Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 14:44:10 -0400 From: Chris Ambidge Subject: *Integrator* files for 1992 INTEGRATOR, the newsletter of Integrity/Toronto volume 92-2, issue date 1992 03 04 copyright 1992 Integrity/Toronto. The hard-copy version of this=20 newsletter carries the ISSN 0843-574X Integrity/Toronto Box 873 Stn F Toronto ON Canada M4Y 2N9 =3D=3D contents =3D=3D [92-2-1] THE TRIALS OF JIM FERRY / by Chris Ambidge [92-2-2] MEDITATION ON A SUBWAY RIDE / by Don Uttley [92-2-3] BRIDGE-BUILDING WORKSHOP NUMBER 1 / by John Gartshore [92-2-4] PRAYER VIGIL AT THE TIME OF THE BISHOP'S COURT / by Norm Rickaby [92-2-5] VIGIL CANDLES... [92-2-6] JIM FERRY DEFENCE FUND [92-2-7] NEW EXECUTIVE [92-2-8] VANCOUVER CONFERENCE [92-2-9] LETTER TO THE EDITOR / by SG West =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D [92-2-1] THE TRIALS OF JIM FERRY=20 by Chris Ambidge Regular readers of *Integrator* will know that last summer, the=20 Rev James Ferry was removed from the incumbency of St Philip's=20 Church in Unionville, and his priesthood was inhibited by the Rt=20 Rev Terence Finlay, Bishop of Toronto. The explanation given by=20 Bishop Finlay in a letter to the parishioners at St Philip's was=20 Ferry's "decision to remain in a continuing relationship with=20 another man, which is incompatible with the discipline of the=20 Church". The matter has since gone to trial in the rarely- convened Bishop's Court, and the five judges are now considering=20 the evidence and arguments presented to them. The Bishop's Court has been the focus of a great deal of media=20 attention, both in Canada and abroad. In the light cast by this=20 attention, the way that the Anglican Church of Canada treats its=20 lesgay daughters and sons is also very much on trial. The Bishop's Court sat for six days over two weeks in early=20 February. The president of the court is The Honourable William=20 Parker, retired Chief Justice of Ontario. The other judges are Dr=20 Dorothy Ley, Canon Gordon Baker, Dr John Graham and the Rev=20 Victoria Matthews. The Court was held in the parish hall of suburban St Matthew's=20 church. It looked like many other parish halls, with walls long=20 in need of fresh paint, a stage at one end and a basketball hoop=20 at the other; but this event was formal and public and certainly=20 not like coffee hour. On the six days that the Court sat, the=20 public seating was nearly always full, and sometimes standing- room-only. Many, and often a majority, of those hundred people=20 were wearing pink ribbons, in support of Ferry. The press tables=20 were always full, with reporters representing major Canadian=20 dailies and some international papers, an artist sketching the=20 principals, and (when the judges were not present) TV cameras from=20 all the Canadian networks. The case that the Court heard against Ferry was based on the vows=20 made by him, and all other clergy, at his ordination: to obey the=20 bishop's "lawful and honest demands" and to follow his "godly=20 admonitions". The diocese contends that Ferry, in undertaking and=20 continuing his relationship with his partner (and in refusing to=20 resign when so requested by Bishop Finlay), was going against=20 those "demands and admonitions". Robert Falby, the diocesan attorney, has said that the diocese's=20 case is solely about discipline of the church, and not about=20 homosexuality as such. He maintains that the issue of=20 discrimination and prejudice, of how gays and lesbians should be=20 treated by the Anglican Church of Canada, is outside the scope of=20 the Court. These issues, he says, should be addressed in other=20 forums. Valerie Edwards, Ferry's lawyer, says that this is nonsense. At=20 issue is Ferry's being gay. The Church's standards for gays and=20 lesbians are at best ambiguous, and at worst prejudicial and=20 discriminatory, she said. She was allowed considerable leeway in=20 the evidence introduced into court, and homosexuality was indeed=20 the focus of much of the testimony. When Bishop Finlay spoke of "the discipline of the Church" being=20 broached by Ferry's behaviour, he was referring to the *Pastoral=20 Guideline* issued in 1979 by the (National Church) House of=20 Bishops. These Guidelines say, in part: o We accept all persons, regardless of sexual orientation, as=20 equal before God; our acceptance of persons with homosexual=20 orientation is not an acceptance of homosexual activity; o We do not accept the blessing of homosexual unions; o We will not call into question the ordination of a person who=20 has shared with the bishop his/her homosexual orientation if there=20 has been a commitment to the bishop to abstain from sexual acts=20 with persons of the same sex as part of the requirement for=20 ordination. These *Guidelines* were the basis for a statement issued in 1983=20 by the Toronto diocesan College of Bishops, and were re-stated in=20 November of 1991 by the National House, after the Ferry affair=20 became public.=20 The prosecution maintains that statements made by the National=20 House in 1979, by the College in 1983, and by Bishop Finlay=20 himself in interviews with Ferry are all "authoritative rules of=20 conduct", and as such are binding on Ferry. The status of the *Guidelines* form much of the prosecution case. =20 They brought evidence that they are statements of "the mind of the=20 Church", and binding on all the bishops in the church. Bishop=20 Finlay, Falby said, was compelled to act as he did. Other bishops have not felt so compelled. The trial heard=20 evidence from Doug Fox, a gay priest from the diocese of=20 Qu'Appelle [southern Saskatchewan]. Fox testified that he was=20 ordained with his diocesan bishop knowing that he was gay, but=20 with explicitly no commitment of sexual abstinence being extracted=20 from him. Since coming to Toronto to pursue graduate studies, Fox=20 has also been actively exercising his priesthood, both as an=20 honorary assistant on Sundays, and acting as priest-in-charge (an=20 appointment of Bishop Finlay) while his parish was between=20 incumbents. He has celebrated the Eucharist for Integrity/Toronto=20 a number of times. Edwards contends that the *Guidelines* are only "the mind of the=20 House of Bishops", and NOT "the mind of the Church". She argued=20 that the House of Bishops does not have the authority to make laws=20 of the Church. She quoted a Lambeth Conference document saying=20 that "... in the Church, the Bishop mediates authority from Christ=20 as Father in God *in synodical association with clergy and laity*"=20 [emphasis added]. The *Guidelines* (so called, according to=20 former Primate Archbishop Ted Scott, to differentiate them from=20 Canons) were formed by the bishops with no synodical consultation,=20 either with clergy or laity. They are therefore, Edwards says,=20 outside the law of the Church. In her concluding arguments, Edwards spoke to the nature of=20 "lawful and honest demands". She noted that there is a difference=20 between what the law demands and what the law allows. Various=20 things in civil law are prescribed (one must pay taxes) and some=20 proscribed (theft is forbidden); but on the vast majority of=20 things in our lives (where we live, what movies we watch, and so=20 on) the law is silent. She pointed out that the written law of=20 the Anglican Church of Canada: the (founding) Declaration of=20 1893, the Canons of General, Provincial and Diocesan Synods, the=20 Prayer Books and the 39 Articles of Religion are all silent on=20 homosexuality. Since they are silent, the Bishop can not make a=20 "lawful demand" on this matter. The closest thing that can be found in Canon Law on requiring=20 sexual abstinence appears in Article XXXII of the Articles of=20 Religion, which says "Bishops, Priests and Deacons, are not=20 commanded by God's Law, either to vow the estate of single life,=20 or to abstain from marriage: therefore it is legal for them, as=20 for all other Christian men, to marry at their own discretion, as=20 they shall judge the same to serve better to godliness". This=20 Article, which eliminated the distinction between clergy and laity=20 for marriage, indeed asserts that clergy can not be required to=20 remain single -- which is the effect of *Pastoral Guideline* for=20 lesgay clerics. The Court also heard from Jim Ferry himself. It heard the story=20 of his ministry, and of his relationship to his partner. It also=20 heard that his relationship with his partner has burst under the=20 relentless pressure of publicity surrounding the case. Jim is now=20 alone again. =20 Ferry was asked "when the Bishop asked you to end your=20 relationship, was this a 'godly admonition'?". He replied "No it=20 was not. That request was not rooted or grounded in love or in=20 justice. To tell me to stop loving another human being is beyond=20 the scope of any other person, including a bishop." He spoke of the unwritten rules, the conspiracy of silence, which=20 he says are understood by all lesgay clergy and by bishops. He=20 quoted one of the suffragan bishops, "Now Jim, don't say anything=20 I might have to take notice of." In other words, pretend that you=20 are single (even if you are buying a house with your partner), and=20 don't do anything that would force the bishop to acknowledge=20 publicly that he understands what (and who) the homosexual=20 cleric's domestic life involves. Perhaps Ferry's most powerful statement on the stand was to do=20 with the dilemma the bishop placed him in. Edwards asked him,=20 "Why didn't you just choose -- either your relationship or your=20 priesthood?". He replied, "How can I choose between my two loves? =20 I love the church, and I love my partner. Either of those choices=20 is like asking me to cut off my arm". Two witnesses came from the Episcopal Church in the USA to speak=20 on Ferry's behalf: the Rev David Norgard the director of *The=20 Oasis*, the ministry to lesgays in the diocese of Newark; and the=20 Bishop of Newark, the Rt Rev John Spong. Norgard was able to=20 speak as a real-live gay priest, with a life-partner, and with a=20 genuine ministry in the Church. Spong was able to speak of his=20 experience with lesgays in and outside of the church. Both=20 Norgard and Spong demonstrated that lesgay clergy in committed=20 relationships can and do exercise exemplary, non-scandalous=20 ministries which can be "wholesome examples to their flock" Bishop Spong scrupulously avoided direct comment on the actions of=20 Bishop Finlay. He was on the stand for an entire morning,=20 however, and spoke about how the mind of the Church has changed=20 and continues to change on such matters as slavery, and the=20 ordination of women, blacks and homosexuals. He spoke eloquently=20 of the damage that can be done to people and the church when rules=20 of celibacy are imposed on lesgay individuals. His passionate=20 testimony, which at times moved into homily, included a flat=20 statement that the love of Christ should know no bounds, including=20 that of homosexuality. He was applauded for that, and Parker=20 moved swiftly to silence the "circus" atmosphere. Edwards and Falby argued about the legal weight of the 1979=20 *Guideline* and its restatements by other bishops, they argued=20 about what constitutes canon law and what is binding on Canadian=20 clerics, and they argued about the nature of the vows made at=20 ordination by both bishops and priests. These are legal niceties,=20 and in Court those are important. However, the real issue being=20 brought up for examination is the position of lesgays in their=20 church. The Court has now risen to consider the evidence. They must make=20 a finding of guilt or innocence, and a recommendation to the=20 Bishop on how to dispose of the case. The finding will not become=20 public until Bishop Finlay announces the verdict and how he has=20 decided to deal with Ferry. There is no time-line on the=20 deliberations of the Court. The Court has received huge amounts of media attention. It has=20 been covered on a daily basis by television networks and major=20 newspapers from coast to coast, and even abroad. Cynics may say=20 that this is because sex sells newspapers. While that is true,=20 newspapers are not the only ones to benefit. Previously this has been a largely academic debate in Canadian=20 Anglican circles. This test case has given the debate a human=20 face, and that is the face of Jim Ferry. I know that people have=20 changed their minds about this because there is a real person=20 attached to the question -- in a similar way that The Quilt has=20 changed minds and hearts about AIDS by attaching human names and=20 faces to a previously abstract idea. One of the other reporters said to me at the trial that he thought=20 the process was pretty healthy. At first I thought he was wrong. =20 The trial process itself is medieval, and thousands of people=20 have been voyeurs into Ferry's private life. The church has been=20 presented as prurient and intolerant, damning one man's career and=20 vocation for something over which he had no more control than his=20 eye colour. The blaze of publicity has focused for lesgays how=20 un-welcomed they are by parts of their church. Lesgay clergy are=20 running for cover in fear of an on-coming witch-hunt. It has cost=20 Ferry himself dearly: he has lost not only his employment and his=20 privacy, but also his partner. It has been a dark and enervating=20 time for those of us who are lesgay and in the church. On further reflection, though, the process is healthy. As=20 Christians, we have been promised that there will be a=20 resurrection, though we know not what form it may take. Anglicans=20 tend to be polite to a fault, and papering over cracks is one of=20 our favourite approaches to conflict. Many would rather ignore=20 the entire issue of lesgays. The media coverage, and indeed the=20 trial itself, have stripped the paper away. People have been=20 forced to consider the homosexuals who are sitting beside them in=20 the pew. The debate continues. As we go to press, the outcome=20 for Jim Ferry is now in the hands of five judges. The outcome for=20 the Anglican Church of Canada remains in the hands of God. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D [92-2-2] MEDITATION ON A SUBWAY RIDE by Don Uttley Two members were travelling home after one of our regular weekly=20 meetings. Earlier they had been at the Bishop's Court. One=20 commented on the lack of a formal prayer as part of the=20 proceedings; it did not seem like a church affair. The other=20 member told the story of a child taken to church on Vestry Sunday=20 when parish business replaced the sermon. The child stood up on=20 the pew, and speaking out loudly as children are apt to do said=20 "But I came to see God!". Dear child, may you grow to see our loving God in Vestry Sundays=20 and Bishop's Courts. Even as God was there when Jesus of Nazareth was before the High=20 Priests, Herod, and Pilate; God is at Vestry Sunday services, and=20 at Bishop's Courts. Pray that all such affairs may be creative, redemptive, and=20 resurrective. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D [92-2-3] BRIDGE-BUILDING WORKSHOP NUMBER 1 by John Gartshore Last September, during his Charge to Synod, Bishop Finlay made a=20 strong plea for bridge-building in the Church. I felt this was a=20 needed bright spot during a sad time in our history. So on=20 February 19 at a regular meeting, Integrity/Toronto held a=20 workshop called *Working at Bridge-Building: following the=20 Bishop's Initiative*. The format was questions and answers. We examined what a bridge is, both the physical kind and the=20 metaphoric bridge the Bishop was referring to. Bridges have to be=20 strong, built and supported from both sides, and have firm=20 footings. They have to be well designed and maintained. They=20 have to be wide enough to carry two-way traffic, and go FROM=20 somewhere TO somewhere. They usually are over a dangerous place,=20 so need railings to avoid accident. They provide a safe,=20 convenient crossing, and enable goodwill. There may need to be an=20 active peace-keeping force. People usually build bridges to get to the other side of an=20 obstacle, either because there isn't already a bridge, or because=20 the old one is falling down. That sounds pretty obvious, but we=20 then wondered if anyone would really want to get to the other side=20 of the bridges we want to build. That question will need more=20 work. We turned our attention to *why the Church needs bridges*. The=20 Bishop's speech last fall was all well and good, but there has to=20 be a perceived need by a lot of people before the bridges will=20 work We feel the need for unity, understanding, togetherness. =20 Don't we need meeting-places, where there is openness and=20 accessibility? Right now, we sense a lot of FEAR (characterised=20 by hurtful epithets), mistrust, guilt, denial, and a warlike=20 spirit about the topic of sexuality, especially homosexuality. =20 Many people are na=EFve, superstitious. Liberals question the views=20 of conservatives and vice versa. We see our job, in co-operation=20 with other bridge-builders, to make peace in the midst of war. Who should be building these bridges with us? Whom do we see=20 across the chasms? First of all, open-minded people wherever. =20 Several people suggested that Christian-gospel-minded people would=20 be more amenable than those more deeply rooted in the pre- Christian scriptures. We are confident that there are people who=20 want to know us and be willing to talk to us, like justice and=20 outreach groups and the media, and that these contacts will be=20 self-selecting. We felt an urgent need to build bridges with the=20 Houses of Bishops (national and provincial) and the Toronto=20 College of Bishops; our communications with these groups have been=20 sporadic and frustratingly unproductive. At this point, it was apparent that a specific plan couldn't be=20 concocted in just one meeting. We started talking about HOW we=20 would start. Invitations to Integrity meetings would be=20 worthwhile, so: ++NOTE from the Co-Conveners: Please bear in mind that our ++meetings at Holy Trinity are at 7:30 every Wednesday evening ++and persons of goodwill are invited. Don't wait for a more +specific invitation! Clergy who would like to preside ++at our Eucharists, please call 941-9213 As well, we would welcome invitations to visit other groups, to=20 share techniques, stores. We need to consult about what things=20 WORK, and what are APPROPRIATE. We have courage to share, and we=20 need to draw on others' courage as well. One important point came up here. Some of us (like me) can, and=20 need to be very public about being gay. We "come out to" everyone=20 who will listen, and sometimes even to those who don't really want=20 to know. [To come out to (verb, transitive): *a technical term=20 meaning to reveal one's sexual orientation to another person. =20 Non-gays don't usually do this because they feel they don't need=20 to . More's the pity! * To come out to *someone is to trust them=20 with very private information. Always to be taken as a=20 compliment.* Demanding *to know someone's orientation is never=20 permissible. Period. Certain clergy, please note*.] Probably=20 the great majority of lesgay persons, especially in the Church,=20 must reserve giving information about themselves to a small select=20 group. How can some of us "come out" without compromising=20 everyone? More discussion in needed on this! Back to bridges: we are taking for granted that the footings on=20 our side of any bridge will be firm. Do we need support to make=20 sure of that? We are counting on goodwill in many places in the=20 Church We've found that in the past, and are sure that we'll find=20 it again And we're certainly counting on the Holy Spirit to be=20 with us, not only comforting and strengthening, but also pushing=20 and guiding where it's needed. We also made some resolves NOT to do a few things. For instance=20 anger can be a mighty motivator, but, as we saw recently, we can=20 let our anger overwhelm us so that all we can do is get MAD. On=20 the other hand, if we aren't careful, we can be stampeded into=20 things we later regret. In our over-confidence, we might omit to=20 hear others' stories, particularly from those who are nervous=20 about us. And there is always the temptation to OUT someone,=20 especially someone we're mad at. [*To out* (verb, extremely=20 transitive): *to reveal the orientation of another, without=20 express permission. A violence. A cardinal sin*.] We need to be=20 careful to avoid these things. We ended the evening with a short worship, then adjourned for our=20 usual delightful social time. We decided that there's more work=20 to do -- Workshop #2 seems needed. So are prayers. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D [92-2-4] PRAYER VIGIL AT THE TIME OF THE BISHOP'S COURT by Norm Rickaby Nearly fifty people met at St. James Cathedral in Toronto Sunday=20 evening, February 2nd for a Prayer Vigil. This was the eve of the=20 opening of the Bishop's Court which was to hear the charges=20 against the Rev James Ferry. The idea of a Vigil had been=20 conceived by the Friends of Jim Ferry group and was to encourage=20 prayer for the Court, for Bishop Finlay, for James Ferry and for=20 the Diocese of Toronto. The service was approved of by Bishop Finlay and was originally=20 arranged for St George's Chapel at the Cathedral with the=20 assistance of Dean Duncan Abraham. Shortly before the service was=20 to begin, it became obvious that there would be too many people to=20 be comfortably accommodated in the Chapel. On short notice, Dean=20 Abraham made it possible for the service to be moved into the=20 Chancel with the majority of participants sitting in the Choir. The evening's liturgy was planned and led by Integrity/Toronto=20 members, Chris Ambidge and John Gartshore. The Service of Light=20 opened the Vigil, and was followed by eight distinct sections,=20 each having a specific focus for prayers. Each segment of the Vigil began with a Bidding and closed with a=20 Collect, some of which had been written for the occasion. Between=20 these, there were readings, hymns, litanies and/or prayers from a=20 variety of sources. Silences were also effectively incorporated=20 and people were invited in those periods to add petitions of their=20 own, to light a taper as a sign of personal concerns, or to=20 meditate. The first section of the Vigil after the Service of Light was=20 designated *Prayers for the Bishop and Father Ferry*. The Collect=20 closing this part of the service interceded for "our brothers=20 Terence and James, engaged for a time in anguished struggle" and=20 continued, "Grant to them the mediation of your Spirit that,=20 without compromise of essentials or need for vengeance, they and=20 their supporters may see ways to solve the dispute now separating=20 them, and make a model of peace in your Church." Under the heading *Prayers for the Bishop's Court and its=20 Servants*, the Collect was prophetic of the long tedious hours the=20 judges would be sitting and listening day after day when it asked=20 that they would be given "stamina to encounter the task of the=20 hour." Prayers, silences and hymns followed in turn for the Church, for=20 Fr Jim Ferry, for Peace, and for Bridge-Building. During the prayers for Bishop Terence Finlay, a member of the=20 congregation read from the prayer for the Consecration of a Bishop=20 (BAS pg 639);=20 "Enable him as a true shepherd to feed and govern your flock;=20 make him wise as a teacher, and steadfast as a guardian of its=20 faith and sacraments. Guide and direct him in presiding at the=20 worship of your people. Give him humility, that he may use his=20 authority to heal, not to hurt; to build up, not to destroy." In the Collect read during the *Prayers for Lesgay persons in and=20 out of the Church*, the company petitioned God to "protect and=20 comfort those who see themselves shabbily treated by the Church of=20 their Baptism by those who would exclude them from full practise=20 and membership, whether for their orientation, their sex, their=20 race, or their way of making family". Not only was this included=20 in the prayer, but also, "To any who show fear and disdain, direct=20 us as we extend to them the comfort of your Gospel and the Spirit=20 of your true Church." After the events of this past summer, Jim Ferry is out of the=20 closet to the whole world. The result has been a great deal of=20 pain for him, his family and for many who love and care about him. =20 On the other hand, Jim has discovered both the companionship of=20 the Spirit of Christ through this ordeal and the power which comes=20 from knowing that little else remains which can be done to him. Many others still remain closeted and for them we prayed at the=20 Vigil (as we continue to pray now); "Strong and peaceful Jesus, you came to your friends as they met=20 behind locked doors, fearing the religious authorities. As you=20 said 'Peace' to them, say it again to us. For it was through=20 those disciples in their closet that you gave your Church power to=20 make peace." *God in your mercy, hear our prayer*. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D [92-2-5] VIGIL CANDLES... At the end of the Vigil, one of the participants shared this=20 insight. =20 "Today is the Feast [Presentation of Christ in the Temple] that=20 commemorates two old people, Simeon and Anna, and we have just=20 sung Simeon's Song [*Nunc Dimittis*]. I am an old person too, and=20 I don't know much about what this trial is about. But I have seen=20 troubles come and go, and life continue. "Today's feast is sometimes called Candlemas. When we decided to=20 move from the chapel and come up here to the chancel, I happened=20 to break my candle as we were walking up the aisle. It was broken=20 in two, but it was still held together by the wick. We lit the=20 candles and I watched mine very carefully when it came to the=20 break. The flame burned past the break as if it wasn't there. =20 The candle healed itself, and the two halves burned exactly as=20 they should have. Maybe we can be like that candle even at this=20 difficult time." =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D [92-2-6] JIM FERRY DEFENCE FUND Donations to help defray Jim Ferry's legal bills are still very=20 much needed. To date many people (and Integrity chapters!) have=20 been quite generous, but the costs have still to be met. Please=20 send donations c/o Integrity/Toronto at Box 873 Stn F Toronto M4Y=20 2N9. Thanks. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D [92-2-7] NEW EXECUTIVE A glance at the masthead box (in the paper edition) above shows=20 that a new executive was elected at our Annual General Meeting in=20 late January. Norm Rickaby is joined as Co-Convener by John=20 Gartshore, who has handed over the Treasurer's books to Brian=20 MacIntyre. Don Uttley continues as Secretary. Congratulations to=20 all. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D [92-2-8] VANCOUVER CONFERENCE The Vancouver chapters of Integrity and Dignity are jointly=20 sponsoring a conference for all members of Integrity or Dignity in=20 Canada and elsewhere this summer. The dates are Friday July 31 to=20 Sunday August 2, and it will tentatively be held at Vancouver=20 School of Theology. The theme of the conference is "*Christ has=20 no body now but ours*" (a quote from Teresa of Avila). The=20 keynote speaker will be Bishop John Spong. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D [92-2-9] LETTER TO THE EDITOR [Periodically, *Integrator* receives letters-to-the-editor. We=20 are quite prepared to print such letters. This one arrived before=20 the beginning of the Bishop's Court. It is reproduced here in its=20 entirety, and has been very carefully proof-read.] Jan 10th 1992 To the Editor and Executive of Itegrator. I came upon an issue published last Summer of your=20 publication, recently, which defended the right of Jim Ferry=20 to practise the priesthood while also practising homo-sexual=20 acts -- against the rules of the church to which he had=20 subscribed at ordination. Completely apart from the sententious nonesense in the=20 publication about love and acceptence, Jim Ferry was not=20 honest. He went to the Bishop only after complaints from=20 parishioners had come before the Bishop.. He knew what the=20 rules were before he was ordained. He is suing at civil law the church to which he promised=20 loyalty, thus showing something of his true self. Of course God loves him, and, for that matter, so do I -- but=20 with grief. There are passages in the Bible which assert the meaning of=20 sexuality -- Man and woman made He them -- I don't remember=20 anything about man and man or woman and woman made He them --=20 in any sexual context. It is distinctly unexceptable to normal human beings to=20 receive the sacraments from hands, male or female, that have=20 messed around with the sexual organs of people of the same sex=20 -- and it involves no hate. As a priest, soldier, and in the prisons, I have seen a good=20 deal -- and I don't understand nor have the answers -- but I=20 do support my Bishop when he follows the clearly defined rules=20 of the Church. Sincerely =20 SG West [If any readers would like to respond to Mr West's letter, or to=20 anything else of interest to Integrator readers, please write to=20 Editor, Integrator, PO Box 873, Station F, Toronto M4Y 2N9. =20 Letters may be edited.] =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D End of volume 92-2 of Integrator, the newsletter of Integrity/Toronto copyright 1992 Integrity/Toronto comments please to Chris Ambidge, Editor chris.ambidge@utoronto.ca OR =20 Integrity/Toronto Box 873 Stn F Toronto ON Canada M4Y 2N9