Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 18:26:44 -0500 From: Chris Ambidge Subject: Integrator 98-6 INTEGRATOR, the newsletter of Integrity/Toronto volume 98-6, issue date 1998 12 18 copyright 1998 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 == [98-6-1] A VERY MIXED EVENT / Bishop Terry Brown of Malaita, Solomon Islands, on the Lambeth Conference 1998 [98-6-2] RECLAIMING THE BIBLE / Sister Thelma-Anne ssjd's regular column "Ways of Prayer" [98-6-3] NEWS FROM THE PRAIRIES / The Rev Bob Webster reports in from the Diocese of Rupert's Land [98-6-4] AS UNJUST AS APARTHEID -- Archbishop Desmond Tutu on equal treatment for lesbians and gays / by Chris Ambidge ======= [98-6-1] A VERY MIXED EVENT Bishop Terry Brown writes to *Integrator* about the 1998 Lambeth Conference -- and Anglican perspectives on homosexuality in the North and the South. Solomon Islands November 1998 Dear Readers of *Integrator*: The editor has asked me to write a short reflection on the Lambeth Conference, especially the sexuality issue. I have waited a while before replying as I am still sorting out my views. I find the whole matter extremely complex, particularly coming from my perspective as a bishop in Melanesia, a Canadian and a human being. From the perspective of the Church of Melanesia, a Lambeth decision to bless or even recognise the gracefulness of active homosexual partnerships would have meant a fair level of chaos. I returned home to a rapidly spreading rumour, spread by a local fundamentalist sect, that the Anglican Church has now approved "homosexual marriage" and that prominent evangelists have been leaving the Anglican Church because of this -- and urging Diocese of Malaita Anglicans to do the same. On this issue, the "northern" churches have moved quite quickly in the last ten years and "southern" churches are in a very different space. I think this is the sense in which many of the Asian Anglican bishops would have preferred the homosexuality issue not have been on the agenda at all. Family life and marriage are under enormous threat in the south from globalisation, poverty, ethnic strife, persecution, and so on, and from that perspective, the amount of time spent on homosexuality may not really have warranted it, especially considering the outcome. Perhaps this issue is a matter for the local church to decide -- that is, following the principle of subsidiarity (that decisions should be taken at the lowest appropriate level possible) -- a theological concept endorsed at this Lambeth but not adhered to in the sexuality debate. Since the majority of bishops were not prepared (nor were their people prepared) for a resolution endorsing or promoting active same-sex relationships or unions, it was possible for the most conservative of the bishops (including, I am sorry to say, the Archbishop of Canterbury, at least on this issue) to push the whole conference to quite a conservative position, since the only other option seemed to be positive endorsement. Here the media played an extremely devious role, constantly featuring interviews with the most inflammatory and controversial bishops on both sides of the issue, constantly highlighting the possibility of the Conference breaking apart in shambles. I found myself especially annoyed at bishops (whether conservative or radical) who seemed constantly to be in the media promoting their position, rather than being present in the Conference, listening and sharing. In this area, I am afraid I think that Bishop Spong did more harm than good. Another factor was the enormous amount of printed material on homosexuality being fed into the bishops' mailboxes from groups of all perspectives. (Ironically, bishops were not allowed to know each others' room numbers for security reasons, making communication very difficult, but any Tom-Dick-or-Harry could send a mailing to all the bishops.) Some of the material was extremely scurrilous and inaccurate (for example, one group claiming that gay men commonly put live rodents up their anuses!) and extremely misleading to anyone coming from cultures where homosexuality is not common or recognised. Eventually bishops were so flooded with conflicting material (mailings, panel discussions, the daily newspapers, picketing, the Lambeth newspaper) that they reverted to their largely heterosexual instincts, simply to be prudent. As a Canadian Anglican (perhaps I should say, as a former Canadian Anglican) I support faithful same-sex relationships. However, I am also aware that this position is too radical for the Church of Melanesia and cannot really be put into practice here, although my fellow bishops have not disowned me for holding the position, realising that I am coming from a quite different culture and personal experience than themselves. There is also the awareness that the Church of Melanesia has had a lot of gay missionaries over the past 150 years. Therefore my official and personal positions are somewhat different, though, I hope, not totally disconnected. (And not just on this issue, I might add: this Province does not yet ordain women.) In explaining the Lambeth resolution to the diocese, I have been talking about both positions, since I really do have one foot in each culture and am prepared to respect both. Ironically, my ''no" vote on the resolution seems to be well-enough respected in the Diocese (at least it is not an issue) -- whether from my more liberal position (the final resolution was Biblicist, unpastoral and partly motivated by hatred, especially the amendments) or a conservative position (the matter should never have been discussed in the first place). However, the Lambeth resolution is having the positive effect of actually forcing the Diocese to discuss homosexuality, which is present here. Personally (perhaps I should say, as a sexual person), I found the whole Lambeth discussion on homosexuality disappointing. Dirty politics, the refusal to listen, stereotyping, bad theology, colonialism, neo-colonialism, manipulation, grandstanding, sheer hatred, were all present. I would have expected a certain largesse of spirit and equanimity from the Archbishop of Canterbury, but it was not present. In the end, I was one of the 70 who voted against the resolution for the reasons noted above. I have not signed the "Pastoral Statement to Lesbian and Gay Anglicans from Some Member Bishops of the Lambeth Conference" although I am appreciative of those who have. I would like to have some discussion of the Statement with the full Church of Melanesia Council of Bishops before making a decision. The letter shows much positive awareness, but I am a bit annoyed that the majority of those who have signed the statement are those who voted for the resolution. I would rather vote "no" (which I did) and not apologise than vote "yes" and apologise afterwards. It is the oppression of gay and lesbian persons followed by the quick apology that I am not very happy with. In preparing this piece for *Integrator*, I have had a conversation with our Primate, Archbishop Ellison Pogo, about my reflections. (In preparation for Lambeth, I wrote a long study paper for our Council of Bishops on homosexuality, including the Pacific context, so the subject is under ongoing discussion with us.) Archbishop Ellison asks that I also convey to you his unhappiness with the final outcome of the discussion at Lambeth. He comments that the debate should have ended in some healing and reconciliation but that the end result produced only more division and pain. The inability of the Archbishop to show balance and equanimity on this issue (and, I would say, his active manipulation of the process) in the end produced more division than unity. I think something along the lines of the March 1995 Statement of the Primates would have been much better: Around the world serious questions relating to human sexuality are being faced by the Church. The traditional response to these questions is to affirm the moral precepts which have come down to us through the tradition of the church. Nevertheless, we are conscious that within the Church itself there are those whose pattern of sexual expression is at variance with the received Christian moral tradition, but whose lives in other respects demonstrate the marks of genuine Christian character. The issues are deep and complex. They do not admit of easy, instant answers. A careful process of reflecting on contemporary forms of behaviour in the light of the scriptures and the Christian moral tradition is required. We have to recognise that there are different understandings at present among Christians of equal commitment and faith. We invite every part of the church to face the questions about sexuality with honesty and integrity. As a follow-up to this excellent statement, the Lambeth Conference and the Archbishop of Canterbury failed. I hope these comments are helpful. Altogether, I found Lambeth a very mixed event -- with worship, Bible study and meeting old friends the high points and the quality of the theological discussion and the sexuality debate the low points. After all the unpleasantness of Lambeth, it was a joy to return here. I have found being a bishop in Melanesia a very happy experience, a rather incredible web of commitment, ministry, friendship and intimacy. Looking after some 35,000 Anglicans -- 36 parishes of 320 congregations, 50 clergy, four religious communities of 10 households, a lay training centre, a clinic and a diocesan office -- is a lot of work. However, I also have incredible help and support. I hope you will continue to pray for me and our Diocese, as I pray for you. Faithfully +Terry The Rt Rev Terry Brown Bishop of Malaita Church in the Province of Melanesia Solomon Islands, South Pacific = = = = = = Author box: The Rt Rev Terry Brown is now Bishop of Malaita in the Solomon Islands in the south Pacific. Before his election there, he was Asia-Pacific co-ordinator for Partners in Mission for the Anglican Church of Canada. When a resident of Toronto, he celebrated the Eucharist for Integrity/Toronto on several occasions, and his sermons at those events have been published in *Integrator*. Bishop Brown's letter arrived in early November, after the last issue had gone to press. In the article, he said he was not at that time prepared to sign the *Pastoral Statement to Lesbians and Gays from some Lambeth Bishops*. In late November, we learned that both Bishop Brown and his Primate, Archbishop Ellison Pogo of Central Melanesia, have added their signatures to that letter. The total now stands at 185, with 14 provinces of the Communion and 9 Primates represented. ======== [98-6-2] RECLAIMING THE BIBLE Sister Thelma-Anne ssjd's regular column "Ways of Prayer" In a climate in which the Bible is still used against lesbian and gay Christians , it is time to reclaim the Bible as our home and our rightful heritage. Too often, we have let ourselves be seduced into regarding it as enemy territory. We have either gone in warily or have been afraid to enter at all, in dread that if we do, we will experience once again, and at an ultimate level, the rejection that has been such a constant part of our lives. And so we have allowed this rejection to undermine the basic hope and trust which alone ca n enable us to approach God through the scriptures. It is time that we took back the Bible. It is time we refused to let anyone persuade us that we are outside the kingdom. As baptised Christians, we are already inside. If you are worried about proof texts, try these: "There is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus", and "All that the Father gives me will come to me, and those who come to me I will in no wise cast out." It is curious that in all the to-ing and fro-ing around the Bible and homosexuality, so little is said about prayer as the expression of a living relationship with God. Yet prayer is the one way in which we can reclaim the Bible as our home and our rightful heritage. In this article, I want to look at two sources of help very different at first sight but with real commonality. That commonality is a here-and-now, intimate, two-way, talking-and-listening relationship with Jesus, and both find the primary food for nourishing that relationship through praying the scriptures. The other day, I received an article by Canon Gray Temple, who is active in the charismatic movement in the Episcopal Church, USA. I was intrigued, to say the least. I have always identified the charismatic movement with a rigidly anti-gay stance. As I read, however, I got a different picture. Canon Temple was writing on behalf of gay charismatic Christians who "know Jesus real well and pray more than many of us," who have received the Holy Spirit, "complete with tongues yet remained homoerotically oriented", and who "lead lives as orderly as our own, [whose] deepest relationships manifest the same grace as our own marriages." Canon Temple suggests that charismatics are in a particularly strong position to respond to the challenge posed by the gay Christians in their midst. Charismatics "have committed [their] hearts and lives deliberately to Jesus Christ ... know him personally ... regularly sense his risen Presence ... have been filled and renewed by the same Holy Spirit who animated Jesus' ministry, and ... apply the Gifts of the Spirit to real life. " Charismatics "value the Bible as God's conversation-starter" and are committed to a "life submitted to a personal God in searching, listening prayer." I read how Canon Temple himself, the first time he celebrated the Eucharist for an Integrity chapter, heard Christ say to him, ''Look around you; this room is part of the Kingdom." "I looked at the congregation again with fresh eyes and it was so." As I finished the article, I felt I had heard the liberating word of the gospel in a new and powerful way. Shackles of fear that were already loosening simply dropped off. That "loosening" has come through the other source of help I want to talk about. The charismatic movement and Ignatian spirituality seem strange bedfellows. There is, however, a strong commonality between the kind of prayer Canon Temple describes and the spirituality of St. Ignatius of Loyola, as interpreted and developed by Jesuits and others in recent years. Both focus on a living relationship with Jesus, fostered through encountering him in the scriptures. For about two years, I have been in spiritual direction with a Jesuit- trained religious sister. It has taken that long for me to get the picture, to begin to move beyond self-absorption and fear, and learn to contemplate Jesus in the gospels. In Ignatian contemplation, a gospel passage is, in fact, "God's conversation-starter". At its simplest, we familiarise ourselves with a passage of scripture, typically an incident in the gospel record. We settle into quiet and prayerful attitude. Slowly and prayer fully, we re-read the passage. We notice whether we identify with anyone in the scene or are attracted to any particular words, feelings, memories, desires or thoughts. We listen and reflect on them for a few moments. Is God trying to say something to us? We talk to God about what we experience, or about anything else that is alive in us. If we experience none of this, we talk to God about that. At the end, we make a brief review of our prayer. Desire and affectivity play a crucial part in Ignatian contemplation. At the beginning of the prayer, we ask ourselves what we most desire from God, and we pray for that particular grace. For example, we may ask that we may pay attention to Jesus as he reveals himself in the scripture passage, or that we may truly experience God's love and acceptance. As we go deeper, we get in touch with the reality of our feelings and desires and find courage to express them openly. This is important; if we block our true feelings, thinking that they are inappropriate, our prayer, too, will be blocked. In this prayer, we let God be God, not our projection of God, and we let ourselves be our real selves before God. Prayer such as I describe doesn't necessarily change opinions, but it does change hearts. It opens us one to another and offers the only hope there is for a church as divers e and divided as ours. Canon Temple suggests that in being charismatic (and this would be true, I believe, for any tradition which fosters authentic prayer), we do not cease to be liberal, Anglo-Catholic or evangelical, but we learn to put "God before Party." "Furthermore, all those parties get along fine as long as we're all facing the Throne of God in adoration. What's determinative is the personal connection with the heart of God." ======== [98-6-3] NEWS FROM THE PRAIRIES *The Rev Bob Webster reports in from the Diocese of Rupert's Land* We had our diocesan Synod in October at which our Bishop included some extensive comments about Lambeth. In addition to several useful insights, he made these observations: "Back to Lambeth. I had assumed that the main concern of the Conference would be for the starving and oppressed of the world, and the injustice of the economic systems. Rather, it became apparent that many who were representing those suffering populations were more intent on doing battle over another issue -- human sexuality, specifically homosexuality. The debate was at times ugly, and unseemly. One African bishop shocked me by shouting, "I'm not going to talk to sinners" when an English bishop pleaded for dialogue and pastoral concern. Where was Jesus in that outburst of hate and fear? Pleas for sensitivity fell on deaf ears. As one Canadian bishop remarked, our debate in the Canadian House of Bishops is open, frank and loving; but that was not evident in a debate which was largely immature and premature. "I would hope that we would respect the guidelines of our own House of Bishops while continuing to enter into frank dialogue with our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters. I endorse the pastoral letter to lesbian and gay Anglicans which apologises for "any sense of rejection," and expresses the hope that they do "not feel abandoned" by their church. The letter goes on to say that though we may not agree on what "full inclusion" means, "we will continue t reflect, pray, and work for full inclusion in the life of the Church." We have much to learn, and much to gain, from respectful dialogue. I would hope that this Synod might facilitate such a caring process." This gave rise to a motion which was passed and referred to the national bodies named: "A3 RESOLVED THAT this Synod expresses its appreciation to our Bishop, the General Synod of the Anglican Church of Canada, and the Canadian House of Bishops in developing their guidelines and for their important word in assisting the Church in its frank dialogue with our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters; and we encourage the Bishop to continue the important work of providing opportunities for dialogue in the area of human sexuality in the diocesan community." At a subsequent meeting of the clergy, called by the Bishop, a decision was made to engage in a process of sharing and discussion among the clergy. It was felt to be important that the atmosphere be one which would not force people to share beyond their comfort level and would therefore probably need an outside facilitator. It is a hopeful sign to me that we can begin talking to each other personally. May God bless our efforts to be open and loving with one another and show us a way through the polarising effects of this issue. Peace and Joy to all Bob = = = = = = [Author Box: THE REV BOB WEBSTER is the rector of St Mary Magdalene's church in Winnipeg. He was part of the Integrity team at General Synod this past Spring in Montreal. He was too modest to mention here that this was the third year he's put up an Integrity display at the Rupert's Land diocesan synod, complete with the pamphlets we had at General Synod, and giveaway "fruit drops" candy.] ======== [98-6-4] AS UNJUST AS APARTHEID For Archbishop Desmond Tutu, equal treatment for lesbians and gays is "a matter of human rights and a deeply theological issue" by Chris Ambidge Desmond Tutu, retired Archbishop of Cape Town, is one of the outstanding people of our age. He was a leading figure in the ultimately successful battle against apartheid, and received the Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of his work. Archbishop Tutu has long been an advocate of equal treatment for lesbians and gays, and bases his position very firmly on the Gospel. As long ago as 1990, speaking to the General Conference of the United Church of Canada in London, Ontario, he said: "Christians have no option but to defend the rights of all the oppressed, including homosexuals.... Our faith cannot allow this [oppression] to happen." The Archbishop nominally retired a couple of years ago, but has not been idle by any means. Much of his time has been spent as Chair of South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which recently delivered its report. In late November, he toured North America, and reiterated calls for equal treatment of gays and lesbians. One of the first stops in his journey was at a Peace Rally for young people in Denver. When a student asked Tutu what injustice he would most want to reverse, he gave a surprising answer. "Will you give me two?" he said with a grin. First, Tutu called on world leaders to forgive the mounting debts owed by developing nations. Then he said the persecution of homosexuals is as unjust as apartheid. "Sexual orientation is just like race," Tutu said. "People do not decide to be gay any more than they decide to be black or white." He went on to condemn the killing of Matthew Shepard in Wyoming in October. "For me it's a matter of human rights and a deeply theological issue," Tutu said. "I believe they are as much God's children as anyone.... I can't be part of a scheme for clobbering them." The Archbishop then came to Canada, and stopped to receive an honorary doctorate from Bishop's University in Lennoxville PQ en route to a Human Rights conference in Edmonton. In an interview for CBC Montreal, he was asked if he thought there were analogous situations to apartheid in Canada today. He thought for a second, and then replied that discrimination against gay people because of who they are was the same as discrimination against blacks in South Africa: in both cases people were being oppressed and discriminated against because of a state into which they were born. The words of a man of such stature as Archbishop Tutu, who bases his call not only on human rights arguments but on the Gospel imperative, is deeply supportive, and something for which Integrity gives daily thanks. *with files from Planet Out News, the Rocky Mountain News, and CBC* === end of text === End of volume 98-6 of Integrator, the newsletter of Integrity/Toronto copyright 1998 Integrity/Toronto comments please to Chris Ambidge, Editor chris.ambidge@utoronto.ca OR Integrity/Toronto Box 873 Stn F Toronto ON Canada M4Y 2N9 --=====================_914905604==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" -- -- Chris Ambidge chris.ambidge@utoronto.ca Integrity/Toronto http://www.kapn.tap.net/integrity Integrity is a member of the Alliance of Lesbian & Gay Anglicans http://www.alga.org --=====================_914905604==_--