Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 18:57:30 -0400 From: Chris Ambidge Subject: *Integrator* files for 1991 INTEGRATOR, the newsletter of Integrity/Toronto volume 91-1, issue date 1991 01 06 copyright 1991 Integrity/Toronto. The hard-copy version of this newsletter carries the ISSN 0843-574X Integrity/Toronto Box 873 Stn F Toronto ON Canada M4Y 2N9 == contents == [91-1-1] IN SEARCH OF INCLUSIVE IMAGES, FOR GOD AND HUMANS. by Chris Ambidge [91-1-2] FIFTEEN-PLUS YEARS OF INTEGRITY / by John Gartshore [91-1-3] HUMAN RIGHTS STATEMENT SHELVED (YET) AGAIN BY NATIONAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE [91-1-4] REFLECTIONS AFTER A RARE VISIT TO A GAY CLUB ======== [91-1-1] IN SEARCH OF INCLUSIVE IMAGES, FOR GOD AND HUMANS. by Chris Ambidge A while ago, I was at a church conference where there were a number of workshops, and time for worship together. While there, I received several insights on the language we use about God and about humanity. One of the other workshops was on sexism. The conversation came around to the language we use in liturgy, and how some images are not only sexist, but exclusive and positively un-helpful. "God the Father" works for most people, partially because we have heard it all our lives, and partially because the partner image of "God the Mother" also works. While God-as-mother is less familiar, it does bring a new wealth of images to our understanding of God's love for us. The theme has been reflected in both Old and New Testaments, in Julian of Norwich and Madeline L'Engle. Once the discussion had dealt with God the Father/Mother, the idea of God the King came up. "What about God the Queen?" somebody asked. There was great hilarity at this idea, and I must admit it doesn't work for me: it conjures up amusing visions of God in an evening dress, tiara and garter ribbon going off to open parliament. I have a great deal of respect for the person on whom that image is based and who appears on our coins, stamps and paper currency. I just can't make the analogy between Queen Elizabeth II and God the creator. For me, there is no doubt that the image of God the Queen is beyond redemption. If God the Queen doesn't work, then there must be something wrong with the portrayal of God as King. I will never again be able to take that image seriously. The worship at the conference was joyful and energetic. This was not your typical sit-in-the-back-pew, and mumble-the-hymns congregation. Everyone participated to a great extent, and that was a wonderful feeling. However, I stubbed my toe, metaphorically speaking, against the language of the liturgy. The images of God and of humans were overwhelmingly masculine, in both prayer and song. I realise that one should not expect inclusive language in a Wesleyan hymn written in the 1700s, but most of these hymns had been written in the last twenty years, and the BAS came out in 1986. The male-ness of the language severely impaired my ability to worship in that community. During the conference, I realised the pictures of God we use should be rich and allusive, because none of them will ever fully encompass the reality. A large number of the traditional images are becoming threadbare. The analogy of God the King is not helpful to me in trying to relate to my creator. If God-the-King/Queen doesn't work for us who live in a constitutional monarchy, who have kings and queens as part the fabric of our lives, how on earth does it work for those who live in a republic? Does King just become some magic title? When it is the name of a hockey team and a hamburger chain, one wonders. It has been pointed out that, for those of us who live in North America, the term "Lord" also has a very shaky grounding in our life-experiences. The only lords we deal with are landlords, and some of them are not what I would call appropriate analogies to the divine. While I have difficulty using images of God that are exclusively masculine (King, Lord); I flat-out refuse to refer to humans in anything other than inclusive terms. While I can only describe God by analogy, I have a pretty good idea of what humanity is like. There are those who hold that "Man" and masculine language includes the female gender. Dr Alan Hayes, of Wycliffe College, has pointed out that this just doesn't hold water. He asks "What's odd about the sentence, 'Man, being a mammal, breast feeds his young'? It sounds foolish because 'man' isn't really generic." I agree with him: *Rise up, O Men of God* won't get ME standing in the pew. The language of the BAS does go some distance toward being inclusive, when compared to the BCP, and for that I rejoice. It doesn't go nearly far enough, though. There is an old principle in liturgy -- so old it is in Latin. *Lex orandi, lex credendi*: as you pray, so shall you believe. The language of our worship must reflect our images of the God we worship, and our conceptions of ourselves as God's creatures. My God is not exclusively male, and she has not only sons, but daughters too. ======== [91-1-2] FIFTEEN-PLUS YEARS OF INTEGRITY [JOHN GARTSHORE is a founding member of Integrity/Toronto. He was at the Integrity/Northeast Regional Conference in Philadelphia this past September, and agreed to write an account of the conference for *Integrator*. Here it is, but it is more: it is an account of how Integrity came into being, and the grace-filled network that Integrity is. Maybe John's original title of this article should have been allowed to stand: it is ] INTEGRITY AND MY ONGOING LOVE AFFAIR Years ago, in a far-off land (Georgia), a certain wise man started a newsletter, and called it *Forum*. This publication addressed issues facing lesbians and gay men who needed to retain their affiliation with the Episcopal Church, and did not wish to deny their sexual identity. At that time, in many parts of the Church there was a tension between sexuality and religion. Surely the word *Integrity* had to get into any discussion of the wholeness and honesty of the individual. *Forum* grew into an admirable journal. Its editorship passed to other hands, and it seemed obvious that an organisation had to be formed, based on the integration of faith and practice. *Integrity* was originally incorporated in the State of Illinois. The first of many annual conferences was held in Burrill Hall, St James' Cathedral, in Chicago, in 1975. Six Canadians were there, and Integrity/Toronto was born. The annual conferences were wonderful events. I remember them as my on- going love affair with a hundred or so beautiful persons. I attended faithfully; the conferences *and* the people were important to me. From those experiences, my own personal integrity and love of justice have grown. As is bound to happen, Integrity has had set-backs. Presidents came and presidents went, usually forced out by burn-out, a tragic event in the lives of wonderful, faithful people, who commit too much of their lives to one task. In the course of that, *Forum* died, or perhaps was killed, and a huge rift grew up in the Integrity family. There were no conferences. We thought it was dead. Much of Integrity rebirth was due to the next supply of faithful persons. Integrity in the US regrouped, this time forming four regions. At our request, Canadian chapters were left out of that, although we do keep in close contact with the closest US region (for us in Toronto, that's the Northeast) if we wish. When Integrity in Canada gained independence, we thought of forming a national organisation; we even started to do that. It quickly became obvious that committing so much time and energy to a structure was not what we wanted to do. Holding national conferences in such a widespread land as ours is too expensive to be feasible. We decided to remain a loose federation of chapters, and to affirm our close sibling relationship with the US organisation. At the same time, we, as individuals, remained at liberty to join the US organisation, and I have kept up my membership since 1975, either as a member-at-large, or as a member of one or another US chapter. Integrity Inc (the legal name of the umbrella organisation in the US) still holds national conferences, but not every year. This is a sensible arrangement; travel expense is much lighter that way. Regions hold their own conferences annually or biennially. There already was a national conference this year, in the context of *Under One Roof* in St Louis in June [Editor's note John's report on this conference appeared in the September *Integrator*]. The Northeast Region also held its conference, at the Michaelmas weekend in late September, in Philadelphia. After all that lead-up, I'm not going to tell you much of what happened; you have to go there and experience it to understand. Sure, we all travelled to Philadelphia (except for the beautiful people who already live there). I drove down from Toronto, and Chris [Ambidge], whose schedule is tighter than mine, flew. It was fun meeting his flight and driving him to St Mary's church where the conference was held. It was even more fun not getting lost! There are other memories for me, reading a lesson at Morning Prayer, and attending the Sunday morning Eucharist at a suburban church where some dear friends are members. Seeing old friends again is always a precious experience, and many Integrity persons are in that category. St Mary's, Hamilton Village, is on the campus of Penn State University. It was the site of the 1977 national conference, and I still have happy memories of the parish and its Rector, John Scott. The experience of setting foot in St Mary's again, and shaking John's hand was a great nostalgia trip -- though the conference was much more than nostalgia. We did many of the usual things for churchy conferences. We worshipped together. We had a gala "closing Eucharist" on the Saturday, with the bishop present and a bout of some of the finest preaching I've ever heard. The singing got rather exuberant, with Integrity people, mainly the men, bellowing when we should have been singing. I bellowed too, because it's sort of fun, but my musical sense is always outraged by the "loud is good" school of thought. (Remember Gandhi: "if we shout, we hear only ourselves") We also had a business meeting, and a fine banquet, expertly catered, and for a ridiculously low fee. Congratulations, Philadelphia organisers! The main event of the conference was a workshop led by Chris Glaser, entitled "Reclaiming Spirituality and Community as Gay Men and Lesbians". If you don't know about this man, find out. [Glaser's latest book, *Come Home!* was reviewed in the last issue of *Integrator*] His pastoral gifts during the workshop were obvious and deep. The denomination which denied him ordination, apparently because of his being gay and unashamed about it, certainly made a gross mistake in not harnessing Chris' sense of the fitting, the supportive, the growth- making, the needful. Thank God he's using his gifts anyway. And where was God in the workshop? There is a temptation to feel, simply because we hold a conference in a church hall and do our worship in the Church itself, that we have thought about God. We might *know* that God is present at our gatherings, but that's not enough. One of the things Chris Glaser gave us was the opportunity to leave our worries aside for a moment, and, in a moment of prayer and careful consideration of the scriptures, to look deeply into our lives, our beliefs, our needs, our personalities. It is this kind of a breather, away from the frivolousness of homophobic bible-thumpers, that enables the intimate knowledge of God. That's all I want to say about the workshop; what we carried away was intensely personal, and you cannot really experience it vicariously by reading about it. My only regret is that I may have offended some who had identified with the vulnerability of the infant Moses floating down the river, when I referred to them as "basket cases". Sorry. It was intended to be funny. You should know that, among the participants, there appeared Integrity's founder, Dr Louie Crew, the wise man referred to in my opening paragraph. Louie is still being wise (well, he paid me a compliment; what can I say?), and one of the ongoing privileges is to be in the same room with him. THE SERMON: There will be more conferences, and notice will be given in these pages. This is a strong pitch to Integrity members and others to attend. The potential for personal growth is immense; the scope of celebration of our brotherhood/sisterhood, and our gayness/non-gayness, our identity, our place in Creation, is immeasurable. ======== [91-1-3] HUMAN RIGHTS STATEMENT SHELVED (YET) AGAIN BY NATIONAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE The Anglican Church of Canada has been working on a Human Rights document for the past ten years. The code is designed to protect the church and church employees from discrimination. The National Executive Committee (NEC) at its fall meeting decided not to approve the document. The draft calls on the church not to discriminate on the basis of age, sex, sexual orientation, family or marital status, race, colour, ethnic origin, ancestry, disability, or socio-economic status. It was mention of sexual orientation that has been causing the problems for the document in its bumpy road. The document was originally produced by the Human Rights Unit of the Programme Committee of the National Church, at the request of General Synod 1980. Since then it has shuttled between NEC and the House of Bishops. At this last go-round, NEC responded to a request to the House of Bishops not to approve, and will consult with the dioceses and report to General Synod 1992. Some members of NEC felt that the church already has documents and policies in place which cover the same ground as proposed code. Maybe that is true, but the main issue is undoubtedly sexual orientation and rights to employment, and the discomfort that several members of the House of Bishops feel on any issue related to homosexuality. The meeting of NEC was fully reported in a front-page article in the December 1990 issue of *Anglican Journal/Journal Anglican*. The November issue carried an editorial urging the affirmation of the code. Integrity/Toronto is in full agreement with the editors of Anglican Journal, and thank them for this coverage. Equality of acceptance and treatment of lesgay people in the Anglican Church is the *raison d'etre* of Integrity. We will be addressing this action of NEC in greater depth in future issues of *Integrator*. In the meantime, we recommend that you read the articles in Anglican Journal. Please write to us, and to the editor of Anglican Journal, to express your views. ======== [91-1-4] REFLECTIONS AFTER A RARE VISIT TO A GAY CLUB *They* all seem so young, so was *I* young, once. *They* dance for sheer joy of it, so did *I* dance, years ago. *They* abandon themselves to the music, and *I* remembered that freedom. *Their* energy ripples and flows over the crowd, so contagious that *I* caught it. *They* laugh, and touch, and hold their heads up high, but *I* remembered shame, and fear, and hiding. *They* come out early and find freedom and pride, while *I* carefully constructed a closet to live in. *They* are gay and know it's fine, but *I* was queer, perverted, and desperate to be "normal" *They* confront the challenges and successes ahead, but I remember it was tough in the fifties. *They* accommodate one, or twenty, more on the already crowded dance floor, so *I* stepped out and was part of the dance. They are no longer *They*, nor I any longer *I*, we are *We.* *We* praise life, and creation, and God with our whole selves. ======== End of volume 91-1 of Integrator, the newsletter of Integrity/Toronto copyright 1991 Integrity/Toronto Editors this issue: Bonnie Bewley & Chris Ambidge comments please to Chris Ambidge, current Editor chris.ambidge@utoronto.ca OR Integrity/Toronto Box 873 Stn F Toronto ON Canada M4Y 2N9