Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 14:44:10 -0400 From: Chris Ambidge Subject: *Integrator* files for 1992 INTEGRATOR, the newsletter of Integrity/Toronto volume 92-4, issue date 1992 05 12 copyright 1992 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 == [92-4-1] "THE STRING OF HIS TONGUE WAS LOOSED, AND HE SPAKE PLAIN" by Chris Ambidge [92-4-2] WITCH-HUNTS PROCEED DESPITE BISHOP'S PROHIBITION by Integrity/Toronto Co-Conveners John Gartshore and Norm Rickaby [92-4-3] JIM FERRY AND BANQUO'S GHOST: The question of Jim Ferry will haunt the Anglican Church for a while to come / by JACK KAPICA, religion reporter for the Toronto *Globe and Mail* [92-4-4] THE FAMILY OF GOD? / by Mayne Ellis [92-4-5] "YOU ASKED TO HEAR OUR PAIN. THEN HEAR THIS" / a letter to Bishop Finlay from Michelle AND Bonnie Crawford-Bewley [92-4-6] CHRIST HAS NO BODY NOW, BUT OURS [92-4-7] INTEGRITY'S PRESENCE AT GENERAL SYNOD / by Norm Rickaby [92-4-8] DIALOGUE ON THE MOVE, SLOWLY / by Chris Ambidge [92-4-9] INTEGRITY'S ANNUAL RETREAT / by Michelle Crawford-Bewley ======== [92-4-1] "THE STRING OF HIS TONGUE WAS LOOSED, AND HE SPAKE PLAIN" by Chris Ambidge While the matter of the Rev Jim Ferry's dismissal by the diocese was before the courts, neither he nor the diocesan authorities have been able to speak freely. This is no longer the case. Jim Ferry has decided, after much prayer and reflection, that he will not appeal the decision of the Bishop's Court through Ecclesiastical Court channels. He has also withdrawn his lawsuit against the Diocese of Toronto for wrongful dismissal, and has said that he will not pursue action through the Ontario Human Rights Commission "for the time being". Jim gave a number of reasons for his actions. The first is to encourage dialogue on the subject of gays and lesbians in their church. As anyone who has written a letter to the Synod offices about Jim will know, the bishops have felt that they could not comment while the Ferry affair was before the courts. They have been saying "no comment" for many months. Now that legal actions are no longer pending, all voices -- including Jim's -- will be free to enter into the discussions. He also feels that the church courts are the wrong avenue to pursue. Jim says that he is not going to get justice the church courts: all that an appeal could do would be to order a new Bishop's Court trial, where judge and jury and charge and sentence are all in the hand of the Bishop, his opponent at law. The diocese has consistently refused to deal with the central moral issue, which is the iniquitous treatment meted out to lesbian/gay clergy by the church. The phrase "criminal and immoral activity" was excised by diocesan authorities from the charges against Ferry, and the charges boiled down to legalities. Future church court proceedings would likewise be more concerned with the law than with grace. The last reason is personal: Jim's life has been completely consumed since June of last year, and eleven months are a large slice out of anyone's lifetime. It is time for him to get on with his life. This does not mean that he is abandoning the cause of lesbians and gays in the Church. He remains committed to seeing that justice is done for homosexuals within the Anglican Church of Canada. There are now no legal constraints on his entering vigorously into the debate. Jim Ferry has sacrificed a lot for that cause of justice for lesgays. All justice-seeking people owe him a debt. Please help him to pay his legal bills: a lot of money has been raised, but the bills are still higher. Please send (suitably earmarked) contributions either to Integrity/Toronto, or to the Jim Ferry Defence Fund, c/o Harvey L Hamburg, 97 Maitland St Toronto M4Y 1E3. ======== [92-4-2] WITCH-HUNTS PROCEED DESPITE BISHOP'S PROHIBITION by Integrity/Toronto Co-Conveners JOHN GARTSHORE and NORM RICKABY Bishop Finlay said in his charge to Synod in September 1991 that "I will not tolerate homophobic 'witch-hunts', nor 'gay bashing'". He said that again on March 20. Those are words of hope for those in the diocese who are liable to homophobic witch-hunts or to gay- bashing. Unfortunately, in the event, the hope has turned out to be ill-founded. We have heard, from a number of independent sources, that some (though not all) of the suffragan bishops are asking pointed questions of individual clerics. Questions have been asked about where they stand on the 1979 *Guidelines*. These *Guidelines* have been interpreted to prohibit clergy from having same-sex partner relationships. Questions have been asked about the personal lives of individuals. People have even been asked if they contributed to the Jim Ferry Defence Fund. We cannot name our sources. The events of the past year have proven that the diocesan authorities cannot be trusted with information like that. They are real people, however, people who are very apprehensive about what their bishops are doing, and why they are ferreting out information of this kind. They are being gay-bashed, denigrated because of their sexual orientation (either real or presumed). Bishop Finlay, writing in the May issue of *The Anglican *said that rumours and half-truths are appalling, and he is quite correct. What we report here is not rumour. That people are afraid for their position in the church, and of what some bishops are doing, is cold hard fact. We predicted this back in July of last year, and, tragically, it has come to pass. A witch-hunt, the Oxford dictionary says, is "a search for and persecution of supposed witches or persons suspected of unpopular or unorthodox views." We assume that that is the meaning Bishop Finlay had in mind when he prohibited witch-hunting. Nevertheless, some of his suffragan bishops are doing precisely that. We are not saying that those trying to root out the homosexuals (or their supporters) in the clergy are acting out of malice. The good townspeople of Salem felt they were acting for the common good in rooting out supposed witches from their community. Senator McCarthy felt he was working for the common good when he worked mightily to root out communism from the United States in the 1950's. Nevertheless, innocent people who were a little different -- or simply were perceived as being different -- from the majority had their lives shattered by the witch-hunts. One life has already been shattered by those in this diocese who cannot tolerate homosexuality. The bishops know full well that there are gay/lesbian clergy living today in committed relationships. It is common knowledge among all the clergy that the bishops are "on the lookout" for homosexual clerics. The fear and apprehension of what might happen next to them is horrendous and debilitating to gay clerics. A church that preaches love and acceptance, which follows in the footsteps of Christ, who said "Come unto me, all who are weary and heavy-laden", should not be in the business of striking fear into the hearts of its clergy. We believe that Bishop Finlay attempted to allay those fears back in September when he issued his prohibition of witch-hunts and gay bashing. Unfortunately, the actions of some of the suffragans has put the lie to his assurances. Surely this is a disciplinary matter. We have already had one cleric tried for canonical disobedience this year, we don't need any more. ======== [92-4-3] JIM FERRY AND BANQUO'S GHOST The question of Jim Ferry will haunt the Anglican Church for a while to come by JACK KAPICA, religion reporter for the Toronto *Globe and Mail* Banquo, wrote Raphael Holinshed in his *Chronicles* in 1578, was the thane of Lochaber and, like his pal Macbeth, a Scottish general. But then three weird sisters tipped Macbeth that Banquo would sire kings (his progeny became the House of Stuart). The hubris-ridden Macbeth, who had regal ambitions of his own, tried an end-run around that prophecy by having murderers put Banquo out of Macbeth's misery. Respectable historians scoff at the yarn, but when Shakespeare had Banquo's ghost haunt Macbeth at a feast, the dead king-maker earned a kind of immortality as one of literature's more effective reminders of past mistakes. Now Rev Jim Ferry, the Anglican who was relieved of his pulpit in Unionville, Ontario last year by Toronto Bishop Terence Finlay, bears little resemblance to Banquo. For one, Mr Ferry was not murdered. Also, his offence was more serious than posing as an obstacle to a friend's ruthless ambition -- he violated guidelines set down by the Anglican Church in 1979 (reaffirmed in 1983 and 1991) by maintaining a homosexual relationship. For this, he was dealt with by a Bishop's Court in a trial that riveted the country for a week in February. But like Banquo's ghost, the case of Mr Ferry will not go away. The decision of the court, announced March 20, did not sit well with the faithful, many of whom feel that Mr Ferry was hard done by. To make matters more irksome, Mr Ferry is not through with his fight to have the Anglican Church accept relationships for gay ministers. Today, he says he is determined to continue pleading his case. He stresses he is still a priest, and that the Toronto diocese will continue to consider him a priest by keeping his name on something called "the Bishop's list," a kind of catalogue of inactive ministers, even after the diocese stops paying his salary on August 1. He also emphasises that he was found guilty of only two of the four charges against him. The court said he was guilty of contumacy (a sadly underused word meaning a contemptible disregard for proper authority) and guilty of disrespectful conduct to his bishop. But he most certainly was NOT guilty of disobeying his bishop's instructions to end the homosexual relationship -- in fact, Bishop Finlay never asked him to end it and Mr Ferry never refused. Mr Ferry was also not guilty of canonical disobedience, because the guidelines forbidding sexual activity for gay priests are not canon law. Mr Ferry concludes that the judgement suggests a bishop can ask a priest to do anything at all, including obey a non-canonical order. This, says Mr Ferry, is contradictory, and therefore unfair. Mr Ferry also says that Bishop Finlay was wrong in stating that he was bound by the decision of the Bishop's Court, and that in fact he could have rejected both the court's verdict and its recommendations. "It's a disappointing moral dodge," says Mr Ferry of the judgement. "If the Church can't deal with a moral issue, then who the hell can?" For its part, the diocese feels it was a just and merciful judgement -- Mr Ferry remains a priest ( a revoked licence means only that he cannot preach or celebrate the sacraments), and will be put back into active service if and when he promises not to enter into a homosexual relationship of any kind. His case will also be reviewed each year. Moreover, the bishop is now committed to address the issue of homosexual priests more fully. Mr Ferry has announced he intends to drop a civil suit against the bishop, make no appeal to the ecclesiastical court, and forgo his complaint to the Ontario Human Rights Commission -- "for the time being." Instead, he plans to haunt the corridors of Ryerson Polytechnical Institute, where the Anglican Church will hold its General Synod in June, hoping to influence the two-hour debate on homosexuality that has been inserted into the synod's agenda as the result of is case. "The discussion will be very different when there's a real person there," he says. Depending on your point of view, Mr Ferry is either a sore loser or a champion of homosexual rights. But one thing is for sure -- his shade will certainly be a major presence at the Synod this summer. Copyright 1992 *The Globe and Mail*. Reproduced by permission ======== [92-4-4] THE FAMILY OF GOD? by Mayne Ellis "The church is the family of God, and in any family there is a need for both discipline and loving care. As Bishop, I am to maintain the unity and discipline of the church and to exercise pastoral care". Thus Bishop Terence Finlay on March 22, 1992. The syntax and vocabulary are significant. To me, this statement is an attempt to claim the moral high ground, to cloak autocratic behaviour in unquestioned, time-worn and often deceptive concepts. Family means different things to different people. What does it mean to Terry Finlay? What kind of father makes his child an outcast, insisting that no-one else in the family may offer sanctuary to that child? What kind of family must unquestioningly obey, without fair argument or recourse, every edict and whim of the father? Based on what Finlay and the Bishop's Court have said and, more importantly, done to one of its members (and, as the Rev Jim Ferry said, by extension, many others), the prevailing construct of the "family of God", and particularly of the bishops' role within it, is markedly dysfunctional. As everyone who recalls their adolescence knows, you can always count on your parents to embarrass you. Finlay's humiliation of Jim (outing him to his congregation in a "pastoral" letter) was so masterful some of us still find it difficult to believe he didn't know what he was doing. No one is that cruel by accident, are they? Such acts, whether understood consciously or not, are quite usual for parents acting out their own emotional or mental problems. Alice Miller has brilliantly identified the phenomenon: the need to re-enact one's own humiliation upon the child, to be at last the punisher and not the punished. "I'm the head of the household and what I say goes." In the charges and trial, the bishop defined the terms of the discourse with patriarchal absolutism. The Court refused to consider any factor but the purely legalistic (church discipline and administration - grounds on which the diocese felt sure of winning the argument). It even defined HOW the charges should be understood, as the discussion of the Court's findings in the March 20 press release makes clear. Superficially this may seem to have worked for Jim, but the underlying principle is a destructive one. There also seemed to be no negotiation on their part about what they were prepared to accept as evidence; the Court did not consider alternative or additional viewpoints or information (in this case, that the singular treatment of lesgay clergy is discriminatory and unbalanced). What is this but the behaviour of a dogmatic parent whose final and perhaps only argument is: "Because I say so, that's why"? Many heterosexual Christians actually resent and hate their own sexuality, though most are socially conforming enough to now cloak that in conciliatory, albeit limited and limiting, language. For such parents, any manifestation of unsanctioned sexual feeling or activity by a child is a cause for alarm, resentment and punishment, as RD Laing's work with schizophrenic children make clear. In fact ANY sign that the child is becoming sexually mature can be threatening for a disturbed parent. Finlay's choice about Jim's fate, as discussed in the press release of March 20, seems to me purely vindictive, and fits perfectly into the pattern of parental dysfunction: Jim is denied any and all possibility of productive life within this "family" unless he conforms unquestioningly to the bishop-father's will, because Jim has insisted that he is an adult with the right to fully adult choices about his whole life. I did not expect mercy, much less justice, from the Bishop's Court, and I'm sorry to say that I was not disappointed. In the end, Jim was convicted of "contumacy and disrespectful conduct toward the Bishop" and "wrongdoing by refusing to refrain from continuing a homosexual relationship contrary to the Bishop's instructions" - thus making it perfectly clear that this trial and sentence is really about questioning authority. Jim is being punished for challenging Dad. This is how power is exercised in the dysfunctional family. It's not quite Deuteronomy 21:18-21, but emotionally it's close enough, for the shadow-life the Bishops offer is no life at all for the committed Christian clergyman we know Jim to be. We are told that "The Bishop of Toronto ... took the position that Reverend Ferry had disobeyed his instructions to end his relationship..." What is this but the position of an Imperial Roman paterfamilias who could legally force his child to divorce a spouse the child loved to take a spouse more to the father's liking? We owe Jim a great debt for his courage in being the light that shines in the darkness of bigotry; of demonstrating in his own flesh just what the words of Bishop Finlay, in particular, are worth; of showing us the true nature of the "liberal" front that the official church seems anxious to present, to keep lesgays quiet while draining us of our money, energy, gifts and time. My mother always told me, "You can choose your friends, but you can't choose your family." Feminist and lesgay Christians have known for some time that THIS family is profoundly dysfunctional. For those of us who are choosing to stay and work for healing and truth, I want to say this. When I changed my dysfunctional, self- denying behaviour and refused to play the tiresome, dishonest games that families seem to need to maintain the facade of traditional order, it was hard. My parents were upset, puzzled and angry. They began to see that my new behaviours were actually more honest, more humane, more useful, and much more loving. Because I changed, the dynamics of my family relationships have changed, and for the better. I proved for myself the truth of Mr Quentin Crisp's dictum that homosexuals "should make no effort to try and join society" but "stay right where they are and wait for society to form itself around them -- because it certainly will". John McNeill and Carter Heyward have both suggested that lesgay Christians are the theological trail-breakers, the explorers. We are the dissidents, the questioners of authority. Remember Prometheus? Jim, beloved brother, you must feel as though your insides are being torn out, day after day. But, oh my people - Jim has given us fire. [Author Box: MAYNE ELLIS was part of the Integrity team at General Synod 1989, while she was President of Integrity/Vancouver. She now lives in the United Kingdom.] ======== [92-4-5] "YOU ASKED TO HEAR OUR PAIN. THEN HEAR THIS" a letter to Bishop Finlay from MICHELLE AND BONNIE CRAWFORD- BEWLEY Bishop Finlay: We started this letter originally by quoting the Anglican Bishop's statement of 1978 on homosexuals in the church, how we are "brothers and sisters for whom Christ died". On second reading we decided not to tell you what you already know. Christ's message was "love one another" not "arrogantly judge one another's relationships". This letter is in response to your treatment of the Rev. Jim Ferry, but your decision in his case affects us as well. We are Anglicans and we are lesbians. You call for bridge building and dialogue. Homosexuals are attempting to build bridges that should never have been required, but we feel that we're making an effort that is not being reciprocated by the Church or her followers. As we enter dialogue we hear hate, fear and heterosexist presumption on the lack of quality and non-validity of our lives and relationships. Lesgays are being told that if we are patient, attitudes and policies in the church will change. Unfortunately, we each only have one life to live. At the rate the dialogue is presently going, we won't have time to wait for heterosexuals to decide that they are ready to deal with us. We will be long dead by the time that happens, and our love and our ministry -- both gifts from God -- will die with us. You asked to hear our pain. Then hear this. Homosexuals are confronted by hate and fear. Hate manifests itself in verbal and physical abuse. Fear drives people in the church to call lesgay clergy unfit to stand in the pulpit and preach, and to say that we cannot represent God because we are not of God. Hate ostracises and criticises. It wounds and causes pain. Hate will give you the witch hunt that you legitimised by firing and, more heinously, by outing Jim Ferry. Fear and hate cause the leadership of the Church to turn their backs on opportunities to minister in Christian love and acceptance. Pain is the legacy of lesgays in the Anglican Church. People feel justified in hating and abusing us, both as a group but also as individuals, because institutions like the Anglican Church of Canada perpetuate the myth that homosexuals are perverts. The Church says that we do not have the ability or the right to form long term relationships, and that our love is genital expression only. Since we cannot have our relationships blessed in the Church, the impression will linger that there is "something wrong" with homosexual love and commitment. Why is it always homosexual's pain and heterosexist hate? Why is their hate worth more than our pain? How long is your response to our pain going to be just listening? When will you stop causing us more pain? When we wrote to you in August, 1991, regarding your treatment of Jim Ferry, we received a form letter in response. More distressingly, it was the same form letter you sent to Jim's twin brother. Please do not send us just another form letter. We'd rather receive no acknowledgement of our concern than the same reply sent to everyone else who writes to you. This is our response to your call for dialogue. Now it's time for you to act. You've heard our pain, now do something. You announced on March 20 that you were setting up a dialogue with gays and lesbians and other concerned individuals; and said in the press conference that you wanted to be "very intentional" about that communication. We understand that the dialogue has yet to get started. Perhaps it is time that it did. Michelle and Bonnie Crawford-Bewley ======== [92-4-6] CHRIST HAS NO BODY NOW, BUT OURS The Vancouver chapters of Integrity and Dignity are jointly sponsoring a conference for all members of Integrity or Dignity in Canada and elsewhere this summer. The dates are Friday July 31 to Sunday August 2, and it will be held at the University of British Columbia. The theme of the conference, "*Christ has no body now, but ours*", is a quote from Teresa of Avila. Much is suggested by this: that we are agents of God's love in the world; that our bodies express and effect that love; that we are members of a Body, the Church, called into community for God's purpose; and that the bodily expression of love is Spirit infused. The keynote speaker will be Bishop John Spong. Registration fees are $95 (early) or $125; and residence rooms run between $29 and $80. For further information contact: Dignity/Integrity Conference, 1130 Jervis St, Vancouver V6C 2C7, (604) 432 1230. ======== [92-4-7] INTEGRITY'S PRESENCE AT GENERAL SYNOD by Norm Rickaby The 33rd session of General Synod, the national legislative gathering of the Anglican Church of Canada, will meet in Toronto next month. This event, which happens once every three years, brings together clergy and lay representatives of every diocese in the country and Integrity will be there. There was an Integrity display staffed by members from Toronto and Vancouver at the 32nd General Synod in St. John's Newfoundland in 1989. It was felt to be such a worth-while effort that a decision was made immediately afterwards to plan to be at this Synod, too. This one comes at a much more crucial time for the voices of lesbians and gays in the Church to be heard by its decision making body. The eyes of the country will be upon this Synod, in no small measure because of the attention resulting from last year's firing and "outing" of the Reverend Jim Ferry by the Bishop of Toronto, followed by the spectacle of Bishop's Court which pointed up the inconsistencies in church policy and practice towards its lesgay members. Ironically, the Synod will be meeting at Ryerson Polytechnic Institute, which is just blocks away from the very centre of Toronto's gay neighbourhood. The second week of Synod meetings will be taking place during Toronto's Lesbian and Gay Pride Week which, for the first time, will be formally proclaimed by the Mayor of the City and which should have considerable media attention as well. Three years ago, at St. John's, the major issue before Synod which touched the lives of the lesgay community was HIV/AIDS. A general motion of support was passed there which instituted the annual Day of Prayer for people affected by AIDS. At that Synod an AIDS prayer vigil was planned with assistance by members of Integrity and was well-attended. The Toronto and Vancouver Integrity volunteers who staffed our display in 1989 felt that they made some interesting and valuable contacts with delegates. Some delegates were positive about the Integrity presence, a few were quite negative, but many came by admitting that they hadn't given much thought to the issue of lesgays in the church. Most of these were willing to chat and to take literature, promising to think about it. Immediately after that experience, Integrity/Toronto made a decision to begin preparations for Synod '92 which was to be held in our own back yard. For the past three years, we have set aside funds so that there would be a budget for our work this year. We have worked towards making it our role to handle the major arrangements for the display and to ensure our visibility. We hope also to be able to make it possible for members from the other chapters in Canada to be represented. As of this writing, three of the five chapters in Canada (Toronto, Kingston and Vancouver) will have volunteers to staff the table during the 10 days of Synod meetings. We still have hopes that someone from Edmonton and Saskatoon will also be able to be here. The Integrity display will include literature regarding the ministry of Integrity, lesgays in the church and the blessing of same gender relationships. A new updated Bibliography is being prepared. Further, we hope to have an Integrity opinion piece on the Church's treatment of Jim Ferry and perhaps pamphlets touching on the wider issue of lesbian and gay clergy as well as one discussing confidentiality and "outing". We hope to minister to delegates and those attending the Synod, not only by providing literature and opportunities for face-to- face discussion, but also we will be setting up a comfortable seating area where people can relax for a few minutes. There'll be a telephone available in case personal or other calls need to be made. We'll also have a supply of refreshing fruit juices and plan to repeat one feature of last Synod's Integrity booth, a bowl of gourmet jelly beans with a new "fruit of the day" flavour each day! Readers of *Integrator* are asked to remember General Synod and Integrity in your prayers through this next month. If you have been particularly impressed or helped by a book which you think might be added to the Bibliography we are preparing, please forward that information to us as quickly as possible. The theme of Synod will be "For you and for many". The Integrity people will be there on behalf of the tens of thousands of lesgays in the Anglican Church of Canada. ======== [92-4-8] DIALOGUE ON THE MOVE, SLOWLY by Chris Ambidge Bishop Finlay announced in late March that he intends to establish a special ministry in the Diocese of Toronto to promote understanding between gays and lesbians and the rest of the church through pastoral care and education. This grows out of the Synod motion made by Nancy Whitla and me, asking the diocesan Executive Committee to look into ways of making gays and lesbians feel more welcome in their church. The article in the April issue of *The Anglican* indicated that Integrity was to be invited to take part. These actions are entirely consistent with Bishop Finlay's repeated calls for people on all sides of the sexuality-and-the- church debate to continue talking to each other. He has called for people of good will to be bridge-builders. I have said before and will say again that I fully agree with the ongoing need for everyone to continue to talk to each other. Lesgays have been saying for decades "talk TO us, not ABOUT us". I hope that this dialogue will begin to make lesgays more at home in what is, after all, their church too. To date, Integrity/Toronto has received no invitation to participate. Bishop Finlay, writing in the May issue of *The Anglican*, announced a committee to seek submissions from scholars and documentation from other Anglican dioceses. He said that this will be a time-consuming process, but that he is committed to it. I am glad to hear that commitment. I hope, however, that the process will not take too long, and that lesgays will be intentionally included at ALL stages of the process. It is our lives that the church is discussing here. We must keep moving and be seen to be moving. ======== [92-4-9] INTEGRITY'S ANNUAL RETREAT by Michelle Crawford-Bewley Eight members of Integrity Toronto enjoyed the annual retreat this year. Sister Thelma-Anne, of the Sisters of Saint John the Divine, led us through *The Easter Moment*, an earlier book by Bishop John Spong (available at ABC). It is a moving and compelling work, discussing the importance of the moment of Christ's resurrection to the Christian faith. The group used T- A's addresses as jumping-off points to talk about (and sometimes debate) topics like literalism, prayer and faith. While talking about Easter celebrations in the Church and the rituals that are a part of that celebration we focused on hope and faith rising out of the resurrection of Christ as a reality in our own lives. It was an emotional session as we focused on how current events in the church have touched us and affected our hope, for good or ill. All was not serious though; we threw our annual wine and cheese party for the sisters, which was a great success (especially since the group managed to avoid devouring all the food before the nuns arrived). We all benefited from the tranquillity of the convent and all found it difficult to leave, but Bonnie and Alice were particularly hard to move: they refused to leave until they had finished the jigsaw puzzle they started on Friday night. The retreat was energising and inspirational. Come along next year and experience it for yourself. ======== End of volume 92-4 of Integrator, the newsletter of Integrity/Toronto copyright 1992 Integrity/Toronto comments please to Chris Ambidge, Editor chris.ambidge@utoronto.ca OR Integrity/Toronto Box 873 Stn F Toronto ON Canada M4Y 2N9