Date: Wed, 5 Apr 95 17:36:19 EDT From: "James D. Anderson" MORE LIGHT UPDATE October 1993, Volume 14, Number 3 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 Note: * is used to indicate italicized or boldface text. CHANGES Lisa Larges, PLGC Executive Board member, has the following telephone number: 415/648-0547. CONTENTS Synod PJC Upholds Ordination of Gay Deacons PLGC Conference in Delaware To Be A Church Again, by Jack Hoffmeister More Light Church Disciplined The Price of Privilege, by Charles Collins Beyond Apology, by Charles Collins. Another review of *Gay Theology without Apology*, by Gary David Comstock. God's Gift for Which I've Been Waiting So Long, by Howard B. Warren. Review of *By the Pool at Bethesda*, by the Rev. Floyd Thompkins, Jr. (Genesis 1 Publishing Co., 100 NE 26th Ave., Pompano Beach, FL 33062, 305/783-9205, $6.95). Life Options, by Susan Kramer News of the Church and the World PLGC Conference in Delaware New Editor and Address for PANdemic New More Light Church More Light Churches Conference Synod Responds to Extortion Synod of Mid-America More Light Church Disciplined Holy Union Leads to Pastor's Resignation Holy Unions or Marriage, by Steven R. Durant PLGC'ers Debate Response to Church-wide Study A Wichita Ultimatum Too Little Too Late Wichita Is Too Early Debate continues at Ghost Ranch * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Synod PJC Upholds Ordination of Gay Deacons The Permanent Judicial Commission of the Synod of the Pacific has unanimously upheld the ordination of a lesbian and a gay deacon in Eugene, Oregon, and has gently rapped the knuckles of the Presbytery of the Cascade for calling the ordinations "irregular." This case has been appealed to the homophobic PJC of the General Assembly, and there is little doubt what they will say, judging from their previous bashing of Janie Spahr and Lisa Larges and the action of the 1993 General Assembly declaring the former "definitive guidance" to be an "authoritative interpretation." Nevertheless, we thought the wise counsel of the Synod of the Pacific PJC deserves a little publicity, so here is the full text. Enjoy. It may be a while before you see such a sensible decision in this church again. -- JDA. Note: citations beginning with a 'C-' are to *The Book of Confessions*; those that begin with a 'D-' are to *The Rules of Discipline*; and those that begin with a 'G-' are to *The Form of Government*. These latter two documents are part of *The Book of Order*, which together with *The Book of Confessions* constitutes the constitution of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). THE PERMANENT JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF THE SYNOD OF THE PACIFIC OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH (U.S.A.) Hope Presbyterian Church, ) ) Complainant/Appellant, ) Remedial Case 93-01 ) v. ) ) Central Presbyterian Church, ) ) Respondent/Appellee ) _________________________________________) This is a remedial case which has come before the Permanent Judicial Commission of the Synod of the Pacific on an appeal by Hope Presbyterian Church of Portland, Oregon, from a decision of the Permanent Judicial Commission of the Presbytery of the Cascades. This Commission finds that it has jurisdiction, that appellant has standing to appeal, that the appeal was properly and timely filed, and that the appeal is in order (D-13.1200a). HISTORY The central facts of this case, which were not in dispute below, may be simply stated. On June 16, 1991, the session of Central Presbyterian Church in Eugene, Oregon, ordained two self- affirmed, practicing homosexual members to the office of deacon. The ordinations were preceded by a congregational meeting in which the congregational nominating committee presented its annual slate of candidates for election. The two individuals were found to be well qualified, with one having just completed a term as a ruling elder on the church session. It came as a surprise to the session when letters from each of the two candidates were received by the church in which they acknowledged their homosexual preference. Special meetings were held to consider the issue. After discussion, the congregation, finding no better qualified and willing candidates, reaffirmed its original vote and again elected the two to the office of deacon. The two were later ordained by the session. Hope Presbyterian Church of Portland, Oregon, hearing of the ordinations, filed a complaint with the Stated Clerk of Cascades Presbytery. Hope contended that these ordinations violated Presbyterian law and constituted a rebellion against the Word and will of God. The case was tried by the Permanent Judicial Commission of the Presbytery of Cascades on Hope's complaint seeking remedial relief February 11 through 14, 1992. At the conclusion of the trial the Permanent Judicial Commission filed its written decision finding that an irregularity had occurred in the ordinations of the two homosexual persons. However, it ruled that the remedy sought by complainant, namely annulment, was "inappropriate" and declined to set aside the ordinations. The Permanent Judicial Commission also rejected complainant's additional contentions that the ordinations constituted a rebellion against the Word and will of God. This appeal by Hope followed. DISCUSSION A. Sources of Authority Presbyterians, as Christians of Reformed tradition, give primacy to the Word of God (C-13.19, C-5.001 ff, C-6.001 ff), and especially to Jesus Christ, the Word made flesh (G-1.0100c; G- 1.0307). Secondary authority is accorded the collective ecclesiastical wisdom found in *The Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)* with its two parts: the *Book of Confessions* and the *Book of Order* (G-2.0200b). A third, and subordinate, source of authority for lower governing bodies is the papers and reports of each General Assembly, which can be found in the *General Assembly Minutes* for a given year (G- 13.0103r). The precise issues presented by this appeal, first the "regularity" of the ordination of self-affirmed homosexual persons as deacons, and second, the power of a higher governing body to "annul" or set aside such an ordination, appear to be issues of first impression in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). As there exists no reported decisional law from the Permanent Judicial Commission of the General Assembly to guide this commission's determination of these novel legal questions, we are compelled to find answers in higher authority: in scripture; and in the constitution. We are guided in this task by the values of toleration, inclusiveness, and diversity, which are cardinal tenets of our contemporary church law (G-4.0400). Scriptural support for a church policy precluding self-affirmed homosexual persons from ordination as deacons is uncertain at best. Jesus Christ is the head of the church (G-1.0l00a), and He was silent on the subject. Paul, the apostle, speaks of homosexuality as sin (Romans 1:27), but he probably had reference to something other than same-sex monogamous relationships. Moreover, Paul also limited the role of women in the church (I Timothy 2:12; 3:8-13). However, such exclusionary teaching has been discredited and is rejected by the modern church (G-4.0403; G-6.0105). Furthermore, in the Old Testament homosexuality is not mentioned in the Ten Commandments, whereas several forms of heterosexual misconduct are specifically proscribed (Exodus 20:14, 17). It would appear anomalous, for purposes of determining *moral* eligibility for ordination as deacons, to accept as a class sinners of graver magnitude, while at the same time to exclude as a class those of lesser offense, if offense at all. Apart from a doubtful scriptural basis for discrimination against homosexuals in determining eligibility for ordination, the *Book of Order* clearly precludes such discrimination. For active membership in the Presbyterian Church one professes faith in God through Jesus Christ (G-5.0100a). For leadership in the Presbyterian Church one must be an active member in good standing who is chosen, instructed, and ordained by the congregation or higher governing body (G-6.000 ff). *Importantly, affirmation of faith in God through Jesus Christ is the sole, objective qualification for church office recognized in the Book of Order.* G-5.0202 provides in relevant part: "An active member is entitled to all the rights and privileges of the church, including the right to participate in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, to present children for baptism, to take part in meetings of the congregation, *and to vote and hold office* (emphasis added). In short, if homosexual persons are accepted as active members of a Presbyterian congregation, they have the constitutionally recognized right to be elected and ordained to the office of deacon (G-5.0202). Any other conclusion on this elemental constitutional question simply cannot be reconciled with the clear language of the *Book of Order*. Furthermore, the correctness of this conclusion is underscored by the fact that no other broad category of active member has ever been singled out for exclusion from holding church office. A special rule of exclusion against homosexual active members thus suffers the additional infirmity of arbitrariness. Hence, neither logic, nor history, nor the clear wording of G-5.0202 supports such a uniquely discriminatory policy against homosexual persons. For these reasons, we conclude that the Presbytery of the Cascades erred in its ruling that an "irregularity" occurred in the ordinations of the two homosexual deacons. It follows, however, that the Presbytery did not err by nevertheless *refusing* to "annul" the ordinations, or by failing to require Central Presbyterian Church to repent, confess "error", and make "a public acknowledgment of wrongdoing . . . before Presbytery". B. Specifications of Error Specification #1: The Presbytery erred by failing to set aside, or "annul," the two ordinations. This specification is not sustained. Inasmuch as the ordinations were, in fact, constitutionally valid, no reason existed to set them aside. Even assuming (*arguendo*) that the two individuals were ineligible for ordination as deacons because of their stated sexual preference, it does not follow that the Presbytery either had the power, or improperly refused to exercise the power, to "annul" the ordinations. We are cited to no authority, and we have found none, in which a higher governing body has purported to "annul" the ordination of a deacon by a session. We doubt such power exists, as it would contravene the authority vested exclusively in session to examine and approve candidates for church office (G-14.0205). In any event, we cannot fault Cascades Presbytery for failing to exercise such dubious authority in the absence of clear decisional law, or an express provision in the *Book of Order*, recognizing the existence of such authority. We leave the creation, or the confirmation of the existence, of such an extraordinary power to a higher governing body. Specification #2: The Presbytery erred by failing to rebuke appellee for rebelling against the Word and will of God, and by failing to order appellee to publicly acknowledge wrongdoing before Presbytery. This specification is not sustained. As neither rebellion nor wrongdoing occurred, repentance and confession of error by appellee were unnecessary. CONCLUSION In its written decision the Permanent Judicial Commission of the Presbytery of the Cascades, while not granting the ultimate relief sought by Hope, nevertheless found that Central had violated Presbyterian law with the two ordinations it determined were "irregular". As an appropriate remedy for the "irregularity", it therefore ordered that its decision "shall be read to the session of Central by its clerk". For the reasons set forth in this opinion, these portions of the decision of Presbytery are founded upon an erroneous interpretation of Presbyterian law. Accordingly, they are set aside. DATED: March 26, 1993. [Signed by] John W. Runde, Moderator; Herbert E. Dobberstein, Clerk, Douglas Acker; Marijo Kerr; David Hill; Louis R. Paradise [signature not present on this copy]; Rhoda Iyoya. John Pickrell, deeming himself disqualified, did not join in this opinion. The Rev. Dr. David S. Hill submitted an addendum. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To Be A Church Again by Jack Hoffmeister In the Stonewall Revolution of the sixties gays and lesbians learned that it is all right to be homosexual. We learned that sexual orientation is not our choice -- it is given to us -- but that what we do about it *is* our choice. We must decide whether we are going to suppress it, or hide it, or live it openly. The most revolutionary thing we learned was that living as an openly gay person is a viable choice, and that for many, if not all, it is the healthy choice, the self-fulfilling choice, the right choice. But in the sixties there was another revolution going on simultaneously that was equally important to us: the sexual revolution. The sexual revolution told us that it is all right to have sex, that sex is a healthy and natural form of expression and of recreation, that taboos are wrong, that sex should not be held captive to old rules about propriety, marriage, age, or gender. Not even the rules of love. Both revolutions produced much-needed correctives to the attitudes and values of the past, as necessary as the changes in attitudes towards blacks, towards women, and towards war. But they have left many unresolved questions and problems, particularly questions about sexual behavior. These questions have been examined at length by psychologists and social scientists. We are learning how the new attitudes and patterns of behavior affect us, how sex works. But we are making little progress in the equally important under-side of those questions, the moral side. We know how sex works, but we do not know what sex *means*. Moral questions, because they are essentially religious, have always been the province of the church. As a result of the sexual revolution, sexual morality in America has been set adrift. But the churches have failed to come up with the spiritual or intellectual resources, much less the strength of leadership we need to point us towards a new moral imperative. What happened in the Presbyterian Church is typical: we got caught on a snag. The entire field of sexual morality has been hooked on the question of the ordination of gays and lesbians. While we face a massive crisis over the meaning of sex and love which affects all our relationships and most institutions, this one peripheral, and indeed artificial, issue has put up a barrier that must be overcome before the Presbyterians can begin to function like a church again. Why did this happen? I think it happened because most of the church leadership is still not ready or willing to come to grips with the changes that occurred in the sexual revolution. Some, a remnant from my generation, were raising their families during the sixties, struggling to keep their values intact, and have never accepted the changes in thinking. Others are products of the conservative backlash of the late seventies and eighties, and hearken back to a romanticized notion of the morality of the 'good old days'. Add to this the presence of an element of fundamentalist thinking, a small minority in the Presbyterian Church, but aggressive, vocal and united. When openly gay people sought ordination, fundamentalists objected, and instead of quickly overriding them, a majority allowed this relatively simple doctrinal dispute to excuse them from confronting their own confusion and fear over sex, with what it means in their professional and personal life. And they have not budged for nearly fifteen years! In a very practical sense this impasse is a disaster. People are not getting the spiritual and moral guidance they need in the most intimate part of their lives. Or worse, what they are hearing is out-of-date, conflicted, naive, or simply wrong. Gays are especially in need of that guidance. With a new identity, a new role in society, we need a much clearer sense of the importance of sex in relationships, as an expression of love, and as a statement of commitment. It is a cruel irony that the church should choose to exclude us. But there is another factor here that compounds our separation from the church: that is the whole history and intensity of the struggle of gays and lesbians for acceptance in society. The process of political polarization has required gays, lesbians, and 'pro-gays' to unite, to gloss over their diversity and the problems that arise in what is a new arena of social structuring. In the face of an opposition that is not only immoral, but at times life-threatening, to admit that gays are anything less than 'gentle, angry people' has been regarded as impolitic. But gays are no more saintly than anyone else. And where sex is concerned there are some very disturbing realities we must address. Gays have been using sex to make friends, to demonstrate prowess among their peers. They have been using sex to make statements about themselves as unfettered self-affirming individuals, political statements, spit-in-the-eye-of-society statements. Many have acquired habits of sexual behavior that are socially inappropriate, have developed obsessions that amount to neuroses. Those gays who have not accepted their identity, who are struggling to hide it or suppress it, are suffering from the denial, the fear of exposure, the self-loathing, all the demons that homosexuals have always endured, that drive so many to suicide. But notice that while some of these problems and questions relate specifically to gays, they are all rooted in moral issues that are universal. A reluctance to treat sex respectfully or reverently pervades all of society. Promiscuity, sexual prowess and peer pressure, sexual obsession, failure to make commitments, these are everybody's plagues, and the results are universally devastating. The battle over ordination of gays and lesbians has prevented the Presbyterian Church from helping not only gays but all its people in this moral crisis. That's tragic. That it should allow an anachronistic doctrinal dispute to stand in its way is a disgrace. It is tempting to simply give up on the churches, to look elsewhere. That is what most gays have done. And so has nearly everyone where questions of sex are concerned. But where have they gone? To the movies? To the TV talk shows? To the schools, where that same anachronistic element has put up the same barriers? The fact is there is no substitute for the church to meet our need for moral insight and authority. Only the church can tell us why any part of our life is of importance or value beyond the self-contained system of pragmatism. Crippled as it is, I believe we must stick with it, that for those of us who value our church, who continue to call ourselves Christians, there is no other choice. As I see it, we have two jobs here. One is the ongoing effort to get rid of the ban on ordination of gays and lesbians. But the other job is more inclusive, and more important: we have to do what we can to see this church once again serve as a moral standard bearer. The commissioners at General Assembly gave up. They said in effect "There's nothing we can do; deal with it yourselves." I think we should answer "All right, we will," but not to interpret it as an invitation to simply continue fighting the definitive guidance. The ban on ordination must be removed; it is a cancer. But while it has not yet been cured I believe we should treat it as if it were in remission until a cure is found. I would urge that we owe it to ourselves and to our faith to not let the ban on ordination stop us from participating in the whole life of the church, from behaving like the Christians we know we are. We who are gay can contribute a special insight into the moral needs and realities of sex in the nineteen-nineties. The last sexuality study was a good start. That it tripped up on the gay issue merely demonstrates how important honest, open participation from gays is. The church needs us if it is to start acting like a church again. What we have to do is to behave *as if* the ban on gays didn't exist. We have to work towards moral clarity unhindered by the nagging feeling that we are not wanted here. We have to reach out to gays and to all others who need understanding, whose lives are being torn apart by the seeming incompatibility of sex and love. We have to reach out as if we had something to give them. For indeed we do. Because everything we do here is important. A new sexual morality will be realized only as an integral part of the entire scope of the church's impact on our lives. Sex raises the most fundamental questions, questions about love, honesty, responsibility, holiness: How are we to articulate the love we feel for one another? If life is holy can the force that puts life into motion be anything less? All of us, regardless of our sexual orientations bring these questions to the alter. And each of us, *because* of our sexual orientation, has answers to share. Every facet of the church's business speaks to these questions. We have been invited to a dialogue. I submit to you that in all our participation, indeed in our very presence here, we are speaking, and we are listening. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The Price of Privilege by Charles Collins "Praise Jesus!" the young woman declared. "He changed me from a lesbian into a heterosexual! Praise the Lord! I will be a loving wife someday." Her audience received the joy-filled announcement with a marked absence of enthusiasm. To them it didn't carry the importance of an end to the Bosnian conflict or a solution to famine in East Africa. The audience seemed to receive the news with a silent "So what?". To the young woman, however, her claim was every bit as important as an end to war or famine. She was announcing the end of years of being different, ostracized, queer. She could now claim normalcy and enjoy the privileges of the heterosexual class. She could now seek ordination in many Christian denominations. She could now aspire to high government office without fear of public ridicule. Assuming she would be married at some future date, she would enjoy significant tax and insurance benefits. And she would not have to endure the rejection of her husband's family at the time of his death. The benefits of membership in a privileged class are considerable, but so is the price of denying one's true nature. I asked an African American friend if he would rather be a white man. "The privileges which come with a white face would be great," he replied. "And yet I wouldn't give up my race, my heritage, my family, my people. Living as a white man, I'd feel lonely and out of place. Difficult as it is in this racist society, I'd rather be a black man." In 1979 I was ordained a minister in the United Presbyterian Church. At that time I believed that I was heterosexual and took for granted all the privileges granted to white heterosexual men in our society. The world was my oyster. I could be president someday. Then after one year of ministry, I realized I was gay and that gay men and lesbians were my brothers and sisters. I made a decision to live my life honestly as a gay man with other gay men and women. Losing privileges once taken for granted is an eye-opening experience. My career as a Presbyterian minister was over. Other careers would demand strict silence, including school teaching, medicine, or law. Even the love of family and respect of life-long friends could no longer be assumed. Recently, a lightbulb lit in my mind. I could reclaim those privileges. I could declare to God and Society that I am straight after all. "I was only fooling when I said I was gay. Come on; can't you take a joke?" But what would be the price of giving up my true identity? My friends who love me as I am. My two sisters who stand with me in my struggle against hate and misunderstanding. My God who has welcomed me home to myself. The new insights I have learned to cherish. The price of privilege would be too great. The lightbulb shattered as quickly as it was lit. I pray for the young woman who claimed the "miracle of heterosexuality." I pray that she has discovered her true identity and is not running from her fears. I pray that her friends will love her for who she is and not the miracle she represents. May she be measured by her love and not her willingness to sacrifice integrity. [Collins is a member of the Downtown United Presbyterian Church, facilitator of human relations workshops, and co-leader of Lesbian and Gay Youth of Rochester.] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Reviews Beyond Apology Another review of *Gay Theology without Apology*, by Gary David Comstock. Cleveland: Pilgrim Press, 1993. 183 p. $14.95. ISBN 0- 8298-0944-9. Reviewed by Charles Collins. [Our first review was in the August '93 Update. But a great and important book deserves more than one review, right? -- JDA] There is a topsy-turvy nature to Christian theology. The first shall be last, and vice versa. The poor are blessed and the mighty fall. Enemies become neighbors, and trusted leaders become fools and hypocrites. When voices fail to speak justice, even the stones shout out loud. Is it any wonder that God would choose to speak through the voiceless? Lisa Larges, a seminarian seeking ordination within the Presbyterian Church was silenced by the denomination's judicial commission because she is a lesbian. But several months later at the Orlando General Assembly, Lisa spoke with authority about First Corinthians 13. "Where is the justice in telling a woman abused by her husband that 'Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, and endures all things'?" Lisa reminded me of countless occasions when gay voices have revitalized tired theologies. In a time when gay experience is stereotyped as evil and the term "gay Christian" is declared an oxymoron by Fundamentalists, Gary Comstock confirms what many of us have known for years. *Gay Theology without Apology* moves beyond worn-out interpretations of Romans and affirms the presence of God in gay relationships, the experience of living with AIDS, and the struggle to build community out of shared experience. *Gay Theology* is rich with discussion material. As a Christian educator my mind had difficulty sitting still as I read. Before I finished the book, I was beginning to design a workshop using it as a text. The workshop would begin by building on Comstock's dialogue with scripture. How do the central themes of exodus and resurrection co-exist with the gay-critical texts in Leviticus and Romans? What are the parallels between gay experiences and the biblical stories of liberation? How is the gay closet like slavery or death? How is the coming out "process" like a sojourn in the wilderness? Just as the wandering Israelites longed for the security of Egypt, why might a gay person want to return to the closet? What would be the price of doing so? As Comstock moves from scriptural inconsistency to scriptural bias, the next segment of the workshop would investigate that bias. Considering the biblical assumptions about children and women, the patriarchal bias of scripture is obvious. What would be the consequence of failing to recognize that bias while holding to a literal interpretation of the Bible? The answer is clear to those who are continually abused by the church. Next we would have some fun. Taking Comstock's lead with his fresh look at Vashti, the rebellious queen replaced with a compliant Esther, we would revisit several minor characters of the Bible. Women, the disabled, and outcasts would be promising candidates. Rather than seeing them as victims we would look for ways in which they were empowered. We might even write accounts of our own experiences into the Canon. Then we would get serious with the book of Leviticus. This book of strict, often harshly punitive rules was compiled when the Hebrew exiles returned to Jerusalem from Babylon. Comstock's comparisons between the book's historical context and contemporary America should keep the discussion lively. Then on to some serious controversy. I must admit, I had some trouble even beginning the chapter entitled "Leaving Jesus." For as long as I can remember, a well-honed Christology has been the focus of my faith. But Comstock suggests that if we look beyond Jesus' Master image and take his message seriously, we will forever alter our relationships with one another. It is significant that Jesus commanded that we love one another, not that we worship him. In the closing sections of *Gay Theology* Comstock reflects upon gay experience, history, and culture. Since the invention of language, lesbian and gay histories have been ignored or rewritten. Within the past several decades gay people have begun to reclaim the courage and sacrifice of their forebears. As with any community, awareness of this history will be crucial to lesbians and gay men who see God as active within their lives. *Gay Theology* is valuable reading for gay Christians and those who stand beside them in their struggle within the church. By the close of my workshop, I am certain the participants' pages will have lots of notes in the margins. They will be richer for having theologized without apology. Even richer will be those who finally hear their silenced voices speak. Copyright 1993 by Charles Collins. All rights reserved. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * God's Gift for Which I've Been Waiting So Long *By the Pool at Bethesda*, by the Rev. Floyd Thompkins, Jr. (Genesis 1 Publishing Co., 100 NE 26th Ave., Pompano Beach, FL 33062, 305/783-9205, $6.95). Reviewed by the Rev. Howard B. Warren, Jr. I was sent this book to review for PLGC and I wasn't impressed by its "looks", but after putting off reading it, I was astonished to realize that it is God's gift for which I've been waiting so long. The Rev. Floyd Thompkins, Jr., is a Black Afro-American Baptist minister who uses his wide pastoral/chaplaincy experiences to develop a collection of Christian reflections on terminal illness, specifically HIV/AIDS. His ability to get to the heart of scripture and move us into areas of corporate health care, grieving, moaning and lamenting, feelings of anger/rage, and poverty while continuing to believe is refreshing and amazing. In nine reflections with titles such as, "Life Outside the Gate," "Going Through the Roof for the Sake of a Friend," "Empty Jars and Bills to Pay," "We Shall Dance Again," Thompkins, with skillful exegesis, resonates the lifespace of people with HIV/AIDS, the feelings of patients, family and friends, the absence of the church and the possibility of the church, always focusing on the constant care and compassion of God, a very practical Trinity, or as I say, The Wildly Inclusive God. One final note! Those of us in ministry with HIV/AIDS and witnessing the changing Many Faces of AIDS, particularly from the Black Afro/American community, have been waiting for a spokesperson such as the Rev. Mr. Thompkins whose book might have more credibility with the Black Afro/American churches and leadership. This is said not to limit its audience, for it is on target and will be helpful to all who struggle with the many realities and feelings of a chronic terminal illness, particularly HIV/AIDS, without regard to gender, race, orientation, age or national origin. It does fill a very real void and hopefully will be a widely used spiritual resource for one of the many faces of AIDS, Black Afro/Americans. We often hear that this community needs more resources that speak to their traditions and experiences and style. I thank God for the Rev. Thompkins. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Life Options by Susan Kramer Several months ago I was reading an article about a woman executive of a not-for-profit organization in Minnesota. She was describing some of the ways that she survives the stresses of her job. One of her practices is to keep a list of "Life Options," in a sense a fantasy list of things she would most like to do or dreams of doing. She keeps this list in a prominent place in her calendar and whenever things are particularly difficult she takes a few minutes and imagines herself doing or becoming one of the things on her list. When I started my new job last October I decided to try her practice. So I began my own list of "Life Options." In the ten months that I have been in my job, I have regularly flown to these "Life Options" in my imagination when I needed a break from the stress I was encountering. I have a relatively short list of "Life Options" I suppose, but that makes it easy to see in one swift glance. It also means that I have plenty of opportunities to add to my list. The possibilities are endless. You will be interested to know that number two on my "Life Options" list is to move to Cambridge, Massachusetts. I put that on the day I read in the newspaper about how Cambridge, Massachusetts had just passed a bill recognizing Domestic Partnerships. Since we live fairly close to Massachusetts it seemed like a logical move. Number three on my list is to open and operate a bicycle repair shop. Now I do not know much about repairing bicycles (a whole lot more about riding them), but on certain days believe me, I could learn real fast the repairing part! Number four on my list is to buy and operate a sheep farm. This would never be to sell the sheep for meat. It would only be for shearing and selling their wool. A number of people tell me I would not make enough money at that, but I sure would like to try. My latest addition and number five is to operate a used book store. That derives both from my love for books and my most recent frustration of not being able to find two that are out of print. By now you are probably wondering about number one -- at least I hope you are! For you see, on my list number one is indeed my number one life option. The order of the other four could shift and I would still be satisfied with one of them, but number one stays at the top no matter what. My number one life option? To become a cat. Yes, to become a cat. You have to understand that I am a late comer to loving cats -- and even envying them. When I was a child I was always afraid of cats. This was not because they had ever hurt me or I was afraid that they would hurt me, but because I was afraid that they always knew what I was thinking. Now I know that they do indeed know what I am thinking, but I am better able to deal with that fact as an adult. Kathleen, my partner, and I first got cats about three years ago and I only agreed to it begrudgingly. I also only acquiesced to two because I thought that they could keep each other company. I certainly did not expect them to keep us company. What I thought about cats was that they were cussedly independent and aloof creatures who only deigned to allow humans around them to feed and water them and make sure their litter box was kept clean. Well, Brittany, with her outrageous white whiskers and "eyebrows" against her black face and her extra toes on her front paws (around here they call her an Albany mutant) was the first one to grace our lives. One of my initial memories of Brittany after she came to our apartment from the shelter was to see her standing in the middle of our dining room floor with a plastic toy ball in her teeth ready to bring it to whomever invited her. Next came Theadora, maybe five weeks old at the time, a gray and white tabby able to fit in the palm of my hand. The first night we had her she curled up and fell asleep next to me on the couch. Then most recently has come Calista, our little gray tornado with her beautiful eyes. Acting more like a puppy sometimes than a cat, she talks to us constantly and responds in extra ways to everything. Actually she does everything in extra ways. We have been told that she probably has Siamese in her. Obviously, it did not take long for these cats to wrap me tightly around their paws. But this really is not an attempt to simply brag about our cats. I actually want to talk more about the gifts of our cats. I could watch them for hours. They not only calm me, but they center me. And I literally mean for hours. Their lithe bodies. Their silence. Their ways of moving. Their ways of loving us. Their focus. Their balance. Their trust. Their affection and companionship. They are anything but aloof and independent in the ways that I had believed. Three activities, however, may sum up these wonderful four footeds the most accurately. In many respects these three activities appear to be of their very essence, their very being. For you see, what they do best is eat, sleep, and play. And as Kathleen says, the eating and sleeping is what makes the play so good. Lest we think cats slothful, however, perhaps their eating, sleeping, and playing is their life's work. Blatantly their life ethic contradicts a life ethic I latched onto at a very young age. As a child I copied the following quotation and kept it in a very prominent place: "It is better to burn out then to rust out." It was a very different predecessor to my "Life Options" list. Certainly it is antithetical to cats' way of life. Thea is laying near me right now as I finish this. She seems to be the one of the three of our cats most attuned to us emotionally. You know, when Kathleen and I argue she is the one who comes and sits by us. She is not much of a lap cat, but when she nuzzles against us or lays her paw in one of our hands or rolls over with her paws in the air for us to stroke her beautiful underside, for a few brief moments our spirits touch in a unique way and we are blessed. Ah, yes, to become a cat -- even if for just one day! * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * News of the Church and the World PLGC Conference in Delaware PLGC of New Castle Presbytery is planning an exciting conference around the topic of Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual Inclusion, and issues around becoming a More Light Church. This event is scheduled for November 8, 12, and 13, 1993. For information, please call Lee at 302/323-8817. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * New Editor and Address for PANdemic PANdemic, the newsletter of the Presbyterian AIDS Network, has a new editor and address: Peg Atkins, 747 N. Taylor, Kirkwood, MO 63122. The July-August issue included an insert with the new hymn by Rosalind Brown that won the PAN competition for a hymn to memorialize those lost to the AIDS epidemic and to witness to the resurrection. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * New More Light Church We share "The Search for More Light" at The Church of Gethsemane, 1012 8th Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11215, 718/499-6704; Rev. Constance M. Baugh, Pastor; Mary-Elizabeth Fitzgerald, Director of Community Life; John Beddingfield, Community Life Assistant. "We stand accused by our scriptures, by the events of our world today, and by the disasters that our own attitudes have caused." "WE BELIEVE that people can change, and that God keeps pulling us to life, and to a new world of joy and peace." These two statements are repeated each Sunday in the liturgy used at The Church of Gethsemane. The first is taken from our "Call to Confession" and the second is part of our "Affirmation of Faith." Both statements are foundational to who we are as a community and who we strive to become as individuals. Both statements also describe the spirit and faith of this congregation as it underwent a period of inquiry and subsequently voted to become a More Light Church of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Early in 1991, several members of The Church of Gethsemane asked if the congregation could study the issue of becoming a More Light Church. At its March 10, 1991 meeting, Session discussed this request, and set aside the next three months as a time of study and discussion, encouraging the congregation to explore theologies of human sexuality. The time of education and dialogue included Christian Education classes, sermons, distribution of information resources and informal conversation. At the end of the three months, Elder Louisa Hill conducted a confidential survey of the congregation which included a ballot for voting whether The Church of Gethsemane should become a More Light Church. When the congregation voted, there were only three negative votes. Session later held its own vote and agreed unanimously that Gethsemane would become a More Light Church, understanding this to mean that The Church of Gethsemane would not restrict lesbian and gay Christians from full membership and participation in the church, including ordained leadership positions. As is stated in the literature of the More Light Network, "A More Light Church does not claim to have more light than other churches, but proclaims it is actively seeking more light on the inclusive nature of the church, particularly as it relates to lesbian women and gay men." In choosing to become a More Light Church, The Church of Gethsemane has been informed by scripture, the confessions of the church, the Book of Order, and the experience of the community of faith. We are particularly mindful of the Book of Order's call to inclusivity evidenced by such sections as G- 5.0103: The congregation shall welcome all persons who respond in trust and obedience to God's grace in Jesus Christ and desire to become part of the membership and ministry of his church. No person shall be denied membership because of race, ethnic origin, worldly condition, nor any other reason not related to profession of faith. and also G-3.0401b: The church is called . . . to a new openness to its own community of diversity, becoming in fact as well as in faith a community of women and men of all ages, races, and condition, and providing for inclusiveness as a visible sign of the new humanity. Since June 1991, The Church of Gethsemane has continued theological reflection and conversation about human sexuality. This congregation aims to model a wholeness and health to the world that reflects the love of God for all people. We continue to educate ourselves and to work with other churches to promote understanding and acceptance of gay and lesbian Christians in the sanctuary, in the board room, in the classroom and in all facets of our society. -- John Beddingfield. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * More Light Churches Conference [Bruce Hunt, who attended the More Light Churches Conference representing Lincoln Park Church in Chicago, wrote this report for the Lincoln Park "Update," from which we borrow it with thanks.] When I arrived at the Seventh Avenue Presbyterian Church, San Francisco, on Friday night [May 7], too late for dinner but in time for the evening worship, I spotted someone I know across the hall and went over to talk with her. She was carrying on a lively conversation with a man who said when we were introduced, "I know you." I had been at McCormick Seminary with Chuck in the early 60s, and as we carried on a running conversation over the three days, I realized that his history in so many ways paralleled the Church's history over the last thirty years. Chuck came out just before his fiftieth birthday; as he said -- with a noticeable absence of self-pity -- "I realized I was what I had been taught to loath." But no more; in that hall on that evening he was full of life and stories, pleased with his work in Oakland though a bit wistful that he had taken such a circuitous route to get there. Keynote speaker Robert McAfee Brown, who has been carrying on what he described as a lover's quarrel with the church, would have said that Chuck had changed from a "category" to a "person," or in Martin Buber's terms, from an "it" to a "Thou." Rev. Janie Spahr can no longer be a case number in the Presbyterian Courts once you have met her, and heard her speak, and given her a hug. That was Brown's most vivid example of why it is so urgent for us to "rekindle love," the second theme in his three-point sermon and the second topic of the Ninth Annual Conference of More Light Churches. The other two themes were: "Reclaiming Justice" and "Reforming the Church." We did a great deal of talking and planning for all three: in small workshops like one led by Derrick and Craig that provided Monna Ray [the other Lincoln Park representative] and me with a lengthy list of possibilities for continuing education in our congregation; in information conversations where delegates to General Assembly huddled to plan strategy; in worship where preacher Kathleen Jimenez encouraged us to find "common ground." There was of course a business meeting; Presbyterians always have business meetings and I came through the door just in time to hear the moderator acknowledge the strong work that our own Mark Palermo had done to help the More Light Churches Network get started. Business meetings are rarely inspirational, but this one did provide a sense of stability and hope. A number of congregations represented at the Conference were in similar positions to Lincoln Park: active (occasionally frenetic), mostly joyful (with a touch of righteous anger) and not altogether certain, after nine years, what it means to be a More Light church in 1993. It will be good to hear what new things the other congregations have attempted when the tenth Conference occurs in Minneapolis in 1994. The location will require a long trip for my new old friend Chuck, but it will be easier for folks from Chicago. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Synod Responds to Extortion The Synod of Southern California and Hawaii met in Duarte, California, on June 17 in response to the action taken by the session of St. Andrews Presbyterian Church, Newport Beach, California, regarding ". . . withholding of all general mission support [$300,000] to the synod until it totally severs any and all connection with the Lazarus Project [a ministry of outreach and reconciliation between the church and gay and lesbian persons -- see story in the August *Update*, p. 16]. The following actions were taken: 1. A letter will be drafted and sent to the session of St. Andrews which recognizes their several years of frustration in being unable to successfully communicate their concerns regarding the synod funding of the Lazarus Project [$5,000 annually]. It affirms that it is not the synod's responsibility to try to influence decisions of individual congregations; that this is a matter between the congregation and its presbytery. It recognizes the many years of undesignated giving of St. Andrews to the mission of the church. 2. The Presbytery of Los Ranchos, the Synod Governing Body Relations Committee, and the session of St. Andrews are asked to establish a creative dialogue regarding future relations. 3. In light of the action of the 205th General Assembly (1993), the synod urges open dialogue regarding homosexual orientation and urges that the church, at all levels, seek to provide safe places where gay and lesbian persons may engage in dialogue without fear of negative consequences. The Synod of Southern California and Hawaii is to work with its presbyteries for full implementation of the General Assembly recommendations. The synod assembly did not take action on the request to discontinue funding of the Lazarus Project. It did not act on the recommendation to not accept mission funds which were placed in escrow until June 30 by St. Andrews Presbyterian Church pending synod's possible discontinuance of the relationship with the Lazarus Project. -- Marj Carpenter, *News Briefs*, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), June 25, 1993, p. 1 (but the headline is ours!). Synod of Mid-America At its meeting of June 17-19, the Synod of Mid-America also urged its presbyteries and congregations to pursue the study of human sexuality, and specifically homosexuality, mandated by the 205th General Assembly, pointing out that "confusion and serious division in the church arising from debate over human sexuality point us to the urgent need for reconciliation and wholeness through the reconciling spirit of Christ (Confession of 1967, 9.06)." The Synod asked "governing bodies [to] create and publicize guidelines and covenants to assure an open and non- incriminating environment for gay and lesbian persons to be engaged in the study process without jeopardizing their reputation or standing in the church." * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * More Light Church Disciplined This story is based on stories by Carmen Carter in the Cincinnati *Post* and Beth Menge in *The Cincinnati Enquirer*. With a 95-94 vote, the Presbytery of Cincinnati has set up a special commission to oversee Mt. Auburn Presbyterian Church's operation. This is the first time in the 2.9 million-member Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) that a commission has been appointed to oversee a church to discipline it for ordaining lesbian or gay members. Such controversies usually are addressed through church courts. In January 1993, the Mt. Auburn Church ordained Michael Adee as an elder. Ten local churches filed a complaint. In response, the presbytery decided to set up a seven-member commission to resolve Mt. Auburn's delinquency, said the Rev. Robert Keefer, chairperson of the ecclesiastical affairs committee. After studying the issue, the commission can come back to the Presbytery and request authority to remove the pastor, deacons and elders. That would require an additional Presbytery vote. The Rev. Harold Porter, pastor of Mt. Auburn, said, "Our policy will be to continue to affirm gays and lesbians as full members in the Presbyterian Church." * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Holy Union Leads to Pastor's Resignation In the April and August 1993 *Updates*, we reported on the "flack" over a gay holy union ceremony in Salina, Kansas. The Rev. Bob Lay, Pastor of Sunrise Presbyterian Church in Salina, was investigated by a special disciplinary committee of the Presbytery of Northern Kansas, which cleared him of any violation of church policy. Nevertheless, negative reactions continued. In an interview in the *Salina Journal,* reporter Becky Fitzgerald asked Lay, "Do you have any regrets about officiating at the union of Skip and Steven Bishop-Durant?" Lay said, "I have absolutely no regrets. If I had to do it over again, I would." Fitzgerald asked, "So what prompted you to consider leaving the ministry?" Lay responded, "The reaction to the holy union and what I began to discover about the denomination. The extremes of reaction of Christians within the same church -- the almost violent reactions on the conservative end and the radical reactions on the liberal end. . . . I had people call me and say that homosexuals deserved to die with AIDS and that AIDS was God's punishment. After the presbytery concluded that Bob Lay had not violated any church policy, the session of his congregation voted 8 to 7 to ask Bob Lay not to perform any same-sex unions. "Shortly after that I got a letter from the Committee on Ministry [of the presbytery]. They strongly suggested that I not talk to the press -- do radio shows, be on TV shows if asked. I got requests to talk about this from all over the country. I really felt like there was a rope around my neck." Lay, who has master's and doctoral degrees in divinity and is a Ph.D. candidate in psychology and religion, has opened The Center for Psychology and Religion in Salina, where he will begin a private practice in psychotherapy and counseling. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Holy Unions or Marriage by Steven R. Durant It was the holy union/marriage of Steven R. Durant and Skip Bishop that led to the resignation of The Rev. Bob Lay from the ministry of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), described in the previous story. Steve wrote this story prior to their ceremony. I'm a gay man living in Salina, Kansas. Yes, it's true, we are everywhere. I'm even "out" and have not had any bad experiences. But I'm not writing this to let you know we're everywhere. I'm writing about the term "Holy Union." In July my partner asked me to marry him. I promptly said yes. When Skip proposed to me he didn't ask me to have a union with him. He asked me to marry him. For us there is no difference between a "Holy Union" and a "marriage" other than the words. But what about everyone else out there? What impression are we giving to the straight world by having "unions" instead of "marriages"? I guess my problem is that I feel we are creating another chasm between us and our rights. We are actually asking for special rights and recognition, if we as a community aren't willing to stand up and say, "This is the man (or woman) that I love and we are getting married." Think about it for a minute. Have you ever filled out a tax form and seen "united" as an option on the marital status line? What about insurance forms, loan agreements, rental contracts; the list goes on and on. Do we really want a special line made just for us; just because we're queer? Aren't there enough differences between gays and straights already? I know there are those among "us" who don't want anything about their lives to resemble that of our heterosexual counterparts. But I am of the opinion that we, as a community and minority, need to stop trying to find differences, and look at some of the similarities. As a couple, Skip and I do the things most other couples, straight or gay, do. We socialize, shop, play, talk, laugh, cry, work, do laundry, make love, and in our case, even raise children together. It sounds pretty much like any other couple I've seen and been around. Perhaps if we look at some of the similarities and bring them out of the closet with us, the straight world might not be so terrified of us. The straight world has seen how different we can be and it seems to terrify them. Perhaps if we could show them some of the similarities they could work through some of their fear. Perhaps if we could still some of our fear of being anything like a heterosexual we could make some progress toward equality. I don't want a "union". I want to be "married" to the person I love. The ceremony itself will be unique because it is mine and Skip's and no one else's. The laws are already in existence that set up provisions for a married couple. The connotations of a "marriage" are unquestionable because they are centuries old. I'm not so sure the same can be said for a "Holy Union". Why ask society to define and make new laws just for us and our "Holy Unions"? Why make acceptance harder than it has to be when all we're really asking is that *all* marriages be recognized? I don't know what will make our road to equality easier. I do know that our sexual orientation has created a wide enough chasm between us and heterosexuals. Should we broaden that chasm by trying to force acceptance of a new term for "marriage"? * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * PLGC'ers Debate Response to Church-wide Study Since General Assembly, PLGC'ers have been debating the best response to the decision by the 1993 General Assembly to harden its anti-gay apartheid policies and at the same time ask all congregations and presbyteries to study us queer folk yet again. We present here some of the debate in order to encourage the active input of all PLGC'ers. A Wichita Ultimatum First, I want to express my appreciation to those wonderful brothers and sisters who lovingly listened to me pour out my soul to them at the Cascades Presbytery meeting in Medford, Oregon. Because they showed so much concern and understanding my heart was "softened", somewhat. Those like me who are striving for total inclusion need to know that they have supporters like you folks to stay the fight. And there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that it's going to be a hard fight after the "Disney World" GA! After hearing about it I experienced a range of negative emotions from disgust and frustration to disappointment. I knew what Jesus felt when he branded the scribes and Pharisees as hypocrites, and as he chased the moneychangers from the holy temple. I liken our church leadership to the scribes and Pharisees of old who clung to the law and tradition as they continue to deny homosexuals full participation. In doing so they are turning a deaf ear to God's call for justice and love. What is more hypocritical than to say on the one hand that they support gay rights and full inclusion of gays in the military when they continue to do the opposite in the church? What could be more ludicrous, that they call for yet another study of sexuality (third in the last 15 years), after summarily rejecting the reports of the previous studies! Is anyone really no naive as to believe that this is anything more than a charade to stall making a decision on this crucial issue? Then they have the audacity to ask us to participate in this farce by revealing ourselves and defending our claim to be Christians! Not only will I not play this cruel game by testifying but I urge my gay brothers and sisters to do likewise and join me in denouncing the church for its self-serving attempts to avoid dealing with this issue, as God would have it do. God help me, but I have lost faith in the church and have become ashamed of its pandering to the Trogens* and Sheldons**, who self-righteously conduct this homophobic crusade in the Lord's name. I can no longer be a party to this denial of God's justice! Therefore, I'm calling on all homosexuals and their supporters to join me in issuing an ultimatum to the 1994 General Assembly in Wichita (call it the "Wichita Ultimatum") that unless the church declares full acceptance of homosexuals, there will be a mass walkout of thousands of us in protest. *Maybe God is telling us it's time for a new, truly all-inclusive Presbyterian Church?* -- George Link, reprinted from *PLGC Oregon*. *Larry Trogen is Pastor of Hope [sic!] Presbyterian Church, Portland, Oregon -- the church that challenged the ordination of George Link and a lesbian as deacons at Central Presbyterian Church in Eugene, Oregon. -- See the Synod PJC decision on this case, the lead story in this *Update*! ** Lou Sheldon is a California-based "Christian Family Values" bigot. Too Little Too Late I applaud George for the comments he has made and for the ultimatum he has issued. For myself, however, I feel it is too little too late when it comes to the Presbyterian Church. I was so angered by the actions of the Permanent Judicial Commision last fall that I took action by replacing my 1993 pledge to the church with a pledge of $0, and I removed my time and talents pledge for all involvement with the local church unless it was an activity working for total inclusiveness within the church. I sent word of my actions to all levels of the denomination, but only received a few condescending responses. It took me 45 years to finally deal with my sexuality and begin to realize that I am a loved child of God. I no longer will allow myself to be bashed by the church that was very willing to ordain me an elder as long as I was straight, but then tells me I can no longer serve the church once I am honest about the man God created me to be. I do not accept the "Wichita Ultimatum," because I no longer want to be a part of a church that truly does not know what it means to be the Body of Christ. I now leave the church to its sinful ways and will find a spiritual community with which to worship and which to share with as the real Body of Christ. No longer will I give the Presbyterian Church my time, my talents, my money, just so they can keep telling me that I am unworthy and not loved and accepted by God. I know better! -- Rich Horton, founding convener, Northern Ohio PLGC, reprinted from Northern Ohio PLGC *News & Notes*. Wichita Is Too Early I share your deep disappointment in our church. It is more than just the homosexuality issue: My impression from sitting through the whole General Assembly is that the church has immobilized itself. It's unable to take any decisive action in any direction. There are a number of factors contributing, but the major ones are the dramatic loss of members and a lack of decisive leadership. The G.A. committee on Human Sexuality was totally unprepared for the job, and it got little staff help except for continual admonitions from the legal experts, "You can't do this, You can't do that." And this is representative of the entire situation of the Presbyterian Church -- Scared to death, bound in its own red tape. Representative in another way, too: Unready to deal with the homosexuality issue. The 3-year dialogue is an admission of that unreadiness: The committee and the Assembly recognized their ignorance enough not to want to cut off the discussion. I can imagine your pain. It leaves you dangling with no support. If cases like yours are pursued, it is going to be very difficult to get the trust necessary for a discussion. A moratorium or "stay of execution" by the responsible judicatories would seem to be called for; I don't see why it couldn't be done in the form on an informal agreement. Maybe it's because I did sit through the Assembly and a large part of the committee hearings that after my initial anger, I came to the position -- a strong one now -- that we who are gay and lesbian should do everything we can to facilitate the dialogues and try to see that they are done in a positive say. Yes, we have had 15 years when we were urged to study the subject, but we did not do it. And we've had 2 high-level studies, but the studies were done by "experts" and simply presented to the G.A. The membership of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has never entered into dialogue on the subject. What the 1993 Assembly has called for is just that -- and it is *new*. I sensed that those present at G.A., which includes the entire leadership structure, has a new sense of urgency about this, based on their awareness that the Church is likely to split apart if an answer is not found to this dilemma. This is the same fear you propose to use in your "Wichita Ultimatum." It is quite possible that this ultimatum will have to be given -- It surely will at the end of the dialogue if nothing changes as a result of it -- but in my judgment Wichita is too early, even just for the practical reason that you won't get enough lesbian and gay Presbyterians to reject the dialogue process. Presbyterians DO need to dialogue on this subject don't we? I've seen the beginnings of something new here: My church, also named Central, conducted a 10-session dialogue using Lutheran materials this spring, and the creator of that material conducted a workshop at the Synod of Mid-America meeting attended by 40 persons. Also, our Synod passed a resolution asking presbyteries and congregations to begin the dialogue. Our presbytery Church and Society Committee is working on a plan for the dialogues which it will present to Presbytery Council. Twin Cities Presbytery is doing something similar. We need you in that dialogue, George. We need you to tell folk in other congregations, face to face, about your experience as a gay person and as an ordained officer of the church. -- Merrill Proudfoot, PLGC's coordinator for the Synod of Mid-America. Debate continues at Ghost Ranch George Link hopes to continue this debate at Ghost Ranch, the "enchanting" Presbyterian conference center near Santa Fe, New Mexico, during the fall workshop for lesbian women, gay men, and bisexuals, their families and friends in the church, November 11- 14. Leading the program, entitled "Individuality and Community," will be Chris Glaser, regular PLGC columnist and author, and Lisa Bove, former PLGC Co-Moderator and associate pastor of West Hollywood Presbyterian Church. The long weekend begins with dinner (great food!) Thursday, November 11 and ends after breakfast on Sunday, November 14. Total cost, including room and board, is only $225. Contact Ghost Ranch, HC 77, Box 11, Abiquiu, NM 87510-9601, 505/685-4333.