Date: Wed, 5 Apr 95 17:33:08 EDT From: "James D. Anderson" MORE LIGHT UPDATE February 1993 Presbyterians for Lesbian & Gay Concerns James D. Anderson, Communications Secretary P.O. 38 New Brunswick, NJ 08903-0038 908/249-1016, 908/932-7501 (Rutgers University) FAX 908/932-6916 (Rutgers University) Internet: janderson@zodiac.rutgers.edu or jda@gandalf.rutgers.edu Note: * is used to indicate italicized; ** to indicate boldface text, and *** to indicate bolk italics. CHANGES Dick Hasbany, distributor of PLGC's More Light Churches video, Conferences Coordinator for the More Light Churches Network, Co- coordinator for PLGC in the Synod of the Pacific, and a leader of PLGC/Oregon, has moved again! His new address is: Richard Hasbany, 337 NE 54th, Seattle, WA 98105, phone 206/525-1536. Cleve Evans, "Our Man in Omaha," has moved down the hall from Apartment 26 to Apartment 22. Mark your address lists! Evelyn Davidson -- We mourn the passing of Evelyn Davidson, "God mother" to all of us in PLGC since the beginning and partner to Bob Davidson, pastor of West-Park Church in New York City -- our first More Light Church. Evelyn died on Sunday, December 13, 1992. Evelyn is our Moses. She worked for and yearned to see the promised day when our divided church would reunite to include all believers as full members and participants. She did reach the mountain top and saw that inclusive church down in God's valley of the future. It is now up to us to get there, for her, for all lesbian and gay persons, their families and friends, and for the church and Christ's sake. MISTAKES Don't Hang Up -- We goofed when we published Louie Crew's moving poem "Don't Hang Up" in the December 1992 *More Light Update* -- we left off Louie's name and the copyright statement (c) 1992 Louie Crews, All Rights Reserved! Sorry, Louie! Other Sheep -- Also in the December *Update*, the address for Other Sheep: Multi-Cultural Ministries with Sexual Minorities was wrong. It should have been: Other Sheep, 319 N. 4th St., Suite 902, St. Louis, MO 63102. The telephone is 314/241-2400. CONTENTS Presbyterian Apartheid: A Chronicle of Ignorance, Fear, and Hate Witchhunts Church leader rips Presbyterian ban on gay ministers The Decision: Excerpts from the PJC decisions against Lisa Larges and Janie Spahr Ending Apartheid: Recommendations from the Church-Wide Convocation of 500 in Chicago Wanderings in Grief and Rage, by Susan Kramer PLGC / PAN Activist Dies: John Hilberer PLGC Workshop & the March on Washington St. Louis Church Chooses More Light * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Presbyterian Apartheid A Chronicle of Ignorance, Fear, and Hate *We hope and pray that the present efforts of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) to exclude lesbian and gay Christians from full membership and participation will be the last gasp in the sad history of Christian apartheid, which, over the centuries, has excluded anyone who was different from those occupying the power structure of the church: slaves, people of color, women, and now people of gay, lesbian or bisexual orientation. We present here an overview of the current attempts of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) and its predecessor churches to get rid of its lesbian and gay members, drawing for the most part from a sermon preached by the Rev. Robert M. Davidson at West-Park Presbyterian Church, New York City, November 8, 1992. Davidson was Moderator of the 193rd General Assembly.* **17th century -- 1992**. In the late 17th Century, Galileo was condemned by the Inquisition for revealing the truth about the sun and the earth. Last week, the Pope exonerated Galileo from that condemnation -- as if he needed that exoneration. Last week, Rev. Janie Spahr was condemned by the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission because of her public affirmation that her sexuality was expressed with another woman. **1974**. The Rev. Dr. Jane Adams Spahr was ordained a minister in the United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. **1976**. The question arose as to whether Lesbian and Gay people could be ordained. [Of course the church had been ordaining lesbian, gay, and bisexual Christians for millennia -- the only change was the growing openness and honesty about sexuality and sexual orientation. -- JDA] The General Assembly appointed a Task Force on Homosexuality to look into that question. The steps that led to the creation of this Task Force began in New York City Presbytery when a man named Bill Silver, who was about to be ordained, felt that the Presbytery should know that he was a gay man. So he told Presbytery's Committee on Examinations, and they asked the General Assembly for definitive guidance. The General Assembly, somewhat shook up by that question, appointed its Task Force. I volunteered to serve, feeling that the father of a Lesbian daughter could bring some human perspective to the work of the task force. We had our theological and biblical professors on the task force, we had other pastors, we had a medical doctor whose specialty was human sexuality. It was a well-rounded task force bringing together a great deal of insight. **1978**. After a two-year study, the Task Force produced a document that analyzed Scripture, the theological position of the church, modern insights. The Task Force recommended to General Assembly that there be no barrier to the ordination of Lesbian and Gay people. As happens with Task Force recommendations, they went to a committee of the General Assembly meeting that year. That committee, in what I judge to be near hysteria, accepted the whole report and all but two of the paragraphs of recommendations. They reversed the key recommendation and they, in the most important of these recommendations, said that it would not be well to ordain people who were Lesbian and Gay to be deacons, elders or ministers. Some were troubled by the apparent fact that that report would be accepted by the Assembly, and there was an amendment from the floor, adopted by a voice vote, but clearly by a very strong vote, that said that nothing in this report shall adversely affect those already ordained. Janie Spahr, you will remember, was ordained four years earlier in 1974. I was present at that Assembly and it was a sad experience. Perhaps the saddest of all was my discussion with a minister from another Presbytery who said he felt he should vote against the report of the Assembly's committee but if he did so, it would cost him his job. And so he told me that he was going to vote "yes" and recommend that Lesbian and Gay people not be ordained as officers in the Presbyterian Church. Ignorance is Bliss *We interrupt Bob Davidson's chronology to look at the the level of knowledge, or ignorance, that led to the 1978 "definitive guidance" and whether the framers of that policy and the commissioners to the 1978 General Assembly intended it to be binding on governing bodies of the church.* Ignorance, especially combined with fear, leads to prejudice, bigotry and discrimination. For many, the most telling line in the entire policy statement is: "Therefore, it appears that what is really important is not what homosexuality is but what we believe about it. Our understanding of its nature and causes is inconclusive." But despite this admission of ignorance, the Assembly did not hesitate to declare homosexuality sin ("homosexuality is not God's wish for humanity") and that persons guilty of "unrepentant homosexual practice" should not be ordained. Is Definitive Guidance binding? Just before the vote on the "definitive guidance" policy, The Rev. Thomas Gillespie, now president of Princeton Theological Seminary and then chairperson of the General Assembly committee that drafted the policy statement, made the following statement to the commissioners who adopted the 1978 policy statement: "When your son or daughter comes to you and asks for guidance, you should not respond by laying down the law. We propose, therefore, that this General Assembly not exercise its right to render a constitutional interpretation. We propose, rather, that it offer the 'definitive guidance' requested. . . . We believe this recommendation, if adopted, will provide this policy statement with more 'staying power' throughout the church than one which unnecessarily calls into question the constitutional rights of the presbyteries in the ordination process . . . ." (reprinted in *Church & Society at Eighty*, a special edition of *Church and Society*, 80:1, September/October 1989, p. 106-107). But, despite this clear intent, one man, William P. Thompson, then Stated Clerk of the General Assembly, declared the policy binding after the close of the General Assembly. **1984**. The Synod of the Northeast Permanent Judicial Commission declared this binding "definitive guidance" to be unconstitutional: "By its action in 1978, the General Assembly violated the constitutional power of each congregation to control the selection of its own officers for ordination, G-6.0107. The Church is committed to inclusiveness, G-9.0104, and segments of the membership can not be excluded except by constitutional amendment." [References are to sections in the Book of Order.] **1985**. The Permanent Judicial Commission of the General Assembly overturned the Synod decision and declared the More Light Church commitment of Westminster Presbyterian Church, Buffalo, New York, to be illegal. All the men on the commission except one voted to make the exclusion of lesbians and gays binding across the church; all the women except one opposed this ban, saying: "Such denial of access to church office is in direct opposition to an unequivocal provision of the current Book of Order (G- 5.0202) which states: 'An active member is entitled to all the rights and privileges of the church, including the right . . . to hold office.' "Whereas the Book of Order provides for a single category of active church membership, the General Assembly actions of 1978 and 1979 define a second category of membership, thereby effecting a fundamental change in the Constitution. The Book of Order declares that the *only* process whereby it may be amended is by way of an overture and vote by the presbyteries (G- 18.0301). To declare that the 'definitive guidance' . . . is mandatory when it stands in conflict with other sections of the Constitution is amendment by legislation and therefore unconstitutional. "We also believe that the decision of the majority contravenes constitutional guarantees related to inclusiveness, especially as set forth in G-5.0103: 'No persons shall be denied membership because of race, ethnic origins, worldly condition, or any other reason not related to profession of faith.' . . . "Also, the Book of Order makes it clear that theological positions of members may differ (G-4.0403), and the idea that unrepentant, self-affirming, practicing homosexual behavior is the only disqualifying sin the church has thus far specifically addressed, causes us to feel that this is the kind of discriminatory treatment we have been taught to abhor." **1987-1988**. The Book of Order is amended to give to the General Assembly and to the Permanent Judicial Commission the power to make binding decisions. The new amendment adds the following to the responsibilities of the General Assembly (G- 13.0103q): "To provide authoritative interpretation of the Book of Order which shall be binding on the governing bodies of the church when rendered in accord with G-13.0112 [prior referral to the Advisory Committee on the Constitution] or through a decision of its Permanent Judicial Commission in a remedial or disciplinary case. The most recent interpretation of a provision of the Book of Order shall be binding." Question: so why and how was the 1978 "definitive guidance" made binding? Because a few men, a very few!, said it was! **1992**. *We return to Bob Davidson's narrative:* Janie Spahr was called to the Downtown United Presbyterian Church of Rochester to be one of the co-pastors. The call was approved by the Presbytery of Genesee Valley. There was an appeal against that approval and the Synod Judicial Commission, by an overwhelming vote, with only one dissent, approved the action of Genesee Valley Presbytery. But when the General Assembly Judicial Commission met, the church equivalent of the Supreme Court, it voted with only one dissenting vote, not to approve the action of the Presbytery of Genesee Valley and the Downtown United Presbyterian Church of Rochester. Within that ruling was a shallow, quick look at Scripture, but the heaviest emphasis was on the necessity to preserve the unity of the church. Now, these words are not in that ruling but I believe that the commission was saying, "Throw Rev. Janie Spahr and the 10 percent of Presbyterians that are Lesbian and Gay to the howling wolves of prejudice." **Unity that is dependent on homophobia and grounded in fear is the true abomination.** The Judicial Commission turned aside the considered judgment of the local congregation that offered a call to Janie Spahr, the considered judgment of the Presbytery of Genesee Valley, the considered judgment of the Synod Judicial Commission and also the life and witness of Janie Spahr. I've read the decision and there is not one line of adverse judgment of her pastoral skills or her capacity as a minister. Those of us who know her know her to be a loving, caring pastor, meeting the needs of many not in the church and also a pastor to Lesbians and Gays alike, and to straights, within the entire church. The judgment against her and the Downtown Church, and the Presbytery of Genesee Valley and the Synod Commission does not say anything about her qualities of pastoral leadership. The Presbyterian Church, in its encounter with Janie Spahr and thousands like her, will discover that love is not a threat to faith. I know that she will be vindicated and I think we all know that. The history of the church's relationship with ethnic minorities, with the rights of women to participate in the life of the church, ran the same course: resistance to equal relationships, insistence that here and there there were portions of scripture that spoke against equality and finally the recognition that God's love was calling upon us for equal and full participation for ethnic minorities and for women within the life of the church. And so we know where we will come out but we don't know when. Galileo was right from the beginning. He was convicted of heresy by a fearful church. It took that branch of the church three centuries to recant the church's heresy. In the same way, a timid Presbyterian Church Judicial Commission can be wrong. There is too close a parallel between the actions of the Inquisition and the present day Presbyterian church's national leadership. Presumptuous General Assembly Judicial Commissions and all who promote hatred in the name of unity are much too close to the Inquisition and to the Pharisees with whom Jesus was in controversy. -- Robert M. Davidson. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Witchhunts *The PJC decision has laid a firm foundation for witchhunts, giving the green light to bigots who want to rid their church of gays and lesbians once and for all. Here are comments of the General Assembly Stated Clerk as recorded in the December 7 issue of *Monday Morning*, page 30:* James Andrews, Stated Clerk of the General Assembly, in a November 4 question-and-answer session with staff members in Louisville, observed that he was "not sure whether the decision would allow self-affirmed, practicing homosexuals to remain in their current positions" in ordained office. He suggested it might be possible for members of governing bodies to invoke the judicial process under such circumstances. Gene Williams, writing for @The Presbyterian Outlook@ (December 7-14, p. 4) points in the same direction: "Stated Clerk James Andrews implied the Spahr case could have even more far-reaching effects. During a question-and-answer session at the national offices in Louisville, Andrews was asked by Social Justice and Peacemaking Ministry Unit staff member Vernon Broyles if gays and lesbians would henceforth find it impossible to move from the jobs they have into other church positions. After a pause, Andrews answered: 'the reason I'm thinking about your question is that I'm not sure they can retain their current calls. The might be liable to the judicial process.'" * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Church leader rips Presbyterian ban on gay ministers *This was the headline in the November 18, 1992 issue of *The Times* of Trenton, New Jersey, page A2, and the "church leader" was John Fife, Moderator of the General Assembly. We quote from the story by Tracey L. Regan.* The Presbyterian Church's recent ruling forbidding the ordination of avowed homosexuals is an "untenable policy" that will hasten a move toward a new openness, according to the Rev. John Fife, the new moderator of the church's general assembly and a spokesman for the church world-wide. "The decision is a blow to those of us who felt the church was moving, albeit slowly, in the direction of inclusion," said Fife, who spoke yesterday at a forum at the Princeton Theological Seminary after preaching at a morning service. "But I predict it will be a catalyst," he added. Fife had met the night before with students on the seminary campus who held a service of "grieving, healing and solidarity" in response to the church's Nov. 2 ruling . . . . There, he read a letter he had written to Spahr after the decision, describing her call to the ministry as a "shining ray of hope." . . . [Fife] said his role as spokesman for the church did not preclude disagreement on the issues. He vowed, in fact, to continue speaking in favor of local authority in decisions of ordination, and did not rule out more activist measures if the church proved inflexible. The recent decision, for example, requires that the church inquire about potential pastors' sexual orientation. "If we see our colleagues being inquired after, we may have to join them. We may have to wear the gold star, and say, 'I have to 'fess up. I'm gay,'" said Fife, who is married. Fife said that although he believe 70 percent of Presbyterians were relieved by the decision, and did not want to make a blanket acceptance of homosexuals in the ministry, he thought most did not want to rule them out categorically. "I think the fact that I was elected moderator, even after expressing my views, is just another sign that people feel uncomfortable with that," he said. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * A Declaration of Conscience *Many Presbyterians are expressing profound concern regarding the recent General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission's decision in the cases of the Rev. Jane Adams Spahr and Lisa Larges -- and in a larger sense, are concerned about the direction Assembly decisions have taken since 1978. A national network of concerned Presbyterians recently gathered in San Francisco to begin an organized strategy for changing the tide. . . . Three participants, Howard Rice, Bear Ride Scott, and Lorna Shoemaker, took on the task of composing a "Declaration of Conscience," which is being circulated widely among Presbyterians. Everyone is encouraged to reproduce and distribute this "Declaration" and to collect the names of Presbyterians who would like to be identified with this effort. Please gather the names (along with congregational/presbytery affiliation and status as clergy, elder, deacon, or member) and then mail them to Dr. Bear Ride Scott, 1325 N. College Ave., Claremont, CA 91711, 714/621- 9885, FAX 714/626-3265. Please put your name as "contact person" on the line provided in the "Declaration," and your phone number or address so folks can get their names back to you in a timely manner. We feel that this issue facing the church is extremely urgent, and must be handled immediately. We also hope, in so doing, to show our strong support for the Downtown United Presbyterian Church of Rochester, New York. May God's grace and peace go with us as we do what we are convinced is the work of the Sprit in our time! -- adapted from a letter from Howard Rice, Bear Ride Scott, and Lorna Shoemaker, November 1992.* Declaration of Conscience "The Church is called . . . to a new openness to its own membership, by affirming itself as a community of diversity, becoming in fact as well as in faith a community of women and men of all ages, races, and conditions, and by providing for inclusiveness as a visible sign of the new humanity." -- Book of Order, G-3.0401b. Presbyterians, by design and conviction, are a diverse people. For this we give thanks to God. We affirm that our diversity is a sign of our faithfulness. More important still, we believe that our diversity is a sign of *God's* faithfulness. God has created us with our own individualities and our own differences. We are called to inclusiveness. And we are convinced that it is by God's grace alone that we survive and thrive in this community which is the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Thankfully, our church polity is profoundly theological: we affirm our unity in the midst of diversity and admit that inherent in this double affirmation lies inevitable conflict and controversy. As Presbyterians we are called to exercise conscience and mutual forbearance, knowing that as we live, speak, and openly disagree *in community*, the mind of Christ is discerned. The Spirit continues to speak to our church. The Presbyterians whose names appear below are deeply troubled and offended by the silencing of so many of our sisters and brothers within our church. We find our consciences profoundly wounded by many actions of the General Assembly: -- We believe that the Assembly was wrong in 1978 to adopt as "definitive guidance" that "unrepentant homosexual practice does not accord with the requirements for ordination set forth in the Form of Government." -- We believe that subsequent decisions by the General Assembly's Permanent Judicial Commission were wrong in declaring that this "definitive guidance" is the legally binding interpretation for the church, thus superseding the Book of Order which clearly vests the session and presbytery with the power and responsibility to ordain men and women to the office of deacon, elder, and minister of Word and Sacrament. -- We believe that the most recent Permanent Judicial Commission's decisions -- first declaring that Lisa Larges is ineligible to be certified ready to receive a call, and second, that the Reverend Jane Adams Spahr does not "meet the requirements for ordination" (though she was ordained prior to the 1978 decision) and thus that the call issued by the Downtown United Presbyterian Church of Rochester, New York, be set aside - - are wrong and injurious to the local presbyteries whose responsibility it is to make those very judgments. -- We believe that to remain silent in the interest of preserving the "peace, unity, and purity" of the church is wrong. By dissenting, we hope to return the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) to "peace, unity, and purity," for while this injustice is permitted to stand, there is no peace, unity, or purity in our midst. We confidently affirm, as our Constitution suggests, that "synods and councils may err" -- and in this case, our denomination has erred greatly. When there is conflict between the requirements of peace, unity, and purity in the church (with its all-too-human tendency to err) and the ways and words of Jesus, we should respectfully attend to the ways and words of Jesus. Therefore, we call on the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) to prayerfully and with openness be faithful to our own standards and traditions: -- To be challenged by our diversity and recommit to our Presbyterian call to affirm diversity within our membership, and to delight in and celebrate "the variety displayed by human beings, a variety which includes shapes and colors and sexual orientations" (see *Dissent*, 1992 PJC); -- To re-examine issues of biblical interpretation, evidence from science, and the personal experience of Presbyterians; -- To hear once again, in this day, the challenge of God to "faithfully bring forth justice" (Isaiah 42:36) in both our church and world. Indeed, as Presbyterians we hold the civic community to a higher moral standard than we hold our church, insisting, in the words of the "definitive guidance," that individual Presbyterians "work for the passage of laws that prohibit discrimination in the areas of employment, housing, and public accommodations based on the sexual orientation of a person," while affording these same persons nothing more than a second-class membership in our own church; -- To call the church to a true repentance of its already identified sin of homophobia (see *The Church and Homosexuality*, General Assembly, 1978); -- To recommit ourselves to protect both the consciences and the freedoms of those who dissent, indeed, protecting their rights as if protecting the future of the church, "recognizing that the dissenter may well represent the will of God" (*Historic Principles, Conscience and Church Government, 195th General Assembly*). May God give us the grace to care enough about the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) and all its members that we might live into the hope of a more just and loving future. *If you wish to have your name attached to this Declaration, please inform your contact person listed here. Please include your name, congregation/presbytery membership, and your status in the Presbyterian Church (member, deacon, elder, or minister).* Contact Person:__________________________________________________ Address:_________________________________________________________ Phone:___________________________________________________________ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The Decision *We print here excerpts from the infamous Spahr and Larges decisions of the Permanent Judicial Commission.* The Lisa Larges Case (excerpts) HISTORY On June 24, 1986, the Presbytery of the Twin Cities Area acted to take Ms. Lisa Larges under care as a candidate for ordination to the office of Minister of Word and Sacrament. Throughout the candidacy process, she submitted all reports required of candidates and in all respects complied with her obligations as a candidate under care. During the course of her candidacy, she successfully passed all of the examinations for ordination promulgated by the Presbyteries' Cooperative Committee on Examinations for Candidates, except the examination for polity. This examination was waived by Presbytery, and this waiver was duly approved by the Synod of Lakes and Prairies. On February 28, 1991, in anticipation of her final interview with the Presbytery's Committee on Preparation for Ministry (COPM), she advised the COPM that she is a "Lesbian woman". On April 22, 1991, COPM voted to continue her as a candidate. This action was reported to Presbytery at its May, 1991, meeting. COPM's report did not disclose her communication concerning her sexual identity. On October 28, 1991, COPM voted to recommend that Lisa Larges be certified as ready to receive a call. On November 12, 1991, COPM reported to Presbytery that it had conducted the final assessment for Lisa Larges and that it recommended she be certified as ready to receive a call to the office of Ministry of the Word and Sacrament. The report also disclosed to Presbytery that Ms. Larges had informed COPM, prior to its April, 1991, meeting, that she is a lesbian. Presbytery voted to certify Ms. Larges as ready to receive a call. Complainants filed timely complaints alleging that the action of the Presbytery in certifying Lisa Larges as ready to receive a call was an irregularity and requested that the Synod of Lakes and Prairies order the Presbytery to rescind its action. After trial on June 24, 1992, the Synod Permanent Judicial Commission held that the "Definitive Guidance" issued by the General Assembly in 1978 applies to candidates for the ordained ministry. It ordered the Presbytery to rescind its certification. SPECIFICATIONS OF ERROR Appellant presents the following specifications of error: Specification 1. The Synod PJC erred in declaring ". . . [t]hat the Definitive Guidance of 1978 (Minutes of the 190th General Assembly of the United Presbyterian Church of the United States of America, pp. 261-266) applies to candidates." This specification is not sustained. Although the Policy Statement does not specifically refer to its application to candidates and the candidacy process, the candidacy process is intended to prepare and evaluate a candidate's qualifications for ordained ministry. Under church law, "unrepentant homosexual practice does not accord with the requirements for ordination . . ." Policy Statement, UPCUSA Minutes (1978), 265. Sexual orientation and practice is relevant to a candidate's qualifications for ordination and must be investigated by a presbytery's COPM when, as here, the candidate has taken the initiative in declaring his or her sexual orientation. Specification 2. The Synod PJC erred to the extent that it implied ". . . [t]hat a certifying presbytery is required to determine fitness for ordination rather than a calling presbytery." This specification is not sustained. The Synod PJC did not rule that a certifying presbytery is required to determine fitness for ordination. However, a presbytery, as part of certifying a candidate as ready to receive a call, must determine that a candidate is ready in all respects to receive a call. G-14.0309(c)(4). Readiness to receive a call requires application of the Policy Statement. Specification 3. The Synod PJC erred in holding ". . . [t]hat there was sufficient evidence in the record to determine that the candidate was a practicing homosexual." This specification is sustained. We hold that the evidence presented in the record of this case is insufficient to establish that Ms. Larges is now a practicing homosexual. The Presbytery did not inquire into this issue because of its view of its responsibilities under the Policy Statement. As we have already noted, the Presbytery was required by the Policy Statement to make inquiry once Ms. Larges disclosed her "sexual identity as a lesbian woman". At the same time, we affirm the position of the Policy Statement that a repentant homosexual person who finds the power of Christ redirecting his or her sexual orientation, or who finds God's power to control his or her desires and to adopt a celibate lifestyle can certainly be ordained. (Policy Statement, UPCUSA Minutes, (1978), 266). Specification 4. The Synod PJC erred in determining ". . . [t]hat the failures of the complainants to comply with the procedural requirements of the Book of Order were not material and that the decision failed to state which parties had standing to participate in the proceeding." This specification is not sustained. Appellant does not claim surprise or prejudice. Appellant appeared in the case and vigorously argued its side. The matter was fully adjudicated on its merits, and this appeal should be considered on its merits. Other Concerns This Commission wishes to clarify two additional matters raised by this case: 1) Status of Ms. Larges. The Synod PJC's decision ordered the Presbytery to ". . . rescind its certification of Lisa Larges as ready to receive a call." Although sustaining one specification of error, this Commission is, itself, setting aside that certification. In so doing, we want to assert clearly that Ms. Larges remains a candidate under care of the Presbytery of the Twin Cities Area. As such, the Presbytery is responsible for counseling with her and for guiding her in light of the Policy Statement and this decision. At such time as the Presbytery is satisfied that she can properly be certified as ready to receive a call, it may proceed according to its own procedures. 2) Guidance to the Presbytery. This Commission is concerned that, in the process of counseling and guidance of any candidate, the Church does not lose sight of the special relationship that exists between candidate, COPM, and presbytery. It is a relationship that is built on mutual trust and accountability among those parties and with the wider church. COPM is accountable to the candidate for guidance through the candidacy process. The candidate must rely on COPM for this guidance. COPM is likewise accountable to presbytery for making sure that candidates brought through the process are indeed qualified for ordained office. In turn, the presbytery is accountable to the candidate to deal fairly and honestly. How can a candidate trust a presbytery which votes to certify and yet, as in this case, indicates it would not ordain? Finally, the presbytery is accountable to the wider Church to insure that persons presented for ordained ministry are qualified according to standards of the whole Church. In this case, the process has lacked this sense of accountability and shredded the trusting relationship in our connectional Church. The person most likely to suffer unnecessarily is the candidate herself. As a further matter of guidance to the Presbytery of the Twin Cities Area and to the Church at large, it is essential to consider the Church's overall position on homosexuality and ordination, as expressed in the Policy Statement. The Church must always take into consideration the following provisions of the Policy Statement. This list is intended to give examples and not be exhaustive of the Church's position. a) Persons who manifest homosexual behavior must be treated with the profound respect and pastoral tenderness due all people of God. There can be no place within the Christian faith for the response to homosexual persons of mingled contempt, hatred, and fear that is called homophobia. Policy Statement, UPCUSA Minutes (1978), 263. b) Homosexual persons are encompassed by the searching love of Christ. The Church must turn from its fear and hatred to move toward the homosexual community in love and to welcome homosexual inquirers to its congregations. Policy Statement, UPCUSA Minutes (1978), 263. c) The repentant homosexual person who finds the power of Christ redirecting his or her sexual desires toward a married heterosexual commitment, or finds God's power to control his or her desires and to adopt a celibate lifestyle, can certainly be ordained, all other qualifications being met. Policy Statement, UPCUSA Minutes (1978), 264. d) Therefore our present understanding of God's will precludes the ordination of persons who do not repent of homosexual practice. Policy Statement, UPCUSA Minutes (1978), 264. e) That unrepentant homosexual practice does not accord with the requirements for ordination set forth in Form of Government. Policy Statement, UPCUSA Minutes (1978), 265. f) In relation to candidates for the ordained ministry, committees should be informed by the above guidance. Policy Statement, UPCUSA Minutes (1978), 265. g) . . . [C]andidates committees . . . [are urged] to conduct their examinations of candidates for ordained office with discretion and sensitivity, recognizing that it would be a hindrance to God's grace to make a specific inquiry into the sexual orientation or practice of candidates for ordained office or ordained officers where the person involved has not taken the initiative in declaring his or her sexual orientation. Policy Statement, UPCUSA Minutes (1978), 266. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: the certification by the Presbytery of the Twin Cities Area of Lisa Larges as ready to receive a call is hereby set aside. CONCURRING OPINION We concur specially in the Order of the majority. There is much in our brother's dissent which we support and embrace whole-heartedly. We believe that there are multiple and severe flaws in the Policy Statement, which weaken its status as "definitive guidance" or "authoritative interpretation" of the Constitution. We believe that in several respects the Policy Statement detrimentally and perhaps unconstitutionally, limits or restricts other provisions of the Constitution, including but not limited to qualifications for membership and the Church's commitment to openness and inclusiveness. Many of these issues were raised and determined otherwise by the Commission and by the General Assembly. We empathize with those who feel the pain of having their God-given call to ministry thwarted by the processes of the Church. Nevertheless, we conclude that while the "law" is destructive of the peace, unity and purity of the church, it is the law. As Commissioners of the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission, we believe we are obligated to apply it. -- Nancy Harper, Robert Hotchkiss, C. Montee Kennedy DISSENT I dissent. Attributes with which we are born are gifts from God. Jesus indicates that birth traits can be occasions for proclaiming the glory of God (answering the question of the disciples concerning the cause of the man being born blind, in the Gospel according to John, chapter nine.) God, as creator, surely delights in the variety displayed by human beings, a variety which includes shapes and colors and sexual orientations. The Church should rejoice, as does God, in this natural diversity of people. A few verses seem to some persons to prevent such an attitude, but we must be careful to avoid taking as God's Word admonitions which are time-bound or which belong to culture rather than to the Gospel. For example, examples of Biblical support for both slavery and polygamy are numerous and uncontradicted. The developed moral understanding of the Church condemns both, however, without abandoning our scriptural standard. God's own time has similarly come to express a developed moral understanding on the matter of sexual orientation. A homosexual orientation is not morally worse than any other birth trait. Human choice is the origin of moral wrong (sin). However, it is not credible to suppose that a homosexual orientation is chosen. The opprobrium, the hatred, the threat of physical harm, the social difficulties, the possible blackmail, and the potential legal peril faced by persons so oriented are sufficient arguments against any supposition that homosexual orientation is freely chosen. Every person this Commissioner has known who is oriented to their own sex experiences sorrow and repentance regarding the effects of that orientation. Research in the physiology of the brain ties homosexual orientation to development of the hypothalamus, that is, to a natural, wholly involuntary variation in human physical development. The worldview expressed in Scripture is no more a bar to our acceptance of such knowledge than it has been to us in geography, biology, or physics. One word of caution: every gift of God can potentially be mis- used. Reformed theology has continually warned against idolatry -- worship of things created good in themselves, rather than worship of the Creator of those things. Just so the providential (and therefore good) orientation to those of the same sex may become idolatrous. Appropriate sexual expressiion must be directed, as must ALL human activity, toward the faithfulness required by God of the elect. -- W. Clark Chamberlain The Janie Spahr Case (excerpts) HISTORY According to the record in this case, the Downtown United Presbyterian Church of Rochester, New York (hereinafter "Downtown United"), in preparation for beginning the search for an additional co-pastor, included the following statement in its Church Information Form: [Downtown United] has been a More Light Church since 1979, and was the first church in the Presbytery of Genesee Valley to offer full participation in all aspects of church life to lesbian, gay and bisexual persons. At present openly gay and lesbian elders and deacons serve on [Downtown United] boards. On Sunday, November 24, 1991, a congregational meeting was held for the purpose of receiving the report of the Pastor Nominating Committee and voting on the Committee's recommendation. The congregation elected the Committee's nominee, Jane Adams Spahr, as co-pastor. In a stated meeting on November 26, 1991, the Presbytery of Genesee Valley voted to adopt the recommendation of its Committee on Ministry that it approve the call of the Downtown Church to Ms. Spahr. Two notices of complaint were filed. In accordance with D- 6.1300a.(3), a stay of enforcement was granted by members of the Synod PJC pending a trial. A special meeting of the Presbytery was held on January 6, 1992, to hear the two complaints against the action of the Presbytery, to elect a Committee of Counsel, and to consider a motion to rescind the action of the Presbytery regarding the call of Ms. Spahr. The motion to rescind the Presbytery's approval of the call failed. In a preliminary hearing by the Synod PJC on April 29 and May 5, 1992, the parties stipulated "certain facts and related matters," including the following: * Ms. Spahr was ordained in the United Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) in 1974 and held various positions in the UPCUSA until 1980. In 1980-82, with the permission of her presbytery, she labored outside the bounds of the presbytery at the Metropolitan Community Church of San Francisco ("Metropolitan") (not a Presbyterian church) as minister of Pastoral Care. * From November 1982 to the present, Ms. Spahr has been employed as Executive Director of a work called "Ministry of Light," in San Anselmo, California. * Ms. Spahr, in the PIF [Personal Information Form] submitted to Downtown United, describes herself as a "Lesbian." * Respondent Presbytery admits that "the Rev. Jane Adams Spahr has proclaimed herself an avowed practicing homosexual (lesbian)." * Ms. Spahr was married December 28, 1964. She and her husband were separated in December 1977 and divorced in 1978. Ms. Spahr developed a friendship with another woman in 1980 and has lived in partnership with that woman since 1985. Although she had been aware of her present sexual orientation for several years, Ms. Spahr publicly acknowledged that orientation after 1978. In 1980 [sic--1982] she resigned from her position with Metropolitan. She has not renounced her ordination vows nor has her ordination been set aside and she has been and continues to be a member in good standing of the Redwoods Presbytery in California. The Permanent Judicial Commission of the Synod of the Northeast conducted a trial on May 19-22, 1992, and rendered its decision on July 29, concluding "that the Presbytery of Genesee Valley acted within constitutional limits in finding in order the call of the Downtown United Presbyterian Church of Rochester, New York, to the Rev. Jane Adams Spahr," and ordered that the complaints "be dismissed on their merits." The appellants requested and received a stay of enforcement from members of the General Assembly PJC. THE ISSUES IN THIS CASE In its Decision, the Synod PJC sets forth its understanding of the issues in this case. The Synod PJC raised five issues. This Commission finds only the following issues necessary for a determination in this case: the meaning of the Definitive Guidance regarding homosexual conduct and ordination, and the responsibilities of a presbytery in finding a call in order. WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THE POLICY STATEMENT REGARDING HOMOSEXUAL CONDUCT AND ORDINATION? In its Opinion, the Synod PJC states that: In the present case, Respondent violated no explicit constitutional provisions. The only constitutional provision which is involved is G-6.0106, but the General Assembly has interpreted this provision with respect to ordination, a different question. At the time that the Policy Statement was adopted by the General Assembly in 1978, several possibilities for initiating an amendment to the Constitution were suggested, generally by changes in the Book of Order. The Assembly chose instead to adopt a Policy Statement providing "definitive guidance" which essentially affirms the previous Constitutional stance regarding homosexuality. Later Assemblies declined to amend the Constitution and affirmed the Policy Statement. In an earlier case, the General Assembly PJC declared the Policy Statement and the Position Paper to be "in fact and in substance, authoritative interpretations of the Constitutions as they were then and as the Constitution presently exists." (Union Presbyterian Church of Blasdell v. Presbytery of Western New York, 197th General Assembly (1985) Minutes, 118.) We believe that the Synod PJC views the Policy Statement too narrowly when it limits its understanding of the document solely to the subject of the ordination of homosexuals. The conclusions enunciated in the Policy Statement must be taken in their context which addresses the entire subject of homosexuality. We determine that no one's ordination is an issue in this case. What is at issue is whether a church may disregard an affirmation of homosexual practice when it is seeking a person to serve in a position for which ordination is a prerequisite. The "definitive guidance" provided by the Position Paper in this case is "That unrepentant homosexual practice does not accord with the requirements for ordination set forth in Form of Government." Therefore, this Commission holds that a self-affirmed practicing homosexual may not be invited to serve in a PC(USA) position which presumes ordination. However, this Commission recognizes that a call may be approved for a person who is no longer engaged in a homosexual way of life. WHAT ARE THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF A PRESBYTERY IN FINDING A CALL IN ORDER? "The radical principles of Presbyterian Church government and discipline," which were articulated by the 1797 General Assembly, have ever since been one of the hallmarks of Presbyterianism. They are: That the several different congregations of believers, taken collectively, constitute one Church of Christ, called emphatically the Church; that a larger part of the Church, or a representation of it, should govern a smaller or determine matters of controversy which arise therein; that, in like manner, a representation of the whole should govern and determine in regard to every part, and to all the parts united: that is, that a majority shall govern; and consequently that appeals may be carried from lower to higher governing bodies, till they be finally decided by the collected wisdom and united voice of the whole Church. For these principles and this procedure, the example of the apostles and the practice of the primitive Church are considered as authority. G-1.0400. Under the Radical Principles, a presbytery (or any governing body) is not free to exercise its own judgment contrary to our constitutional standards or the lawful injunctions of higher governing bodies without jeopardizing the entire fabric of our Presbyterian system. The responsibilities of a presbytery in the calling process go beyond ensuring that prescribed steps are taken in the proper order. When finding the call of a congregation in order, it is the responsibility of a presbytery, through its Committee on Ministry, to offer counsel regarding the standards which represent the "voice of the whole Church." Downtown United should have been advised by Presbytery's representatives that it should not consider extending a call to anyone of affirmed homosexual practice. Had the congregation received such advice and, disregarding that advice, persisted in prosecuting the call, it would have been the responsibility of the Presbytery not to approve the call. Had the Presbytery acted appropriately, this call would not have been approved. The questions regarding the examination and enrollment of a self- affirmed practicing homosexual would never have been raised, and this Commission determines them to be outside the scope of this case. SPECIFICATIONS OF ERROR Specification 1. The Synod PJC erred in failing to rule that the PC(USA), in light of the official policy of the Church adopted in General Assembly under authority of Scripture, precludes formal official action affirming in the ministry of Word and Sacrament one who is an unrepentant, self-acknowledged practicing homosexual. This specification of error is sustained. The language of this specification is overbroad. Our interpretation of the intent of this specification of error brings us to finding that the Synod PJC erred when it did not rule that the Policy Statement and/or Position Paper precluded the Presbytery from approving Ms. Spahr as co-pastor for Downtown United. Specification 2. The Synod PJC erred in declaring for church leaders "a double standard -- one rule for those who are already ordained and another one for those who [as of 1978] were unordained" with respect to conduct declared by the whole Church, in General Assembly, under authority of Scripture, to be "sin" and "incompatible with Christian faith and life." This specification of error is sustained. Ordination itself, for those ordained prior to 1978, does not make them immune from the application of the broad principles of the Policy Statement after the date of its adoption. Paragraph 14 of that Policy Statement provides protection from the removal of ordination for homosexual practices which occured prior to its adoption. Paragraph 14 provides amnesty for past acts but not license for present or future acts. Specification 3. The Synod PJC erred in its conclusion that the "Presbytery of Genesee Valley acted within constitutional limits in finding in order the call of the Downtown United Presbyterian Church of Rochester, New York, to the Rev. Jane Adams Spahr"; that a "congregation may elect and extend a call to a self- affirming, practicing homosexual minister who was ordained prior to the enactment of the Definitive Guidance; that a "presbytery may find in order a call to a self-affirming, practicing homosexual minister who was ordained prior to the enactment of the Definitive Guidance"; and that a "presbytery may sustain the examination for membership of a self-affirming, practicing homosexual minister who was ordained prior to the enactment of the Definitive Guidance." This specification of error is sustained. FINDING The action of the Presbytery of Genesee Valley approving the call of Jane Adams Spahr as co-pastor of the Downtown United is irregular because it is contrary to the standards of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. The call of the Downtown United Presbyterian Church of Rochester, New York, to Jane Adams Sphar is set aside. 2. The Presbytery of Genesee Valley shall inform Downtown United that the call to Ms. Spahr has been set aside. 3. The Presbytery of Genesee Valley shall instruct its churches, when completing Church Information Forms, to refrain from implying or stating that persons are eligible for office who do not meet the requirements for ordination in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). 4. The Presbytery of Genesee Valley shall instruct its Committee on Ministry that calls to ministers of Word and Sacrament by churches in the presbytery shall be approved only for those who meet the requirements for ordination to the office of minister of Word and Sacrament. The Stay of Enforcement issued by this Commission in this case is terminated. [We omit the concurring opinion of Joel Secrist.] CONCURRENCE We concur specially in the order of the majority. There is much in our brother's dissent which we support and embrace whole-heartedly. We believe that there are multiple and severe flaws in the Policy Statement, which weaken its status as "definitive guidance" or "authoritative interpretation" of the Constitution. We believe that in several respects the Policy Statement detrimentally and perhaps unconstitutionally, limits or restricts other provisions of the Constitution, including but not limited to qualifications for membership and the Church's commitment to openness and inclusiveness. Many of these issues were raised and determined otherwise by the Commission and by the General Assembly. We empathize with those who feel the pain of having their God-given call to ministry thwarted by the processes of the Church. Nevertheless, we conclude that while the "law" is destructive of the peace, unity, and purity of the Church, it is the law. As Commissioners of the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission, we believe we are obligated to apply it. -- Nancy Harper, C. Montee Kennedy, Robert Hotchkiss, Judith L. Rehak. DISSENT I dissent. The Problems with the Definitive Guidance issued by the General Assembly in 1978 are numerous: 1) It is superseded by the provision of the Book of Order, effective since 1983, that "an active member is entitled to all the rights and privileges of the Church, including the right to . . . hold office." (G-5.0202). 2) The Definitive Guidance replaces careful investigation into the gifts bestowed by God upon individuals (G-6.0106) with a blanket prohibition of a category of persons. We thus are in danger of ignoring God by acting upon our own prejudice. 3) The Definitive Guidance lacks internal logical consistency. Under the Book of Order "an offense is any act or omission by a member or officer of the Church that is contrary to the Scriptures or the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)" (D-1.0800). The Definitive Guidance holds unrepentant homosexual conduct out of such accord, but then holds that it shall not affect those ordained prior to 1978. 4) The Definitive Guidance is at variance with our knowledge of the world as God made it, and hence is bad exegesis, bad theology, bad psychology, bad science. Sexual orientation is not chosen; it is given by God. Facets of personality not chosen cannot be sin, because no culpable mental state or act of will is present. In truth, the Church's problem is with overt behavior. The true sin here for Presbyterians is embarrassment. All of the parties before this Commission affirmed the proposition that homosexual orientation is no bar to ordination in this Church. Nonetheless, the majority of this Commission has somewhat receded from that position. Our Lord ate with sinners and tax collectors, allowed himself to be physically touched by a prostitute, and dispensed with mercy and grace the capital punishment statute against adultery. We, in contrast, make an idol of gentility, of niceness. Since the principal figure in this case offends niceness, the majority, while acknowledging her present good standing, her ministerial gifts, and her acceptability both to her calling congregation and presbytery, finds that her call cannot be fulfilled. The position of the majority is not consistent. If Jane Adams Spahr is a sinner, why is she not to be disciplined? If she is in good standing, why can her call not be fulfilled? If some ministers in good standing cannot do what other ministers in good standing may do, how can this be anything other than a double standard? The position of the majority relies on the Definitive Guidance. The Definitive Guidance cannot stand. So this Commissioner would sustain the judgment of the Synod of the Northeast. W. Clark Chamberlain * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Ending Apartheid *Here is the full text of recommendations on ending apartheid for lesbians, gays, and bisexual in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) from the General Assembly Council's church-wide convocation of 500 for "Discerning the Spirit, Envisioning Our Future," October 30-November 1, 1992, Chicago, Illinois.* Ending Apartheid for Lesbians, Gays and Bisexuals in the PC(USA). Convener: James D. Anderson, P.O. Box 38, New Brunswick, NJ 08903-0038, 908/932-7501 (work), 908/418-7058 (home), 908/249- 1016 (machine). Forty persons gathered in the Graham Room from 10 a.m. to noon, October 30, 1992, to discern the Spirit and envision our future with respect to the current apartheid policies of our church that exclude lesbian, gay, and bisexual Christians. A draft of this statement was distributed to all participants, and to the best of our ability, their suggestions have been incorporated. As one participant commented: "The following statements and affirmations were made by one or more participants. Some reflect apparent broad consensus in the group; others were more individual expressions. No votes or polls were taken." Participants: Douglas R. Acker, Eastern OR; James D. Anderson, New Brunswick, NJ; Donna Blackstock, Louisville, KY; Lisa Bove, Los Angeles, CA; Jo Cameron, Rahway, NJ; Susan Halcomb Craig, Berea, OH; Richard Culp, Austin, TX; Mark Dowdy, Olympia, WA; Lynn Farnum, Tacoma, WA; Jim Fitzpatrick, Princeton, NJ; Larry Fryer, Augusta, GA; Kathy Gorman-Coombs, Scotia, NY; Thomas Harrocks, Santa Rosa, CA; Sandra Hawley, Bloomington, MN; Laurene Lafontaine, Denver, CO; Maria Lasala, Wilmington, DE; Mary Ellen Lawson, Mt. Pleasant, PA; Midge Mack, Hendersonville, NC; Mary Charlotte McCall, Decatur, GA; Jan McCoy, Tucson, AZ; Claire McDonald, Claremont, CA; Bill McIvor, Spokane, WA; Mary Robinson Mohr, Sandpoint, ID; Cam Murchison, Blacksburg, VA; Elenora Que Noah, Broken Bow, OK; Anonymous: "please remove my name"; Mark Ramsey, East Lansing, MI; Tammy Rider, Minneapolis, MN; Henry Schurr, Elmira, NY; Stuart Smith, Chicago, IL; David Steele, San Rafael, CA; Rebecca Tollefson, Louisville, KY; Paula Warren, Rapid City, SD; John Watson, Great Falls, MT; Philip Weiler, Crookston, MN; Dick Werelay, Baltimore, MD; Pat White, Katonah, NY; Philip Wickeri, Hong Kong; Joan Wolfarth, Pittsford (Rochester), NY; Stephanie Young, Dover, DE. Discussion/Recommendations: 1. Our vision for our New Church In Christ, there is neither Greek nor Jew, Male nor Female, Slave nor Free, Gay nor Straight. We are all members of Christ's church. It is imperative that we abolish rules and address attitudes that exclude anyone or any group. We must encourage groups and congregations and presbyteries within our denomination to take steps to reach out and to model full inclusiveness, not only of lesbian, gay and bisexual persons, but all other marginalized groups. We cannot be the Church of Jesus Christ while anyone is excluded. Christ's table is open to everyone. Let the circle be unbroken. The circle is broken; we will be judged because of this. Our new church will support and celebrate the loving relationships of all members of our church and in our society. We will encourage and celebrate long-term and permanent relationships. We will model responsible, just, and loving sexuality for our youth and for the world at large. 2. The consequences of exclusion and apartheid We deprive lesbian, gay and bisexual people -- 10-20% of our world -- of the gifts, nurture, and comfort of the church. We deprive the church of the manifold gifts of lesbian, gay and bisexual people. We teach homophobia to our children and to our society through our example and our silence. We should not be surprised, then, when political groups and parties seek to incorporate the policies of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) -- policies of separation and condemnation -- into the laws of the land (e.g., Oregon, Colorado, and Maine in 1992). The result? Increased sanction for bias crimes, hate attacks, and violence. We isolate and persecute lesbian, gay and bisexual youth, so that they seek release in suicide at a higher rate than others in their age group; as a church we bear responsibility for their despair and the anguish of their parents. By denigrating and isolating the long-term relationships of lesbian, gay and bisexual Presbyterians, we make it harder for them to embody responsible, just, and loving sexuality. We must frequently steer lesbian, gay and bisexual inquirers away from the Presbyterian Church, fearing a too-common hostile reception. A campus pastor says, "My heart breaks at the large number of students who say I cannot go to a Presbyterian Church. 'I am not acceptable.' They ask, 'Where do I take my knowledge of God, my experience of God?'" We are sending an important part of our future away. We are denying it. It's an offense against God when we force people into hiding, yet our current policy forces lesbian, gay and bisexual pastors, elders, deacons, and members into hiding, into lying, to protect their tenuous place in our church. Silence = Death! We must strive to be full-time Christians. Whenever our ministry is tainted with prejudice, we are part-time Christians. We exemplify a part-time Christ. Our ministry must be holistic. No divisions -- we are ALL God's children. A pastor told of his last two funerals, both for close friends. They requested that services not be held in the church. "The church didn't want me when I was alive, I'll be damned if I go there when I'm dead." Many people are really hurting. Where is our evangelism? Our church has decided NOT to share the good news with a large portion of our people -- our homeless children, our lesbian, gay and bisexual children, families of lesbian, gay and bisexual children, lesbian, gay and bisexual families. 3. Achieving our Goal 3.1. Abolishing the current exclusionary policy We must act immediately to return the "definitive guidance" of 1978 and 1979 to its original intent, as guidance from that General Assembly, but not a policy that suspends the authority of ordaining bodies to decide on the eligibility of individual candidates for ordination. Our current policy is a double standard, nowhere sanctioned by our Book of Order. We are instead called to work toward a church-wide consensus that welcomes the gifts and ministries of lesbian, gay and bisexual persons. Congregations and presbyteries that are ready to move forward should be able to do so without exclusionary apartheid restrictions and without the threat of complaints and legalistic challenges. We must apply the same standards for responsible relationships and sexual behavior for all our members, regardless of sexual or affectional orientation or the genders of the participants. To demand unconditional celibacy for lesbian and gay people is to pervert God's good gift of sexuality. As a church, we must cherish diversity. We need to stand boldly. We have to stand for justice. Some members of the group expressed concern that a celebration of our diversity might appear to question the joy and fulfillment that many heterosexuals find in their family relationships. No, a thousand times no! We call for the church to celebrate the joys (and the sorrows) of all our people in their loving, intimate and family relationships. Another member of our group was concerned for pastors who could not in good conscience participate in the ordination of a lesbian, gay or bisexual person. We pray that over time such persons will come to see the conflict in such an attitude with the inclusive gospel of Christ, but we do not believe any kind of coercion would help lead such persons to this vision. 3.2. Education and Biblical Study We need education and Bible study in every congregation and presbytery. We are not fundamentalists. We are reformed. Many in our group assert that there are NO sound, reformed theological arguments that exclude lesbian, gay and bisexual persons. Let us teach the Bible from the perspective of our reformed and always reforming tradition. We must seek the wisdom of the biblical witness on this difficult and divisive issue. Exclusion of unwelcome persons and groups has been a problem for the church from its very beginning. But the Ethiopian Eunuch WAS baptized despite explicit prohibitions in the Old Testament. Several persons urged that we begin our Biblical study and our interpretive task with Jesus, seeking to discern what His Gospel has to suggest about the inclusion of lesbian, gay and bisexual people in the life of our church. In our history, we have made special rules that excluded and set apart slaves and women from full membership and participation. But we have learned that these historical instances of apartheid contradict the inclusive nature of Christ's love, life, and example. So today, we must see that passing stigmatizing and discriminatory laws and standards for lesbians, gays and bisexuals is in like manner a perversion of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. As our Book of Order says, THE EXCLUSION OF ANYONE ON ANY GROUNDS OTHER THAN PROFESSION OF FAITH IS A SCANDAL TO THE GOSPEL (G-5.0103). We are indecently in violation of our own order! In Christ there is no such thing as a "status" offense -- where one's very being is deemed wrong or unacceptable. In the Church there can be no such thing as a status offense. We must remove our current policies that make it a status offense to be lesbian, gay or bisexual. In the past being a woman was a status offense. Being a slave was a status offense. All stemmed from the same root, based on errors in "how we do Bible." If we don't take care to eradicate such inequities, there will eventually be yet another group separated out, and another, and another. We have perfected and perpetuated a model for casting people out. We all have a responsibility to stand up and correct stereotypes and stop denigrating jokes. Our youth need a place where they can safely discuss, learn about, and struggle with their sexuality. All of God's children have the right to learn about God's intention for wholeness in our sexuality. 4. The solution One pastor said: The key to resolution is the cross of Christ; Jesus called us to follow him to the cross. How can we get rid of the apartheid? Martin Luther King, Jr., gave us a model. Christ gives us the "Strength to Love." Our biblical tradition must be based on the cross of Christ, on the power of love. We are willing to pay the price. We must recognize and honor the sincere witness of lesbian, gay and bisexual Christians. "I cannot deny fellowship to anyone who says that Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior." One woman said: It is time for straight people to come out of the closet and speak for those whom this church has silenced. It is time for straight people to say "NO" to the exclusionary, unjust policies of this church. It is time for straight people to speak for justice and to take risks for it in congregations and at every other level of the Church, right up to the General Assembly Council! May the gift of love that the church has to offer be the solution. In the words of lesbian, gay, and bisexual Presbyterians, "we are children of God who call the church to accountability. We name who we are and celebrate our lives. We no longer beg for a place in the church, but demand the respect due to every child of God." * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Wanderings in Grief and Rage by Susan Kramer [(c) 1992 all rights reserved. I suspect that each one of us can recall where we were when we heard or read about the despicable PJC decisions regarding Janie Spahr and Lisa Larges. I also suspect that for weeks, months, and years to come we will sit with one another and recall again where we were, what we felt, what we did, what we said. Part of me right now does not wish to recreate those moments and another part of me demands and screams out that we must indeed remember and we must condemn the action with word and deed over and over and over again. We must let those around us see and hear our feelings of grief and rage, hear our screams and weeping, our wailing, our silent shaking, our roars, our bellows, our streaming tears. I remember where I was when I heard, or should I say "saw", the PJC decision. I was in our Presbytery Office. I had planned it like that. Fool that I was I thought that I and the Presbytery staff who have been so supportive could share these hopeful moments together. So I stood watching our Presbytery Executive dial PresbyTel. We bantered while he waited for an operator. I saw his face change from excited anticipation to grief stricken shock while he slowly shook his head from side to side. In my initial denial, I thought he was merely indicating that no operator had come on the phone yet. Through my denial cut his words, "They voted against -- 12-1." Then through my disbelief walked a pastor friend who said softly, "Susan, you didn't receive my telephone message at home, did you?" I also remember what I did in my anguish. I lifted my arms above me and I slammed my hands down on to the nearest desk and I bellowed, "NO!" And then as someone put her arms around me, I choked out, "Someone someday is going to have to answer for our pain." And I wept. As I think about the remaining hours of that day and the following hours and days, I also remember how little surrounding stimuli I could manage. The only thing I wanted to do was to listen to classical or instrumental music. If it had been summer, I would have gone and sat in our garden. I did not want to hear any more words, any more devastating, demeaning, rapacious words. Nor did I want to hear well meaning, but empty sounding words. I needed people simply to sit with me, cry with me, wail with me. And when people asked what they could do, when people said that they cared, I unabashedly responded, "If you truly care then you must speak out. You must say loudly and clearly and publicly that you support us." The expression of caring alone was no longer enough. If words were to penetrate to me they needed to be words of clear and open support. Publicly standing with all of us was what I needed to see. It is risky to begin to hope. It is anguishing to have hope stripped away. The day had started out so amazingly hopeful: a new U.S. administration to be led by President-Elect Bill Clinton who although not perfect was saying and doing things around human rights in this country that I had never heard any other president in my adulthood saying and doing; the defeat of the Oregon initiative, although the low margin of victory was way too slim; the first black woman elected to the Senate; the first Native American elected to national office; a large increase in the number of open lesbians and gay men in elected office. I could hardly believe it. By afternoon I expected only more. Yes, I expected the upholding of the Synod of the Northeast's position and an open lesbian in the pulpit of the Downtown Rochester Church. Certainly I did not expect the flinging wide of the door to all of us in the Church, but such a significant step in the long process this PJC decision would be. Of course it would happen because the PJC would never made a decision that would violate the very fabric of Presbyterian polity. But that they did violate -- and all of us in the process -- and those twelve who voted against the Synod decision did it resoundingly and with no word of grace, no word of continuing the process, no word of openness. Now, because of naivete? stupidity? hatred? fear? those twelve join all others who are personally responsible for the type of thing happening in Oregon, Colorado, and other places in this country and the world. They are personally responsible for hate crimes committed against us, every time one of us killed. I know these are strong words, but I also know the interconnectedness of all of life, and that interconnectedness they have totally disregarded. For I have heard and seen public people and politicians align themselves with "religious" ideas coming from "religious" people in ways that they never would do with any other group of people or on any other issue. This decision now by this PJC will be held up and alluded to as proof for, and the condoning of, continuing hatred and fear throughout society. People who would never quote church/religious doctrines, stands, or policies, in this one instance do just that to the detriment of not only lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals but every part of life. It is inexcusable and unacceptable and must be condemned. I have been thinking a lot these days of our lesbian, gay, and bisexual sisters and brothers and supporters who have gone before us to bring us to this time and place. I wish that I knew more of their names. I wish I knew more of their stories. And my mind drifts to those I do know -- those who have been in this struggle openly for ten years, twenty years and more. I think of Janie and Chris and Ginny and Jim and Dan and Carter and others. In the midst of my dashed hope, in the midst of my grief, as I struggle to get back up, I wonder how did they do it? How do you continue to do it? I do a lot of rambling and ranting these days in the midst of a lot of crying. I have finally learned no longer to apologize for my tears. They express both my rage and grief, and in this time when words seem impotent, tears paint an indelible picture. It was about three weeks ago that I was driving home through tears after a particularly painful time of being at my own congregation for worship. I was half-heartedly listening to our local weekly lesbian, gay, and bisexual radio program when a song being sung by The Flirtations, a nationally known gay group, began. I know that I had listened to it before, but I realized that I had not heard it before. On that Sunday, soul weary and struggling, I heard it well: [centered] "The higher you build your barriers, the taller I become. The farther you take my rights away, the faster I will run. You can deny me, you can decide to turn your face away . . . Something inside so strong . . . You thought that my pride was gone there's something inside so strong . . . The more you refuse to hear my voice, the louder I will sing. The more you refuse the things I need, the more I want everything . . . My light will shine -- so brightly that it will blind you. Brothers and sisters, when they insist we're just not good enough what'll we do then? We'll look them in the eyes . . . We're going to do it anyway. Something inside . . . There's something so strong . . . Something inside . . . It's so strong!" * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * PLGC / PAN Activist Dies PLGC and PAN mourn the passing of John Hilberer, born March 9, 1958, who died on December 10, 1992. An active participant in the Detroit area PLGC, his last outing was to the November PLGC meeting there. Others may remember him from the Baltimore General Assembly, where he staffed the PAN booth and worked on panels for the AIDS Names Quilt. A memorial service was led by the Rev. Howard Warren. Memorial gifts may be send to PAN: Presbyterian AIDS Network, 100 Witherspoon St., Louisville, KY 40202-1396. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * PLGC Workshop & the March on Washington *A PLGC workshop has been scheduled to coincide with the 1993 March on Washington for Lesbian, Gay, and Bi Equal Rights and Liberation, Saturday and Sunday, April 24-25, 1993, Westminster Presbyterian Church, 400 "I" St. SW, Washington, DC 20024, 202/484-7700.* Are you SICK of being bashed by people quoting scripture? ANGRY at the religious "right" for wrongly using the Bible to promote homophobia? TIRED of being told homosexuality is "sinful"? Come to a **Biblical Self-Defense Workshop on Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Concerns**, conducted by the Rev. Lindsay Louise Biddle. * Examine passages commonly used against homosexuality. * Explore various interpretations of scripture * Understand modern Biblical scholarship supportive of lesbian, gay and bi-sexualities. A special worship service will be held on Sunday, April 25 preceding the march at 11 a.m., with guest minister, the Rev. Janie Spahr! Registration: Send $30.00 (U.S.) -- checks payable to PLGC-DC; includes cost of workshop plus Saturday lunch and Sunday breakfast -- and your name, address, telephone (day and evening) and information on any special needs, to: PLGC-DC, Westminster Presbyterian Church, 400 "I" St. SW, Washington, DC 20024 by April 9, 1993. For further information please contact Bill Moss (202/397-5585) or Ron Willett (202/332-8143). * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * St. Louis Church Chooses More Light *Gibson Heights Presbyterian Church (1075 S. Taylor Ave., St. Louis, MO 63110, 314/872-8799, W. Robert McClelland, STD, Minister) has become Missouri's first More Light Church. Bonnie Montle, Clerk of Session writes:* We ask that we be recognized as a More Light Church. Our session adopted a resolution welcoming all people into the church as fully participating members, with both the opportunity and the responsibility for ordination should they be elected to leadership positions, regardless of sexual orientation. We celebrate diversity in our church. An all inclusive church embraces race, ethnic groups, gender, age, education, economic status, physical or mental challenge and marital status; we meet this criterion. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Bisexual, Lesbian, & Gay Youth *Attention all bisexual, lesbian, and gay youth-serving organizations:* The United Church Coalition for Lesbian/Gay Concerns' Youth Outreach Program is seeking to network with other youth-serving organizations and develop a national resource directory. To ensure your organization is included, please send a one paragraph description and your organization's address and phone number to: UCCL/GC Youth Outreach Program, 18 N. College St., Athens, OH 45701. For inquiries, call Gregory Anderson, UCCL/GC Youth Outreach Program Coordinator, (508) 755-0005 in Worcester, MA. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Parents I'd like to hear how other parents deal with the bigoted and cruel remarks that are often made about gay people. It seems so sad that Christians who are called upon to "love your neighbor as yourself" cannot find it in themselves to love those who are not just like themselves." -- an Indiana Mother. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *