian/Gay Concerns. GC) was founded later that year. Two coalition members were seated as nonvoting delegates to the 1973 General Synod, establishing UCCL/GC as a duly recognized "special interest group" within the denomination. Two years later the 1975 General Synod, by a vote of 546-135, adopted a major social policy Pronouncement on Civil Liberties without Discrimination Related to Affectional or Sexual Preference. T wo other resolutions were also passed by the 1975 General Synod. One called on the UCC Office for Church Life and Leadership to provide nonjudgmental counseling resources and bibliographic materials on homosexuality. The other commissioned a human sexuality study by the UCC Board for Homeland Ministries. The preliminary report of this study commission, including 18 specific programmatic recommendations, was accepted at the 1977 General Synod (see RESOURCES, wounded, as are their families. Many nongay members of the church see the church's treatment of homosexuals as a denial of the gospel. These issues will not go away-the struggle continues. p. 24). Also, in response to Anita Bryant's campaign that revoked the anti-discrimination law in Dade County, Florida, the General Synod passed a resolution deploring the violation of the civil rights of gay and bisexual persons and the use of Scripture to generate hatred. Concurrent with these policy statements on the civil rights of lesbians and gay men, the UCC was dealing with issues about internal church policy. In 1973, in response to my ordination the year before, the UCC's Executive Council (which acts when the biennial General Synod is not in session) had adopted a statement recommending that UCC associations, when considering a lesbian or gay candidate for ordination, give serious consideration to the position that "the issue of ordaining a gay man or lesbian should not be his or her homosexuality as such, but rather the candidate's total view of human sexuality and his or her understanding of the morality of its expression." Yet during the 1970s most associations ignored the Executive Council's recommendations. In 1980, the Executive Council revised its Equal Employment 16/ 0pen Hands Opportunity (EEO) policy adding "sexual preference" to the list of bases of nondiscrimination. In 1981, the EEO policy was amended again with "sexual preference" being changed to "sexual orientation." Ten years of education and advocacy of lesbian/gay concerns within the UCC culminated in the actions of the 1983 and 1985 General Synods. The 1983 synod overwhelmingly adopted a resolution on institutionalized homophobia which "denounce[d] institutionalized expressions of homophobia in all its forms and call[ed] upon all levels of the UCC to expose, to address, and in light of the gospel, to transform institutionalized homophobia, eliminating its effects within the church." Other resolutions adopted by the 1983 General Synod: 1) called on the Board for Homeland Ministries to include lesbian/gay concerns in its family life programs and resources; 2) recommended election of open lesbians and gay men to association church and ministry committees, which review the standing of ministers and approve candidates for ordination; and 3) addressed a number of issues related to the AIDS crisis. Also in 1983, the final report of the Task Force for the Study of Human Sexuality, commissioned in 1975, was presented with significant recommendations. The first of these called on UCC churches to work to end racial and sexual violence against women, children, people of color, and lesbians and gay men. The second ofthese called on the Board for Homeland Ministries to hire new staff to gather resources and to facilitate local church ministries to lesbians, gay men, and their families. Finally related to employment and ordination, the task force recommended that the General Synod recommend to associations that "in considering a candidate's qualifications for ministry, a candidate's heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual orientation, in and of itself, should not be grounds for denying the request for ordination." It also recomended that the General Synod advocate support of "nondiscrimination based on sexual orientation within the UCC, including all hiring and firing of lay and clergy personnel and use of volunteers within the life of the church: local churches, associations, conferences, national instrumentalities and agencies." These recommendations were approved by the 1983 General Synod by a large majority. An "Open and Affirming" resolution was presented to that same 1983 General Synod, but it was referred to the Executive Council for "study and possible action." The Executive Council subsequently mistakenly judged that the resolution's subject matter had already been addressed by previous General Synods and recommended no action. Meanwhile, the Massachusetts Conference, meeting in 1984, passed a revised "Open and Affirming" resolution. This resolution called on all UCC churches in Massachusetts to declare themselves "open and affirming of lesbian, gay and bisexual persons" and to adopt nondiscrimination policies. An implementation committee planned day-long workshops on how to become "Open and Affirming" congregations and created other resources for local churches. The Massachusetts Conference also submitted its "Open and Affirming" resolution for placement on the agenda of the 1985 General Synod. The "Open and Affirming" resolution was crucial because it raised concerns that had never been meaningfully addressed within the UCC. Local congregations had never been strongly urged to adopt nondiscrimination policies nor provided with resources for doing so. The intent of the resolution was to make the fight against discrimination against lesbians and gay men within the church a denominational responsibility and to facilitate dialogue in each UCC congrega tion. There was much resistance to placing this resolution on the agenda of the 1985 General Synod. It took concerted efforts by many supportive delegates from several conferences and a strong presence by UCCL/GC to get the resolution before the General Synod and to secure its adoption. Central to the lobbying effort were the personal testimonials of more than 40 openly gay and lesbian UCC members. In the end, the "Open and Affirming" resolution was adopted by a 95% majority of the General Synod delegates. Now the challenge is implementation. General Synod actions are only recommendations to local churches. UCCL/GC is urging the UCC Office of Church Life and Leadership to implement the resolution by developing resources to enable local church dialogue. Two consultants are on staff at the Board for Homeland Ministries to provide information and guidance on ministries with lesbians, gay men, bisexual persons, and their families. UCCL/GC is encouraging its members to actively initiate "Open and Affirming" statements in their home congregations. We are striving to directly involve United Church of Christ congregations in the movement to end discrimination. We know the "Open and Affirming" resolution will be ignored by many UCC congregations, but some will engage in the education and dialogue so essential to the opening of hearts and minds. In this entire process, we believe the true expression of Christian discipleship has been and will continue to be revealed: the personification of God's love in human community through faith, not fear. Open Hands/I 7 f!3ulfaining flje f!3pitif Reading , '~elieve that Gay culture at its heart is continually, how. I... ~er unconsciously, trying to reveal the other side, sometimesjust to reveal the fact that there are sides. I believe we do this with regard to the sexes, to work roles, to the world oj judgment and value, oj aesthetics, ojphilosophies. oj other realms oj consciousness. We act out irony. essential humor, and paradox . ... In tribal culture we often Jormed a pool ofpotential initiates some oj whom became the shamans and medicine people who can enter the spirit world, the wind, the mountains and rivers and the bottom oj the sea; the worlds oj the dead. or spirits, oj other people's minds, oj the gods and their Jorces; we it is who bring back the strange and old messages, interpreting them Jor the benefit ojour tribe. Anciently we were sometimes rewarded and esteemed Jor this, though I don't doubt we were more than once stoned out oj town or tarred and Jeathered. We can be velY aggravating, moody people, even to ourselves. And oj course we don't always bring good or easy news. What we perhaps have at the core is an uncanny ability to identify with what we are not, to die as one Jorm and return as another, to go Jrom shy cocoon to rampant butterfly. to enter the wolves' den to learn the wolves' wisdom and return uneaten, though not unmarked. We have been the oracles and inspired divin ers, the mediums who interpret the stars, the cards, the kings idle remarks. the weather and innards ojJowls, . the gossip, the history and poetry and saga oj a people. And we remain remarkably tuned to a particular inner vision that is compelling to us. leading us into sometimes painJul, /sometimesJ grueling, /sometimesJ lonely. /sometimes joyJulJ lives. .. [Reprinted with pennission from Judy Grahn, Another Mother Tongue: Gay Words, Gay Worlds, Beacon Press, 1984, pp. 273-4.] qFFirming Our min-)triC!) Litany LEADER: We are fortunate, today, to be able to gather as a people of the church. As men and women; as gay and lesbian and bi-sexual and straight; as people of many origins and backgrounds. ALL: We gather as a community with a common task of seeking justice, of living in shalom, of prophesying to the church, and to the many communities that our lives touch. We are teachers, prophets, healers, interpreters, lovers of life. LEADER: We confess, however, that we too often find comfort in our cocoons. ALL: Rather, like butterflies, we reach out to one another and risk transfonnation. LEADER: / And we confess that we too often shun the voices of the shamans and spirits within and amongst us. ALL: Rather, we dare to listen and learn from one another. LEADER: Each of us is called, as a member of this community, to offer our gifts to the common journey. Our gifts are diverse, our gifts are unique, our gifts are not replaceable. Today, we affinn our loving and inclusive ministries with one another. ALL: From the God within us, we affinn our love-ministries. We smile in joyful acceptance of our loves, and our lives, and our gifts which we share as a community. LEADER: God, who is our mother, father, friend, and lover-send us out from this community as your people. LEFT: We gather strength for the journey as the Hebrew people gathering manna. RIGHT: We store wisdom as the shaman leaders storing herbs and knowledge. LEFT: We put on courage as Amazon women putting on armor for the battle. RIGHT: And we go in laughter and joy, as children in love with our world. ALL: Sustaining Spirit, send us forth, empowering each other and empowering those we meet on our journeys to use our gifts in the work for healing, and justice, and shalom. We ask your presence on our common journey. Amen. i 8/0pen Hands By Richard E. Husky, M.D. Decisions made at the past few General Conferences demonstrate that the United Methodist Church has clearly chosen a noninclusive direction in its treatment of gay men and lesbians. Beginning with the 1972 conference in Atlanta, the church started an avalanche of activity that ultimately has affected our theological assumptions. When the church, at the 1984 General Conference in Baltimore, officially closed ordination to gay men and lesbians, it essentially restructured its theology. A church cannot exclude a significant population from full participation in its community without automatically changing the very nature-and, therefore, the theological basis-of that community. Ultimately, we gay and lesbian United Methodists were defamed in our humanity and declared to be "incompatible with Christian teaching." Rather than ask, question, quiz, poll, or subpoena us about our belief in Jesus Christ or about our lifestyles, the General Conference acted in bad faith by defaming people it did not care to understand or know. Under most systems of justice, this would be considered an intolerable situation and as ugly a history as any inquisition or kangaroo court. Quite simply, the General Conference acted out of homophobia (fear of homosexuals), rather than out of faith and trust in God's world. As a result of the United Methodist Church's abandoning gay and lesbian United Methodists through denying our equal right to pursue the call to ordained ministry, many of its beliefs and assertions have become meaningless. This is especially true when it comes to the church's delivering on the promises made to us when we were baptized. Quite simply, the church has caused the waters of baptism to dry up. Baptism is a covenant that prescribes a certain form of relationship between the church and the person being baptized-child or adult; gay, lesbian, or straight. In the sacrament, the church agrees to provide for specific forms of nurture in the life of the person being baptized-promising that he or she will be "surrounded by steadfast love," "established in the faith," and "confirmed and strengthened in the way that leads to life eternal." The United Methodist Church may indeed want to deliver on these promises, but this nurture is withheld from persons being baptized if they are gay or lesbian. Instead of being loved, established, confirmed, and strengthened, we have been hated, castigated, and shunned. Most of us can recite a cacophony of abuses and mistreatment by so-called well-intentioned Christians. Many of us have experienced more rejection, hostility, and abuse in the "family of God" than in our biological families. For unlike an institution that marginalizes persons without knowing them, many of our families have come to know and, in many cases, affirm us, experiencing us as whole human beings, capable of leading lives centered in commitment and devo- ORDINATION:THE Richard E. Husky, M.D. is a former member ofthe Minnesota Annual Conference (UMC). Subsequently trained as a physician, Husk}' is an active UMC layperson and lives in St. Pau l, Minnesota. tion to God. Our families know we are good Christians, and they have experienced the many ways we inject both quality and zest into Christian life. These findings are being shared by members of the Reconciling Congregations in our denomination. What recourse do we have? First, we do what we always do so well-we pray for the person being baptized, that he or she will be "surrounded in steadfast love, established in the faith, and confirmed and strengthened in the way that leads to life eternal." Second, we continue to hold our church accountable for its words and deeds. For example, when the bishops in the church complain that membership is rapidly dropping, we remind them that Christians are no foolspeople go where they are fed, and the United Methodist Church's treatment of its gay and lesbian members frequently embitters the food the church offers. The United Methodist Church is unlikely to grow until it takes care of its "old" business with us, learns to feed all who come, and makes good on its promises. Open Hands/19 RDI NATION: THE UX? Bishop Slater was interrupted by an unknown young man with a group of unshaven and disorderly spectators sitting near the pulpit. The young man finally introduced himselfas a representative from the "Gay Liberation Group" and tried to read a protest from a printed page which branded the ministerial body as being hypocrites, and with other undefinable shouts [sic]. After a series ofexchange of words, it was moved that a 10-minute maximum be set to hear the representative. The motion was denied. Monday night business session, May 31, 1971, 7 p.m., San Antonio, Texas, 113th Annual Session, Southwest Texas Annual Conference, The United Methodist Church ose ByF. Gene Leggett F. Gene Leggett is afonner member ofthe Soutlnvest Texas Annual Conference (UMC). He is nowa member of Oak Lawn UMC (Dallas) and works for the Fort Worth Opera Company. I had been warned never to face the enemy alone. Because lesbian and gay people were primarily an invisible minority, it was important that we be seen in groups that were as large as possible. A true revolution would need to reflect the group oppression of the minority rather than the concerns of an injured individual. Besides, it could be just plain scary to face alone the hostility of a large group of straight folks! I discovered this truth in 1970 at a called session of the ministerial delegates of the Southwest Texas Annual Conference. Prior to that session, I had not attended a gathering of my conference since 1965, when I had privately admitted my homosexuality. Since then, I had had an unwritten agreement with conference hierarchy that I could keep my credentials, if I did not request a local church appointment. The special 1970 session had been called to discuss a "crisis" that existed among the conference's clergy. At it, I publicly confirmed for my fellow ministers what they had gossiped about for five years-that I had an experimental house church for gay men and lesbians. Bedlam erupted as ministers shouted for an "on the spot" church trial, and the bishop immediately adjourned the session. The conference hierarchy began urging me to take voluntary location or retirement at the 1971 regular annual conference session so that I could maintain my credentials. But, because I felt called to a ministry denied to the church at large, I refused. Knowledge that the 1971 conference would deal with my ordination brought together a number of gay people from across the state. Most of them had at one time had close relationships to the church, with some having earlier contemplated entering the ordained ministry. All saw the church as the focusiof their oppression and felt that they had nothing to lose through confrontation. I, on the other hand, still had my credentials at stake. It was agreed that these activists' actions before the conference would remain separate from mine, although I pledged them my support. My strategy was to remain faithful to proper ecclesiastical procedure. The possibility was there for the church truly to be the church. While the probability of my retaining my credentials was virtually nonexistent, I knew that my challenge, through due process, was necessary to break the demonic pattern that was the church's method of dealing with "exposed" clergy. 1 ~ The Monday night session began in the usual manner, with a hymn and salutary amenities. Then, the request came that the "gay voice" be heard in the church. A motion was made and denied. Cries of "hypocrites" and "Pharisees" came from the activists; delegates rushed from their seats to drag the protesters from the church, while others shouted "Get the queers out of here!" I was sitting in the eye of the storm; the "gay issue" was being born, and the church was responding with violent denial. Friends ran to where I remained seated, tears streaming down my face. They begged me to stop the protesters, to control them, but I replied, "They are your children; you must talk to them." After a 10-minute recess, order was restored, and the majority of the conference voted that the protesters be given the fi nal five minutes of the session. At the agreed time, one of them-in a quiet, emotionally charged voice-read a prepared petition. After declaring that "It cannot be historically denied that the Church as an institution has covertly and systematically condoned and implemented the oppression of homosexual women and men," the statement made 10 demands of the conference. Among these were that the conference accept "the authenticity of the gay life style"; "in light of its historical oppression, ... make sizeable reparations to gay people in the form of programs, facilities, and money"; 20/0pen Hands L srupte ?• ~ and "cease the harassment of Gene Leggett and support in all ways necessary-including financial-" my house church. The minutes of that business session conclude, "After several announcements, the benediction was pronounced by the Rev. Allen G. Roe, Sr." The petition was not entered into the record, and no reply was ever made. But a gay voice had been heard! The next day, after painful debate, my credentials were removed by involuntary location. The vote was 144 in favor, 117 against. Two ministers turned in their credentials in sympathetic protest; audible sobs punctuated a deathly silence. Outside the conference, a custodian comforted me, "Don't worry, honey. Somebody up there gave you credentials they can't touch!" Every year since that conference, the gay/lesbian issue has been raised, not only in Southwest Texas but across United Methodism. In the Southwest Texas conference, delegates still speak indignantly of "the Disruption of '71." I reply that it is not to be compared with the disruption that church and society continues to cause in the lives of its lesbian and gay children. Every year, I request that my credentials be restored; every year, I plead that the church listen to the cries of its child ren. ORD-.-.OS I NATION: TH E u ~The of the ose By Jeffrey G. Snyder Jeffrey G. Snyder is serving a United Methodist congregation as an elder in the California-Nevada Conference. Ben and I met our very first day at seminary. It didn't take us long to discover that we were soul mates. That first term, we agonized together over all sorts of new ideas. We spent hours studying together, developing joint class projects, and working on field assignments. We had countless late night bull sessions. We debated politics, sports, family planning, child rearing, abortion, drugs, booze, and homosexuality. In January when Ben married Jayne, I participated in their wedding. Our families remained close throughout seminary. Ben and I were really good friends-more like brothers. We were always there for each other. I entered the appointment process before Ben and was ordained first. When Ben was ordained, I was deeply moved when he asked me to be one of the participating elders in his service and to take part in the laying on of hands. After that, as Ben and I worked with various cabinets and district superintendents, we always sought each other's counsel on new appointments. When one of us had to go with our spouse for an interview, the other couple would keep the children and vice versa. Ben delighted in my daughter and I was thrilled with his son. When Ben and Jayne's second child was born, my family took a few vacation days to visit and assist them. During that visit, Ben asked me if we could take a walk. There was something he had wanted to tell me for a long time. That night, as we walked through the old cemetery by his church, Ben confided to me that he was gay. He said he had known since he was 13. His parents had been horrified at the thought and put him in therapy. Although therapy calmed his parents, it only forced Ben into the closet. Throughout college, Ben cruised bookstores and (continued) Open Hands/ 21 ORDI AT ON:THE RUX? Cost of the Closet (continued) bars. He hated himself for such behavior but felt compelled to explore this part of himself through the only means his closet would allow. It was also during these college years that Ben felt called to the ordained ministry. Then he met Jayne. Pulled together through common political interests, Ben and Jayne fast became friends. They so enjoyed each other's company, that marriage seemed like a logical step. Ben reasoned, "Every pastor needs a spouse and maybe this marriage will change me." It didn't. Soon after the wedding, the cruising began again. Ben's paranoia grew. Jayne didn't know of Ben's homosexuality. Nor did his congregation, Board of Ordained Ministry, or bishop. But Ben knew, and he needed to tell someone. As his best friend and "brother," I was the natural choice. For the next several years, we shared Ben's secret. Then one night our phone rang. It was Jayne. She was sobbing. Ben had just told her. It was their sixth wedding anniversary. Jayne came to stay with us for a few days. Later Ben joined her. There was much pain and grief, and many tears. But it was also the beginning of a new honesty between them. Over the next year, Ben and Jayne worked hard to save their relationship. They were determined to stay together and find ways that Ben could come to accept and affirm himself and his homosexuality. Together, Ben and Jayne sought counseling. Ben joined a very discreet support group for gay clergy in his area. With Jayne's support, Ben found avenues for ministry within the gay community. He began preaching regularly on Sunday evenings at a nearby gay church. He came out to his parents and family. He shared his secret wi th a few trusted lay people within his congregation. They supported Ben. As he came more out of the closet, he was happier, healthier, and a better pastor than I had ever known him to be. In the early months of 1984, Ben decided to confi de in his seemingly open and caring district superintendent. During their conversation, the D.S. seemed to sense where the discussion was leading. Abruptly, he made it clear that he didn't want to know anything that he might have to share at "a higher level." He reminded Ben that the climate of the church was not supportive of Ben's liberal views on homosexuality. The General Conference of 1984 would soon take a stand on gay issues. And until that stance was known, the D.S. felt it necessary to postpone the conversation with Ben. That conversation was never to be resumed. That day began a new stage of paranoia for Ben. He became more withdrawn. He stopped preaching at the gay church and stopped attending his support group. Afte r the 1984 General Conference made its negative decisions, Ben sank into a deep depression. He felt that the church that he loved, and had served for many years, didn't want him fo r who he was. Our phone conversations, which had once been long, intimate times of sharing, became polite talk about our churches and . 22/0pen Hands children. When I pushed Ben to know how he felt or what was happening, his answers were always the same. He would reply, ''I'm fine! Everything's great!" But it wasn't. In June 1984 Jayne called to tell me that Ben had experienced "some sort of a breakdown" and had been hospitalized in a psychiatric ward. Since then, Ben has been in a period of strong denial. He is deeply closeted and hasn't called or written in over a year. I've called him a few times, but he doesn't want to talk. There is a tension in his voice as he tells me that everything is "just fine." He loves ministry. He loves the people he is pastoring. He fears losing that. The action of the 1984 General Conference weighs hea'vily on his mind. He wants to be left alone, in his closet. The decision of the church to deny the ordination and appointment of "self-avowed, practicing homosexuals" has cost Ben a great deal. He pays the cost every day in fear, panic, tension, poor health, and selfrejection. It is costing his parish too. Their pastor isn't free to be himself. He is physically ill much of the time. He is distracted and wonders why God continues to call him to a task that the church says he isn't worthy to perform. The cost is high. And Ben's closet is also costly to the general church. Through its homophobia, it has caused Ben and many others like him to compromise their integrity and dignity. They have heen driven to deny an intrinsic part of themselves and to retreat to the closet of paranoia and deceit. How can a church commissioned to be light for the world, challenged by Christ to offer persons the life abundant, and committed to a compassionate God, condemn any of its clergy or laity to the closet, and yet maintain its own integrity, dignity, and honesty? The cost of the closet is very great-to the church, to the ministry of Christ, to every gay or lesbian person called to the ministry, to every lay person who would receive the gifts of that ministry, to Ben, and to me. You see, Ben hasn't called or written in over a year. fA note to readers: "Ben" and "Jayne" are fictitious names chosen in order to protect th e tme identities ofth e subjects ofthis account./ I am a deacon with probationary membership in an annual conference of the United Methodist Church. I am currently serving in a special appointment after a few years of pastoring in the local church. I will be interviewed soon for elder's orders. And I am a lesbian. About ten years ago, I went through a time of searching in my life. During that time, I not only decided to answer God's call to ordained ministry, but I also "came out" to myself as a lesbian. I learned that God was calling me forth in both my vocation and my lifestyle as I sought to be faithful. I had mixed feelings. I was excited about going into ministry and relieved at knowing my sexual orientation. But I was also confused about how ordination and my sexual identity could be lived out in the United Methodist Church. My consistent response to this confusion has been to journey in faith, trusting my loving God. As I began to move forward in this trust, God blessed me with the love of a woman with whom I continue to share my life. She was, and continues to be, an active layperson in the Anon~ous ·__~~~~~_____ United Methodist Church. I went to seminary with the support of my partner. I entered seminary thinking that I could keep my lesbianism to myself. But I found that keeping it a secret, especially from people with whom I had developed deep friendships, felt like a suppression of my God-given life energy. During these years, given the church's stance on homosexual clergy, I realized that to continue my ordination process, I needed to take an involuntary vow of silence. When I chose to tell others of my lesbianism, they too were burdened with this silence. During my interviews for deacon's orders, I was never asked about my sexual orientation. However, I lived in fear of being confronted and having to defend myself. I was ordained upon graduation and sought appointment to a local church. I risked both my vocation and appointment by entrusting the knowledge of my identity with a cabinet member. That encounter was a positive one. Through it, we were able to arrange an appropriate appointment which met my needs and was also convenient for my partner. My first full-time appointment was a good match for me. As my new congregation's first woman pastor, we made the necessary adjustments to each other. My partner and I continued to live together and we both worked hard at taking care of the congregation. We also ORDINATION:THE labored to keep our togetherness inconspicuou worked to maintain the appropriate image exp of me by the congregation, as I worried about jeopardizing my chances for elders' orders. My partner and I convinced ourselves that the work and situation were tolerable. Although we were not open about the fullness of our relationship with members of the congregation, we felt loved and accepted as people who cared for one another. They let us know that they respected and appreciated our friendship. This, of course, was bittersweet because we, like most people, wanted to be loved for exactly who we were. I often wondered whether the congregation would have been as accepting of us had they known the full extent of our relationship. Unfortunately, I don't think they would have been. That saddens me. My seminary and ministry experiences have been affected by the fears, stresses, and worries surrounding my life as a lesbian within the church. It has taken its toll on my health and the health of my relationship with my partner. The energy I have expended to censor expression of my life has affected my integrity. Now that I am in a special appointment, I am not as pressured to uphold the image expected by the local church. However, out of my own experience, I am now aware that the church perpetuates the fears, tensions, and low selfesteems of its gay and lesbian seminarians and clergy. What I have come to realize is that by participating in keeping my sexual identity a secret, I not only have hurt myself and my relationship, but I also have protected the church. But the church does not need protection from me or my gay and lesbian brothers and sisters. Gay men and lesbians carry the burden that the United Methodist Church refuses to accept as its own mission. As long as the church remains in the closet about the good news of Christ it has to share with both lesbian/gay and straight persons, it is repressing its own life energy. As I consider my own situation and experience as a Christian lesbian, I am grateful for the opportunity to tell my story. I do not tell it in anger, for I love the church. My life has been blessed for four decades by many loving people within the United Methodist Church. I would like to believe that I can rise above the negative experiences and act as if God has already liberated me from the oppression of homophobia and freed me up to live fully and faithfully in Christ. Iknow that I will continue to struggle as a lesbian clergyperson within the United Methodist Church. And I know others will face similar struggles as God continues to call gays and lesbians into the ministry. I continually ask whether the often painful journeys are worth it all. But along with the pain which I carry, I also carry the hope of healing for myself and the church. This hope and the love of friends gives me the courage to continue in my journey of Christian faith. Open Hands/23 For ~urther study, reflection, and actlOn, we offer a sampling of denominational reports and study d?cuments and of books dealing WIth theological/biblical perspectives on human sexuality and homosexuality. For more information on activities on lesbian/gay concerns in the various denominations, contact the denominational organizations listed below. Reports/Study Documents UNITED PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH (U.S.A.) Sexuality and the Human Community. The Task Force on Human Sexuality. This report was authorized by the 182nd General Assembly. Published in 1970, it covers biblical and theological foundations, Christian goals for interpersonal relationships, and specific sexuality issues. The Church and Homosexuality. This report was commissioned in 1976 and received by the 190th General Assembly (1978). Contains the background paper of the Task Force to Study Homosexuality and the policy statement and recommendations adopted by the General Assembly. (62 pages.) ' Can be ordered from: The Office of the General Assembly, 120 l' Interchurch Center, 475 Riverside Drive, New York, NY 10027. UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST Human Sexuality: A Preliminary Study. Board/or Homeland Ministries. Authorized by the 1975 General Synod and accepted at the 1977 General Synod, this report was produced by the Task Force to Study Human Sexuality. Comprehensive in covering biblical/theological, ethical, psychosocial, public policy, and congregational perspectives. (258 pages.) Order from: Board for Homeland Ministries, 132 W. 31 st Street New York, NY 10001. 212/239~ 8700. Published by United Church Press. UNITED METHODIST CHURCH Guide to the Study Document on Human Sexuality. Discipleship Resources. Study document proposed by the Women's Division ofthe Board of Global Ministries and adopted by the 1980 General Conference. The General Conference mandated that the study document be published with a guide for individual or group study, along with a bibliography. Published in 1983. (52 pages.) Order from: Discipleship Resources, P.O. Box 840, Nashville, TN 37202. Books Edwards, George. Gay/Lesbian Liberation: A Biblical Perspective. New York: Pilgrim Press, 1984. Mace, David. The Christian Response to the Sexual Revolution. Nashville: Abingdon, 1970. Nelson, James. Between Two Gardens: Reflection on Sexuality and Religious Experience. New York: Pilgrim Press, 1983. ___Embodiment: An Approach to Sexuality and Christian Theology. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1978. Scroggs, Robin. The New Testament and Sexuality. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984. Organ izations Affirmation: United Methodists for Lesbian/Gay Concerns P.O. Box 1021 Evanston, IL 60204 American Baptists Concerned 2418 Browning Street Berkeley, CA 94702 Brethren/Mennonite Council for Gay Concerns P.O. Box 24060 Washington, DC 20024 Dignity (Roman Catholic) 1500 Massachusetts Avenue, NW # 11 Washington, DC 20005 Friends for Lesbian and Gay Concerns P.O. Box 222 Sumneytown, PA 18084 Integrity (Episcopal) 4550 Connecticut Avenue, NW #605 Washington, DC 20008 Lutherans Concerned P.O. Box 10461 Fort Dearborn Station Chicago, IL 60610 Presbyterians for Lesbian/Gay Concerns P.O. Box 38 New Brunswick, NJ 08903 Unitarian Universalist Office of Lesbian/Gay Concerns 25 Beacon Street Boston, MA 02108 United Church Coalition for Lesbian/Gay Concerns 18 N. College Street Athens, OH 45701 Reconciling Congregations Washington Square UMC Wheadon UMC c/o Cathie Lyons & c/o Carol Larson Ed Weaver 2212 Ridge Avenue 135 W. 4th Street Evanston, IL 60201 New York, NY 10012 51. Paul's UMC Park Slope UMC c/o George Christie c/o A. Finley Schaef 1615 Ogden Street 6th Avenue & 8th Street Denver, CO 80218 Brooklyn, NY 11215 Crescent Heights UMC Calvary UMC c/o Lyle Loder c/ o Chip Coffman 1296 North Fairfax 815 S. 48th Street West Hollywood, CA 90046 Philadelphia, PA 19143 Wesley UMC Christ UMC c/o Warren Russell c/o Bea Judge 1343 E. Barstow Avenue 4th & Eye Streets, SW Fresno, CA 93710 Washington, DC 20024 Bethany UMC St. John's UMC c/o Christine L. Shiber c/ o Howard Nash 1268 Sanchez Street 2705 St. Paul Street San Francisco, CA 94114 Baltimore, MD 21218 Sunnyhills UMC Edgehill UMC c/o Martha Chow c/ o Hoyt Hickman 335 Dixon Road 1502 Edgehill Avenue Milpitas, CA 95035 Nashville, TN 37212 Wallingford UMC Central UMC c/o Chuck Richards c/o Howard Abts 2115 N. 42nd Street 701 West Central at Seattle, WA 98103 Scottwood Toledo, OH 43610 Capitol Hill UMC c/ o Pat Dougherty 128 Sixteen Street EastUniversity UMC Seattle, WA 98112 c/ o Steven Webster 1127 University Avenue Madison, WI 53715 24/0pen Hands 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 Open Hands Vol 2 No 1 - Our Churches' Policies