Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 18:55:10 -0400 From: Chris Ambidge Subject: *Integrator* files for 1995 INTEGRATOR, the newsletter of Integrity/Toronto volume 95-1, issue date 1995 02 15 copyright 1995 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 == [95-1-1]BUILDING BRIDGES --- CROSSING BRIDGES / an account of bridge-building meetings held at St Clement's Eglinton, by KD Miller [95-1-2]YOU DON'T HEAR UNLESS YOU LISTEN / by Chris Ambidge [95-1-3]*HEARING DIVERSE VOICES* FOUND WANTING, BUT PARISH SUPPORT ASTOUNDS AND EMPOWERS / by Ron Chaplin [95-1-4]THEY HUDDLE FOR WARMTH -- WE FEEL FROZEN OUT / John Gartshore attended the Anglican Essentials conference, and sent us this report [95-1-5]SCRIPTURE DOES *NOT* OFFER US SIMPLE ANSWERS / South African bishops issue a pastoral letter on human sexuality ======== [95-1-1] BUILDING BRIDGES --- CROSSING BRIDGES > In November of last year, the church of St Clement, Eglinton, held > two "meetings to continue its leadership role in bringing about an > understanding of homosexuality." They considered the kinds of > initiatives that can help us move to becoming more welcoming and > accepting, and thereby progress from being "bridge builders" to > "bridge crossers". St Clement's parishioner and regular contributor > to *Integrator* KD Miller chairs the subcommittee which organised > the two-week series. This is her account of the meetings. At some point, things tend to get personal. Issues linking sex and religion are no exception. Whether we are straight or gay, promiscuous, celibate or somewhere in between, such issues hit us where we live. My own Anglicanism was for years convenient, comfortable and cerebral. Then the Jim Ferry story hit the papers, and I haven't been comfortable in church since. It is 23 November 1994. Jim Ferry is sitting a few feet away from me in the reception room of St Clement's Eglinton. In company with members of the Ad Hoc Committee and other invited guest speakers, we are having sherry and sandwiches before going upstairs to Canon Nicholson Hall to present the second part of a two-evening series *Building Bridges / Crossing Bridges.* For a moment I consider telling Jim that he's the one who got me up off my comfortable pew. Then I decide not to. It's too personal for here and now. Best to do it in the thank -you note I'll send him. Oh God. Thank you notes. Something else to remember. I wish I was holding my clipboard, instead of this sherry glass. And, no offence meant to the guest, I wish for the second time in two weeks that I was upstairs with Sue and Brian and Penelope and Tony and the other members of the Faith and Sexuality Committee. I'm not entirely comfortable being the Chair. It's not something I sought out. If I have a talent in life, it's for standing in spots where holes are just about to open up. So I'd rather be testing microphones. Sharpening pencils. Making coffee. Putting question cards and evaluation forms on each chair. Arranging the book and literature tables. Actually doing some of the hundreds of joe-jobs for which I, sipping sherry and making conversations with the guests, will be thanked. + + + "It is very affirming to me, as a gay man, that this kind of thing can happen in an Anglican church." I scribble this quote down, along with so many others Weeks later, while writing this article, I realise that I have failed to note the speaker, and start to slap my forehead. Then I stop. Does it really matter who said it? No. The simple fact of this kind of educational series being presented and well attended in an Anglican church is affirming to us all, gay and lesbian and straight. The mere effort is remarkable. The effort of the Ad Hoc Committee, presenters of this and so many other series. The effort of the audience who listen and question and argue. The effort of the coffee- makers and the mike- testers. And yes, my effort too. Because lately I have been struggling with cynicism. I believe in what I am helping to do. But will I still be doing it five, ten or even twenty years from now? Will educational series on homo- sexuality become an end in themselves, like food banks? How many guest speakers will it take? How many cups of coffee? Literature tables? Sharpened pencils? + + + "I'm on the bridge, trying to learn." Another undocumented quote scribbled down on my notepad. I think this one must have come from the audience. I can't even remember if the speaker was male or female. Again, it doesn't matter. The words are from the heart. And they touch on something. Every one of our speakers has mentioned struggle. Caroll Jewitt, of P-FLAG, says she was "a refugee from reality" when her daughter came out. She concludes "I can't believe I've come this far." Peter Garnsworthy relates how he had to work through his own homophobia. For him, coming out eventually meant the freedom to feel; but that freedom was not without price. Harry Meanwell, father of a gay son, tells of his and his wife Elizabeth's struggle to reject what they had been taught was the Bible's condemnation of homosexuality. Willem Hart, Ad Hoc Committee Chair, admits that he was brought up homophobic. It took him years to realise that gay people were "as normal as I was." Ann Barrett recalls that in her youth, discussion of homosexuality was limited to innuendoes and jokes she didn't "get". Now, as a sexual educator in North Toronto public schools, she works daily with children who in effect ask her, "Please help me sort out my feelings about these people. Is it okay? Is it normal?" John Russell, of the AIDS Committee of Toronto, lists the ordinary, garden-variety civil rights that are out of his and his partner's reach. He concludes, "It's time we stopped calling each other names and started living with each other secure in the knowledge of God's love." A tall order, for some. Because the struggle continues. A Fidelity member approaches the questioner's microphone and reminds us that this is not a morally indifferent issue. He admits he is not yet willing to change his thinking the way modern theologians want him to, then asks "is there room in the church for someone like me?" Is there room for any of us? Or will the wineskin burst? Jim Ferry speaks, with remarkable lack of bitterness, of the conspiracy of silence that allows some gay clergy to function as priests, while he himself is inhibited from doing so. He lists some action programme models that the conspiracy has helped bring into being. He admits that although he has found unconditional welcome in places like Christos MCC in Toronto, or The Oasis in Newark, New Jersey, he does not want to be ghettoised. Still, he concludes, where else but a ghetto would Jesus be? + + + I am part of the conspiracy of silence. I helped to build the ghetto. Earlier this year, I attended a same-sex wedding. It included a Eucharist, celebrated by an Anglican priest. It was held in what I will refer to as a religious setting. There. That's as far as I go, publicly, in describing a very beautiful, deeply spiritual celebration that I was proud to attend. I don't name the building it took place in, the gender of the couple involved, or the name of the priest officiating. I hate the subterfuge. But I hate its necessity more. + + + "Until our relationships are blessed, we will not be fully welcome." The Reverend Brent Hawkes speaks about how a growing number of gay and lesbian people wan t long-term relationships and want to celebrate them within faith communities. When they are allowed to do the latter, Hawkes tells us, the result is frequently "an amazing celebration " remarkable for it's deep spirituality. It occurs to me suddenly that some of the most spiritually oriented people I have ever known have been gay and lesbian. These include not just people of faith, but artists and writers and actors. May I be forgiven if I am perpetuating a stereotype; but I think there may be something to this. Perhaps marginalisation brings us to the end of our spiritual rope in a way that is, ultimately, very positive. Time and again, over these two weeks, I have heard the process of coming out described in religious terms. An ex-nun has said that she was most aware of the Holy Spirit when she fell in love with another woman. Speaker after speaker has borne witness to personal growth an strengthened relationships as a result of having to grapple with homophobia, whether their own or others'. and this includes their relationship with God. Archbishop Ted Scott, former Primate of the Anglican Church of Canada, sums up by describing the futility of hurling conflicting Biblical texts at each other. He reminds us that unity does not have to mean uniformity, and our understanding of morality will grow as our understanding of God grows. + + + Well. Time to gather up the blunted pencils and wash the coffee cups and write the thank you notes. How *does* our understanding of God grow? There is a hint in one of the filled-out evaluation forms: "I am a member of Calvin Presbyterian Church at Yonge and St Clair. We desperately need this in our church. I have been trying quietly for about twenty years to inspire change. This evening has encouraged me to tread on a few toes and not be so gentle." ======== [95-1-2] YOU DON'T HEAR UNLESS YOU LISTEN by Chris Ambidge The position of lesbigays in the Anglican Church is certainly getting attention these days. There is a broad range of experience, thought and feeling on the matter. This issue of *Integrator* looks at three reactions: KD Miller reports on how an accepting parish is looking to move beyond bridge building. At the other end of the spectrum, people at the November *Anglican Essentials* conference in Toronto spoke of "not giving in" to those who want full acceptance, feeling that to do so would be to jeopardise the essentials of the faith. John Gartshore went to the conference and found it less than welcoming. General Synod 1992 mandated a church-wide discussion, and had a task force come up with a curriculum which parishes could follow to become familiar with the issues. Ron Chaplin of Ottawa participated in *Hearing Diverse Voices; Seeking Common Ground,* and his review is also in this issue. I was on a Toronto diocesan task force two years ago, charged with producing a similar guide. Task force members came from all points along the bridge. I found it difficult to hold all viewpoints in tension: a document which says everything I want said would choke those across the bridge. The national church task force has made its aim clear from the title of the study: making all voices heard -- a difficult task for any one document. While I am pleased with the work that "my" (Toronto's) task force did, it was exceedingly frustrating. I have already *done* all sorts of biblical work, and I find it enervating to have to justify my position in the church yet again. I shouldn't have to. This has been my church since my baptism. Likewise, Ron did not find the curriculum helpful to him as a gay Christian. How will we hold all these people together in the same church? Or, as KD Miller asks, will the wineskin burst? I pray that it will not, but when I hear a bishop digging his heels in, saying the church won't move towards acceptance, I wonder. Of one thing I am certain: human beings cannot do this alone. We must not put our hands over our ears and shout at each other. All of us need to continue the dialogue, to continue building the bridges, to continue holding on to what we each feel to be of the essence of our faith, and to continue *listening*. We need to seek God's grace in our listening, to seek the guidance of the Spirit in our speaking, and to look for Jesus Christ in our family, the Church. ======== [95-1-3] *HEARING DIVERSE VOICES* FOUND WANTING, BUT PARISH SUPPORT ASTOUNDS AND EMPOWERS by Ron Chaplin Many gay men and lesbians have found a place within an Anglican church. This was my experience, once again, in participating at my home parish, St John the Evangelist in Ottawa, in a study group on the Anglican Church programme of study on homosexuality and homosexual relationships entitled *Hearing Diverse Voices; Seeking Common Ground*. Yes, I found out, there is a place for me, as a gay man, at St John's parish. The level of support of fellow parishioners for the struggle of gays and lesbians both astounded and empowered me. At the same time, the programme of study made me question whether there is a place for me and mine within the Anglican Church of Canada. The study programme was nothing if not "balanced". It did not so much explain differing points of view as it simply exposited them. The authors of the study guide went to great lengths to give equal emphasis to traditional teachings as to more contemporary perspectives. This being said, two of the six sessions of the study guide merit particular praise -- the first session which attempts to establish ground rules for individual study groups in order to encourage the most open and frank kinds of discussion; and the second session, which deals with current scientific understandings of sexual orientation. The readings for session four, which examined, from a social science perspective, the differences among ethics, individual morality and community morality were also interesting. With these caveats, what did I, as a gay Christian, feel about this study programme? I thought it to be a failure. As a gay Christian, this study programme did *not* lead me to ponder my role within the church. It made me ponder whether I was welcome at all. As someone raised in the Methodist tradition, I was dismayed by the lack of emphasis placed on the Holy Scriptures. Only one of the six study sessions focused on scripture. The familiar passages from Genesis, from Leviticus and from Paul's letters were lobbed out, accompanied by explanatory texts which were far from adequate. The impression was clearly created that the scriptures had to be somehow avoided; that gays and lesbians had to invoke a kind of "notwithstanding clause". I agree with those who assert that there is essentially no "sex ethic" in the Christian Bible -- that there is only a "love ethic". And this is where the study programme most profoundly disappointed me. One of the "purposes" outlined for the study programme was to "stimulate a broad discussion of the meaning of the Gospel for human sexuality,...." In this it clearly failed. For me, as a queer Christian, this programme of study offered... nothing. It neither defended nor denounced. It offered no guidance, no counsel. Its focus was single-minded -- not "human sexuality", but "homosexuality". Its focus was not "homosexual relationships", but "homosexuals". Frankly, I found the process demeaning. This document was written to deal with a political problem. It was not written to deal with a pastoral problem. And, vis-...-vis the gay and lesbian community, I for one believe the church is shirking its pastoral responsibilities. In closing, I would like to quote Bishop David Crawley, who spoke in one of the excellent video presentations that formed part of the study materials. The task of the church, as both individuals and as community, he said, is "to move from brokenness to fullness." Amen. ======== [95-1-4] THEY HUDDLE FOR WARMTH / WE FEEL FROZEN OUT John Gartshore attended the Anglican Essentials conference, and sent us this report On Jan 28, over 300 persons attended an all-day conference, titled *Anglican Essentials -- Toronto*, at St Paul's Bloor St. The flyer said that it was a "Conference for all Anglicans, celebrating our unity in Christ". It was, in fact, a conference for only *some* Anglicans, not all, and plainly intended to created disunity in the church. One speaker (a bishop) even charged that the church's leadership was taking the church where it didn't want to go, and added defiantly, "and where it *won't* go!" I thought I had wandered into some kind of unelected super-synod, where $30 bought you a vote. The tone of the conference presumed that only Anglicans of a conservative bent would attend. That was to be expected, but it made a terrifying space for a person such as me. I'm glad to report that one of the organisers, knowing where I come from, was sensitive to my discomfort, and offered his support, including some warm hugs. One speech which bothered me especially was an intense attack on the use of experience, along with the usual standards of Scripture, Tradition and Reason. The rest of the conference had a lot to say about Christians' experience of the Holy Spirit, experience of the world around us, experience of the twentieth-century Church (doctrinal and pastoral), and so on. The attack was uncalled-for, and revealed, early in the day, some of the bias which would ensue. The conference was a sequel to the "Essentials" event in Montreal last summer. Part of the handout was a book *Anglican Essentials* (edited by George Egerton, ABC 1995) which resulted from that event. I recommend that anyone involved in Anglican politics today read the book, as it reveals the organised position being taken by one school of thought -- by no means all people -- in the Church. The book is carefully put together, as was this conference, and many of the writers and speakers are very articulate. My impression, after attending as much of the conference as I could stomach, and reading some articles from the book, is that *Anglican Essentials* is an organisation of persons -- a lot of them -- who are frightened at some trends in the church, and need to huddle together for warmth. I understand where they're coming from; lesbigay Christians have been huddling together for years. The manifesto reveals what just a few Anglicans consider "essential". This Anglican needs, not authoritarian, dogmatic leadership, but some kindly help in being a responsible member of the church, without fear of what dodge some Anglicans will pull next. ======== [95-1-5] SCRIPTURE DOES *NOT* OFFER US SIMPLE ANSWERS South African bishops issue a pastoral letter on human sexuality >Last November, the four bishops of Cape Town diocese in South Africa >issued a pastoral letter on human sexuality. Here are some excerpts: ...The first thing we would want to say is that, as Christians, we need to begin shouting from the housetops that sex is a wonderful gift from God to be enjoyed. We should put away from us for all time any suggestion that there is something dirty or unclean about it and we should certainly regard it as a topic worthy of discussion in our churches. After all, if sex really is a gift of God, why should we somehow regard it as wrong to talk and preach about it in His house? ... It would be worth asking why it is that Christians seem to regard sexual sins as being far worse than any others. Surely, if we could see things from God's point of view, we would come to regard sins like gossip, judgementalism, callous indifference to the suffering of others and many similar breaches of charity as being far more serious. Is it that we find it so hard to live with our own sexuality that we have to project a lot of our unease on to those who seem evidently to failed in this area of their lives?... Finally, allow us to address a related topic which is also one of crucial importance, namely, the way in which we as a church have educated those in our care. To be blunt, we have fed one another on milk and water. Life is an extremely complex business. It does not offer simple and safe solutions much as we might wish that it did. In the gospels, truth is almost always seen to be paradoxical truth, that is, a kind of balancing act between apparent opposites. Little children like, and probably need, answers in a fairly simple form but adults know life's questions do not evoke simple answers. In the church, however, we often seem to revert to the expectation of children. We seem to be needing security and certainty when none is available to us, except in God, this side of the grave. It would be wonderful if the church really could be infallible, but as Anglicans, we don't believe that. It would also be wonderful if the Bible could be treated as a text book offering easy solutions to every conceivable problem but the Bible doesn't work like that either. This is not to say that, as Christians and as Anglicans, we do not treat the Bible seriously. We do. But not even scripture itself says that the Bible is the Word of God, just like that. It says that JESUS is [the Word of God]. In other words, our faith is primarily in a person not in a book, however important that book may be. When, therefore, we are faced with serious ethical questions about human sexuality or anything else, we would be wise to avoid those proponents who would try to offer us, what might be called 'THE BIBLE SAYS' solution. Scripture has to be grappled with seriously under the guidance of the Holy Spirit and in a deep desire to be faithful to our Lord Jesus Christ if it is to help us in working through these questions. We would ask you to believe that those of us who are your leaders are seriously trying to do this with integrity. But certainly scripture does not offer us simple answers. As we begin, therefore, to think through the deep issues raised around the topic of Sexuality try to do so with openness and real maturity so that together we may hear what the Spirit is saying to the churches." Be assured of our love, prayer and deep support. Yours sincerely in Christ, +Desmond +Geoffrey +Edward +Merwyn === end of text === End of volume 95-1 of Integrator, the newsletter of Integrity/Toronto copyright 1995 Integrity/Toronto comments please to Chris Ambidge, Editor chris.ambidge@utoronto.ca OR Integrity/Toronto Box 873 Stn F Toronto ON Canada M4Y 2N9