Date: Fri, 31 Mar 95 13:17:57 EST From: "James D. Anderson" MORE LIGHT UPDATE December 1994 Volume 15, Number 5 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. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * CONTENTS * * * SAD NEWS Nick Thorndike Dies EVENTS Mid-Winter Conference 1995 National More Light Conference MORE UNHAPPY NEWS Anti-Gay Professor Attacks Gay-Friendly Colleague Janie Spahr Barred from Preaching in Louisville RESOURCES Life Stories REQUEST Lesbians Wanted for Wellness Survey FEATURE ARTICLES The REAL "Sin" = Prejudice = Ignorance + Fear + Hate, by Garnett E. Phibbs, Charlotte, North Carolina Will the Walls Keep Tumbling Down? -- A Sermon by Kent Winters- Hazelton, Preached, June 26, 1994 Testimonies Redwoods Presbytery Dialogue Speaking the Truth, in Love, by Lorna Shoemaker Dialogue on Gay and Lesbian Marriage, by Louie Crew Monogamous Romantic Unions, by Eugene Godilo-Godlevsky M.A., Deacon, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Spiritual Rewards at General Assembly, by George Link Sliding Down the Rainbow: An Advent Story, by Chris Glaser * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * SAD NEWS Nick Thorndike Dies PLGC mourns the passing of Nick Thorndike after a long bout with cancer. Nick was a student at McCormick Theological Seminary, where he helped organize the recent forum on human sexuality. He was a frequent contributor to the *More Light Update*. Nick was also a librarian, a loyal member of the "librarians caucus" of PLGC. At the time of his death, Nick was at the home of his mother, to whom notes may be sent: Sarah Thorndike, 237 Purdy Drive, Alma, Michigan 48801-2106. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * EVENTS Mid-Winter Conference Mark your calendars now for the 1995 Mid-Winter Midwest PLGC Conference!!!! The dates to reserve are March 10-12, 1995. This annual gathering for PLGCer renewal, fellowship, and fun will be held this year at Stronghold Conference Center near Oregon, Illinois. This is a beautiful facility on the Rock River, approximately 25 miles southwest of Rockford, Illinois. Look for details in the next Update. In the meantime, you may call Sue Jones at 608/244-4820 for more information. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1995 National More Light Conference The 11th Annual More Light Churches Network Conference will be held April 28, 29, 30, 1995 in Baltimore, Maryland. The Planning Committee has been meeting for several months at First and Franklin Street Presbyterian Church, the host site for the event. In conjunction with the National Committee, the local planning group announces that this year's theme is "Singing God's Song In A New Land." We have invited Virginia Ramey Mollenkott, co-author of the classic *Is the Homosexual My Neighbor*, as the keynote speaker along with Janie Spahr, Chris Glaser, Charles Forbes, and Herb Valentine, among others, to lead workshops. We have asked the Lesbian and Gay Chorus of Washington, DC to join us for Friday evenings' entertainment. Workshop topics may include gay and lesbian spirituality, inquiring churches, PFLAG, holy unions, Biblical interpretations, preparing congregations for change and others. The group is currently developing a full range of diverse and inclusive workshops designed to inform, entertain and enlighten us all. Registration materials will be available in early 1995 in various publications, including the *More Light Update*. If you are in the Baltimore area, materials will also be available in the narthex of First and Franklin Street Presbyterian Church, located at the corner of Park Avenue and Madison Street in the Mount Vernon area of Baltimore. Regular Sunday services begin at 11 a.m. and the church office phone number is 410/728-5545 available Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. The More Light Conference brings together ministers and laity, lesbians, gay men and nongays, who are involved in Presbyterian congregations nationwide. Some of these congregations have made more light statements declaring a commitment to inclusivity in all aspects of their ministries, but participants come from congregations that are at various phases of considering the issue of gays and lesbians in the life of this denomination. The conference is growing. The movement began with conferences having 20 to 30 participants; last year in Minneapolis we were over 150 strong, a far-flung community that came together to celebrate and learn from each other. We tend sometimes to think that the issue of homosexuality and the church is a dour one, steeped in judicial struggle, political maneuvering, divisiveness, and rancor. Indeed, the struggle for an inclusive church is played out in part in committees and judicial commissions, a game of stratagem more than love. The More Light movement plays out the struggle in the daily lives of congregations. More Light churches are most often sites of exciting, caring, innovative and flourishing ministries. Ministry is the focus of the More Light conference -- how it is done in More Light churches, what the challenges are for congregations, what the rewards are for congregational life. The conference has become an exciting gathering of worship, workshops, excursions, and good food. It is positive and joyous. It is the church we want to create. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * MORE UNHAPPY NEWS Anti-Gay Professor Attacks Gay-Friendly Colleague According to a story in the Raleigh, NC *News & Observer*, Wednesday, October 19, 1994, professor of Old Testament and United Methodist Minister Lloyd R. Bailey has attacked Presbyterian feminist professor Mary McClintock Fulkerson for her views on the Bible and its appropriate interpretation and for her participation in a "public homosexual rights event." Both are faculty members at Duke University's Divinity School. Bailey sent a 40-page packet to United Methodist leaders all over North Carolina, claiming that his evidence "should prohibit Fulkerson from getting tenure . . . at Duke." Bailey also "used the opportunity to sound an alarm over increased support for gays and lesbians on campus, including a movement to expand insurance and other benefits to domestic partners of homosexual employees." * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Janie Spahr Barred from Preaching in Louisville The exile of Presbyterian lesbian evangelist Rev. Dr. Jane Adams Spahr has extended even to the national headquarters of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) in Louisville, KY. Here's the story by Jerry L. Van Marter from the Presbyterian News Service (*News Briefs* - 9442, October 21, 1994): Louisville, KY. -- Two events at the Presbyterian Center featuring the Rev. Jane Spahr, an openly lesbian Presbyterian minister, have been canceled by the Rev. James D. Brown, executive director of the General Assembly Council. Spahr had been scheduled to lead the daily prayer service at the Center on November 4 and then attend a reception in the social justice program area of the National Ministries Division. In an October 14 memo announcing cancellation of the Center activities, Brown wrote, "In my judgment, promotion of these activities during normal working hours gave an appearance that positions were being advocated that were contrary to the established policy of the General Assembly, and did not meet guidelines calling for a balanced dialog across the church on matters relating to the ordination of homosexuals." Kevin Kouba, chair of the Staff Association Worship Committee at the Presbyterian Center, said, "I am concerned and disappointed that worship is being politicized." He said it was the first time in the two-and-a-half years he has headed the Worship Committee "that anyone has been told they cannot participate in morning worship." Brown said staff members could meet with Spahr at the Presbyterian Center "with the approval of division directors." He also agreed to pay reprinting costs for a brochure listing the schedule of events during Spahr's four-day visit -- minus the two canceled programs. The brochure was produced by a number of the churches and groups that were hosting the events. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * RESOURCES Life Stories Here's a video resource for the General Assembly mandated study and dialogue. Experience "Life Stories" on growing up gay in the Christian Church. Meet Lisa, a clergy woman, both affirmed and limited by the church; George, who has a doctorate in ministry but is denied ordination; Doug, elementary school principal whose school won "model of the year" in the L.A. district. This new video has just been released by the Lazarus Project, West Hollywood Presbyterian Church, 7350 Sunset Blvd., Hollywood, CA 90046, 213/874-6646. There are two presentations, with a total of six persons sharing how their sexual orientation has affected their lives. Those participating (whom you may have met at General Assembly or at PLGC events) are Dr. Doug Elliott, the Rev. Lisa Bove and Dr. George Lynch in one session, and John Burnett, Laurie Fox and Dr. Bob Patenaude in the second. This is an opportunity to meet and experience gay and lesbian people in their life situations. Send a check of $23 (including postage) -- remember the bargain: *two* programs! It is also excellent for university classes. Churches and other groups can use it as a model for live presentations. -- Peg Beissert, Director, the Lazarus Project * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * REQUEST Lesbians Wanted Participants are needed to fill out a short survey (the *Lesbian Wellness Survey: A survey by lesbians for any woman who has loved other women*) for a lesbian graduate student's dissertation. Anonymity guaranteed. Contact Jessica F. Morris, Lesbian Wellness Survey, University of Vermont, Dewey Hall, Burlington, VT 05405, 802/657-2999. The introduction to the survey states: "Lesbian, bisexual, and gay women are so often overlooked when information is gathered about people's experiences. We want to change that! The purpose of this survey is to get an idea of what lives are like for lesbian and bisexual women in the U.S." * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * FEATURE ARTICLES The REAL "Sin" = Prejudice = Ignorance + Fear + Hate by Garnett E. Phibbs, Charlotte, North Carolina How do you feel when you are repeatedly accused of something you didn't do? Or when you are assumed to be something other than you are? Or daily blamed for what you did not choose or decide? And for all your adult life you are therefore called ill, illegal or immoral? AND if anybody REALLY knew you, YOU would be fired, evicted, harassed and rejected on the spot? Well, welcome to the world of our gay kids! No, PLEASE don't switch channels on me yet, for I really DO understand where other people are and why they feel that way! For, you see, my family has been just up the road 100 miles since 1750, so I grew up as anti-gay as anybody else. Indeed, as late at 1976 -- even having served for many years on civil rights / human relations commissions on city, state and federal levels, as well as interfaith justice task forces -- I refused sincerely to support legislation adding sexual "preference" to the other categories of anti-discrimination: race, creed, gender, age. BECAUSE, I said, "Homosexuals are DIFFERENT from these other groups, since they CHOOSE to be." (Which everybody but gays still assumed in those days.) Within months, one of my own sons, then later a niece and a nephew, realized they were gay. That catapulted me into a 17- year journey of radical re-education -- as it does for virtually every parent of a gay, and it motivates me now to want to help OTHERS still struggling to understand the elusive TRUTH. No, please don't run and hide behind the Bible! (We'll get to it in due time.) For it is the same Bible which my North Carolina-Virginia Baptist/Methodist preacher great-granddaddies quoted in the same way to prove that slavery and segregation were God's will! Thus were most churches caught on the wrong side of history re racism -- as surely they will be re gayness when the Supreme Court eventually finds, as inevitably it must, that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is just as unconstitutional as for race and gender. In this baccalaureate season, did you notice how much was said about the current buzz word of political correctness -- "freedom is the RESPONSIBILITY for our own lives"? And of course, I would not disagree with this any more than with apple pie, motherhood and Yale! Agreed, BUT try inverting that idea -- what do we do when a person is accused, blamed, punished for something for which they are NOT responsible, accountable, culpable? No loving parent punishes her kids for something they didn't do -- hence not responsible. No just jury convicts a defendant for what he did not do, indeed did not choose to do. Yet this is PRECISELY what our society does to our gay children EVERY DAY! Never a discussion on this topic is held, especially in our Bible-Belt homeland, that doesn't eventually, get down to that old refrain -- "yeah, but gayness is a SIN". Yet nobody ever bothers to analyze it as to WHY it has been called a "sin". Except for that generic "Sin" which afflicts us all, EVERY definition of "sin" I've ever known about has one essential ingredient -- free will, choice, decision, volition. How CAN anything BE a "sin" when in fact the primary ingredient of CHOICE, DECISION is absent? Yet, with psychological scientists having discovered a decade ago that gayness is not caused by either a choice or parental fault, microbiologists are now proving in the lab what we parents have known instinctively for years -- that gays COME TO US that way, didn't choose it, can't change it, and don't have to. Thus it is immoral / unethical for US to judge, condemn, reject ANY person for something which they did not choose and cannot change! Yes, it IS that simple! No freedom / choice: no moral / ethical dilemma! Think with me for a moment of three examples in the last three decades, of how we have learned this fact in other social experiences -- left-handedness, race and gender. As incredible as it seems to us now, our society DID, even in recent years, judge, condemn, blame and oppress certain people because of these factors over which they had no control or choice. Imagine yourself in a waiting room full of strangers. We cannot tell by looking whether any person is Catholic, Protestant, Jew or atheist; educated or illiterate; rich or poor; healthy or sick; Democrat or Republican -- UNTIL they choose to reveal something to us about themselves by talking. There probably is at least one left-handed person who becomes noticeable. Do you remember what we used to do to "lefties" in my boyhood days? Parents smeared stinking sticky tar on their left hand, or tied it behind their back, or locked them in a closet, while all the kids at school humiliated them cruelly. But none of these "cured" it. Next generation experts said no, don't make a big deal over it, as soon as you notice little Johnny or Jane, just gently switch the fork or pencil from left to right hand. Did that cure it? No, in fact after a few months these lefties started stuttering, and many continued stuttering for life, just from the trauma inflicted by their misguided if well-meaning parents in trying to "cure" their left-handedness. So we learned in the 50's from child development educators what to do, i.e., "LEAVE THEM ALONE, accept them AS IS, and LOVE them as just being different." (So, by having learned this lesson well in the 50's, we hardly noticed last election that all three of our Presidential candidates were southpaws!) Back to our mythical waiting room of strangers. We can't know anything about those around us until THEY choose to reveal it. BUT just let a person of color enter the room, and we can peg him instantly, automatically classifying him by all the stereotypes in our minds -- long before he ever opens his mouth to say a thing about who he is behind the skin. Hence we are able to react to him, respond, interact SOLELY on the basis of his different color. This is to say it is his HIGH VISIBILITY that makes OUR automatic response possible, and indeed we probably will never get to know a thing else about him! But it's even worse, not only his high visibility, but the INDELIBILITY of his high visibility -- or its immutability -- that makes racial prejudice and discrimination possible. Therefore, in a nutshell, he is blamed, judged, rejected all his life for something he did not choose and cannot change. Theoretically at least, we started to learn this in the 60's. Yet, ironically, we've reversed, and and many are now saying we want to make "them" INVISIBLE -- "out of sight out of mind"! Then there are others in our waiting room that are obviously different (from me) -- women. BUT this is one difference that we men LIKE, indeed we holler "viva la difference!" In fact we thrive on that difference -- for it's what keeps the human race going! Well, that was, as long as we could keep that difference VISIBLE, so that we could exert OUR dominance by "keeping 'them' in their place," i.e., at least symbolically "barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen". BUT along came the hippies and libbers movements, "mad as hell and not going to take it anymore" -- burning their bras, wearing short hair and men's jeans, while men went to long hair and earrings, and both created the "unisex" phenomenon. So we men could literally not tell WHICH gender we were following across the street -- and we didn't like it one little bit, because it threatened OUR macho image and POWER. While we have a lot more to learn, at least we began in the 70's to quit judging and controlling people by our old stereotypes of sexism. (Sorry, we seem not to have learned anything in the 80's but self-centered greed!) But now in the 90's, we are beginning to face the last of our four great prejudices and injustices -- homosexuality -- or more accurately heterosexism. Back to our mythical waiting room full of strangers -- we can recognize on sight those who are southpaws, black (brown, yellow) or female. But there is a fourth "minority" here -- as indeed everywhere -- gays and lesbians. While they, too, are "different", their difference is almost never so obvious. So THEIR "problem" (or rather OURS!) is opposite, their high INvisibility. YET the other three bases for prejudice ARE there, just as surely and destructively -- didn't choose it, can't change it, and don't have to. We heard generals last year testifying that "what you do in bed is none of my business . . . I don't care . . . I don't need to know . . . etc." YET that same mentality next week demands some ID, "that's not fair to ME" -- I gotta KNOW, I have a constitutional right to KNOW, whether I have a "queer" living or working next door to ME, so I'll know how to relate to (read discriminate against) you! These bubbas would indeed be happy to make all gays wear that same pink triangle that Hitler used in the Holocaust -- if not indeed a big "Q" on their chests to raise their VISIBILITY! So, ANYBODY who has suffered rejection, alienation, discrimination because of their left-handedness, race, or gender SHOULD be the MOST understanding and empathetic supporters of gays and lesbians today! Unfortunately, however, most people are still stuck in the old false analogy of "apples & oranges" -- because gays allegedly "choose" to be that way! The best scientific analogy now is that gays come equipped with the same "hardware" as we (male & female), but their computer "software" micro-chip just came programmed differently from the factory! How long before we learn the basic fact, that gayness is NOT some acts which people DO, but WHO they really ARE? Yes, of COURSE, every love relationship with another person is a MORAL or ETHICAL decision for both partners -- whether gay or straight -- BUT the GENDER of the partners we fall in love with is NOT our choice! I promised to get back to the Bible "in due time" -- having started with the "problem" we know to be the reality, we can now look back and see what if anything they knew about it in Biblical times. But almost all the misunderstanding and heat over the Bible stems more from ignoring its historical context than from particular verses quoted. Anybody who has passed Bible 101 knows that: every page of it was written by men who assumed that the earth was flat and the universe geocentric; every page of the New Testament was written by men who took for granted that the world was coming to an end within their own lifetime; their only explanation for physical disease was that the patient or a relative had sinned; their only theory for mental illness was invasion by alien evil spirits. And they accepted it as a given that everybody is born heterosexual (As did we all until 15-20 years ago!). SO, given how very little they knew about all these areas of common life, WHY on earth would we even EXPECT them to know a cotton-pickin' thing about the complexities of human sexuality, much less homosexuality? Indeed, since all Biblical same-gender instances refer to forced, pedophilic or prostitutional sex, they really had no equivalent word for what WE know to be a loving, committed homosexual relationship. Ironically, even the word Sodomy has been given to an Old Testament story totally different from the meaning we've given it. And the Elmer Gantrys pull out those old holiness codes a yard long, admitting that they don't give a bit of credence to any of the others -- just the one about same gender sex! And any Biblical scholar worth his salt confesses that Paul's one reference is a veritable conundrum --using a word which has at least 14 different meanings in the New Testament. It is not mentioned by either Jesus or the Ten Commandments. Yet by contrast, the vast bulk of the Bible has to do with love of all God's children, acceptance, affirming, non-judgmental understanding, UNCONDITIONAL love! BUT beyond the nit-picking proof-texting methods, THE only point here is that the reason the Bible is of such little help in this situation which we have so recently dared to understand, is that the writers didn't KNOW anything about orientation -- any more than they did about nuclear fission. So we can keep jumping up and down, pounding our pulpits, waving our Bibles as "not MY opinion but the 'inerrant' Word of GOD" till we are blue in the face, but it will not change the bottom-line of biological reality, and indeed will just continue driving nearly half of our gay teens toward suicide! Admittedly, this does necessitate a whole new paradigm, a totally different way of understanding sexual orientation, rather than any chosen "lifestyle". Yes, it is as radical for us today as ole Copernicus' and Galileo's discoveries were for the church - - and unfortunately, it took nearly 400 years for the church to accept reality and finally "forgive" them for having discovered the truth in spite of its ecclesiastical prejudice! So it does come down finally to a matter of stereotypes, or prejudice. That's bad enough, and in the sixties when we first really went honest about it, we thought we had really identified the "problem". But we're now faced with so many who avoid all responsibility with "But I never brought any slaves over here -- nor beat my wife!" -- And we now realize that the REAL issue is WHO controls any given relationship or system, WHO has the POWER, to decide and choose the important issues NOW? Isn't it transparent as to WHO makes the decisions, choices for our gays and lesbians? On the one hand they do not make any choice to BE gay; yet on the other, all their normal choices (equal, not "special") are denied -- the right to hold a job without constant fear of being fired, a home without being evicted categorically, a normal social life without being harassed -- all just because of how they were born! (Even as I type this, news is breaking that our US Justice Department now acknowledges gays as a bona fide group to be offered asylum protection against being returned home to FOREIGN "persecution"! What irony!) Surely THIS is the REAL "sin" when discussing our gay children! AND the most heart-wrenching part of it is the horrific secrecy of that damnable "closet" (created by us, not gays, so we could CONTROL them.) So the whole world suffers because we still listen only to those who peddle ignorance, fear and hate, rather than learn anything about the facts. That is, tragically, UNTIL we finally realize that WE have a gay in our OWN family! So, sit very lightly on your throne of judgment, good friends, because when the bell tolls for thee, believe me, you will spend the rest of your life eating your own words of ignorance, fear and hate, never believing how "sinfully" PREJUDICED you and I once were! Shalom! [BOX] Garnett E. Phibbs is a retired ecumenical / interfaith minister / ethicist, founder of C.I.N.G.L.E. (Charlotte Interfaith Network for Gay & Lesbian Equality); Parents-FLAG member, officer, writer, speaker for 17 years in CA, OH, NC; former member of Lazarus Project Board in West Hollywood, CA; former member of More Light and Affirming congregations in Presbyterian, Methodist, & United Church of Chirst denominations; member of Charlotte Clergy Task Force on Gays; network contact for the United Church of Christ Coalition for Lesbian/Gay Concerns (4901-H Endolwood Rd., Charlotte, NC 28215-4181, 704/536-9348). * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Will the Walls Keep Tumbling Down? A Sermon by Kent Winters-Hazelton Preached, June 26, 1994 [BOX] On June 26, 1994, *Stonewall 25: the International March on the United Nations to Affirm the Human Rights of Lesbian and Gay People* took place in New York City. It was one of the largest human rights marches in history and was part of the celebration of the 25th anniversary of the Stonewall riots.] Texts: 2 Samuel 1:17-27, Mark 5:21-43 As 1969 began, I was in the middle of my sophomore year of High School. When I look back on 1969 there are many eventful moments which come to mind. In early January, Richard Nixon was inaugurated as the President of the United States, but more importantly to me, in sports, a brash, young quarterback named Joe Namath predicted that his underdog New York Jets would win the Super Bowl, and he backed up his words. In the Fall, the "Miracle Mets" won the World Series beating the invincible Baltimore Orioles. And with his victory in the US Open, Rod Laver completed the last Grand Slam in Men's Tennis. Neil Armstrong walked on the Moon and hundreds of thousands of young people gathered for a rock 'n roll concert in a small upstate New York town called Woodstock. Tiny Tim married Miss Vicky on the Tonight show and one of the most popular television shows that year, the Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour, was canceled. For the first time, children entered into the world of Sesame Street. The most popular movies that year had interesting male- bonding images: Easy Rider, Midnight Cowboy, and Butch Cassidy and the Sun Dance Kid. But the movie that won the Oscar was a musical, Oliver! Leonard Bernstein resigned as the Music Director of the NY Philharmonic. And far away from home, in the first 6 months of 1969, 6,358 Americans died in Viet Nam -- the highest casualty figure of the war. Before you think that I have a very good memory let me tell you how I found out some of this information. This past week I went to the Library and looked up the volume for the year 1969 in *The Encyclopedia Americana* yearbook series. I wanted to read about an event that I didn't hear about and in fact did not learn about for another ten years. I went to see what the *Yearbook* had to say about the Stonewall Revolution that took place 25 years ago this week. That began an era of conscience raising about gay and lesbian people who live and work among us, and a time of fighting for civil, human and ecclesiastical rights for homosexuals. And what did I find in the *Yearbook*? Not much. There was absolutely no mention of the Stonewall rebellion which began when the New York City Police began to arrest gays in a bar in Greenwich Village called the Stonewall. At that time, in the State of New York, it was against the law to serve alcoholic drinks to homosexuals and the police would frequently raid gay bars and either arrest a few people or collect a pay-off. But on that night, at that bar, people said, "Enough!" A movement was born. But it wasn't mentioned in the *Yearbook*. In fact there was only one mentioned of homosexuality in the book. The category it was listed under was very surprising to me. It wasn't listed under sexuality. It wasn't listed under movements or lifestyles. It wasn't listed under society or civil rights. It wasn't even listed under disease, which was what it was considered back then. Homosexuality was listed under "Crime." I was stunned to see that. There was something that made this even more sickening to me. At the top of the page there was a picture that told the story of what crime was all about in 1969. It was the story of the year. At the top of the page there was a picture of Charles Manson. The murders his followers committed occurred in August of 1969. Crime: that was the category that homosexuality fell into; that was association that a major publisher made in chronicling the role of homosexuals in society in 1969. In 49 states and the District of Columbia it was against the law to be a practicing male homosexual. To be a homosexual was to be a criminal. Aren't you glad we have made progress from that shocking statement? Aren't we pleased that in our society today gay and lesbian people have standing, and rights and acceptance? This past week, a Virginia State Court of Appeals overturned an earlier judge's ruling which held that a lesbian woman could not keep custody of her own birth child because, even though the state motto of Virginia is that "Virginia is for Lovers," homosexuality is illegal. The earlier judge ruled that the woman was unfit for parenthood because she was engaged in illegal activity. Two months ago the voters in Austin Texas voted to deny health care and other benefits to the partners of City employees. The opponents of the vote cast this as a referendum on gays demanding rights that they were not entitled too, even though less the 10% of the people affected by this vote were homosexual. Two weeks ago at the General Assembly in Wichita, the Presbyterian Church said that Ministers of the Word should be prohibited from performing union services that honored the life commitments of honor and love made between people who are homosexual. In a quotation that the General Assembly News Service used to capture the debate, a youth delegate said, "Homosexuality does not reflect God's plan." Friends, we can see clearly that we have not made very much progress. For every stone that was taken down from the wall at the Stonewall rebellion, we have replaced it with another stone. The wall still remains. In our reading from the Gospel we discover a story of healing that is also about inclusion. As Jesus is making his way through the crowd a man rushes up to him and gives him a command. "Come, for my daughter is ill." The man is named, Jairus, and we discover he is a man of position and stature, a leader in the synagogue, among the religious elite. What a risk for this man to reach out to Jesus. His actions would put him at odds with the religious leadership, upsetting the status quo. He risked his own position in the society. He risked the life of his little daughter by approaching this charismatic charlatan, who just might be a healer. Jesus, sensing the immediacy of the moment, moves quickly to follow Jairus. As he moves through the crowd he is touched. He stops and turns around and inquires who had touched him. An unnamed woman emerges from the crowd. She has been bleeding for 12 years. In that society she was an outcast, treated as good as dead. No one could have any contact with her without being defiled and declared unclean. But Jesus stops and he places his focus on her, giving her equal importance to the powerful and well-connected Jairus. When everyone else was calling her every name in the book, he calls her "daughter." While Jesus gives this woman his fullest attention, the daughter of Jairus dies. Let me make a crude analogy from this story. In this story Jairus's daughter is the Presbyterian Church. We have rushed to Jesus' side and said, "Come quickly, for our mission programs are dying, we are losing members, our budgets are shrinking. We have become too radical. We have become too inclusive. If you don't come quickly it will die." But as Jesus makes his way to the General Assembly he is touched by an unnamed man who is dying of AIDS, or a woman who has lost her job because she told someone who she really is, or a young woman who is confused about the sexual feeling she has within her. Jesus stops to make certain the person in pain is heard and cared for and included. "Go in peace," he says. And while he does this, the General Assembly dies. But still he goes to the General Assembly. And while he is there, he takes its hand and brings it back to life. The moral is that we can make the difficult choices to follow God's call to reach out to the marginalized people in society, to be inclusive, to be justice oriented, and to know that Jesus can still bring new, resurrected life to the church. When will we start tearing down the stones in the wall that the church has erected and that we have erected and that we continue to erect between the church and gay and lesbian people? When will we begin to understand that God does not exclude any person, for any reason from the reign of God? When will we recognize that our reading of the sacred scriptures and our policies and actions toward homosexual people are reflections of the heterosexism of our tradition and not a reflection of the will of God? For most of the life of the church, the scriptures have been read as being hostile to homosexuals and homosexuality. In particular, Paul has some comments that have been interpreted as being very anti-homosexual. But we must remember that Paul is not God, nor is he the son of God. Paul was a man who wrote his letters reflecting the culture in which he was raised. It was a culture that strongly opposed homosexuality. His writings reflect that heterosexual bias. But what does Jesus say? Recently I came across this tract which is entitled, "A Comprehensive Study of Jesus's Statements on Homosexuality." It's contents are very interesting. It is empty. Whatever Jesus said about homosexuality it is unknown to us. But what Jesus did, time and time again, was overturn religious and social traditions whose purpose was to condemn people. He refused to accommodate traditions that excluded whole groups of people -- such as women, gentiles and Samaritans. Instead he responded to people in need, regardless of their status in society or in life. It is important to keep in mind that no where in the Bible does it condemn loving, faithful relationship of any kind. Perhaps it is time for the church to stop doing so as well. Let us look at it this way. One individual's sexual orientation is a mysterious combination of chemical, biological, chromosomal, environmental and developmental factors outside of one's control. For the most part, one does not choose one's sexual orientation. It is present at birth and developed through maturity. If this is the case -- and most medical, biological and psychological studies suggest this -- then we must ask, who is the sinner? Is it the one who expresses his or her sexuality as he or she is created, be it homosexually, heterosexually or even bi-sexually? Or is it the church which proposes to exclude people from the reign of God because they seek to express their God-given sexual nature. We must ask ourselves which is the correct reflection of God's active presence in our world: the *Book of Order* which states the "Membership shall not be denied any person because of race, economic or social circumstances, or any other reason not related to profession of faith" [G.10.0102a]; or the General Assembly which says that self-avowed, practicing homosexuals cannot experience the full benefits of membership in the church? It cannot be both. We must choose which side of the divide we shall stand for. A few years ago the Episcopal Church was debating whether gay and lesbian people could be ordained as Priests. Eventually the Church voted that they could not. As the debate came to an end, Bishop Kilmer Myers stood and spoke these words: *The model of humanness is Jesus. I know many homosexuals who are radically human. To desert them would be a desertion . . . of our Master, Jesus Christ. And that I will not do no matter what the cost. I could not possibly return to my diocese and face them, these homosexual persons, many of whom look upon me as their father in God, their brother in Christ, their friend, were I to say to them, "You stand outside the [gate] of the New Israel, you are rejected by God. Your love and care and tenderness, yes, your gathering, your reaching out, your tears, your search for love, your violent deaths mean nothing! You have no place in the household of God. You are so despicable that there is not room for you -- in the priesthood or anywhere else."* The stones in the wall are still there. There are the stones of homophobia and heterosexism. There are the stones of fear and ignorance. There are the stones of ecclesiastical power and control. There are the stones which say "Come in, but don't get too close." There are the stones which say, "Don't slam the door behind you when you leave." There are the stones of rejection, closets, and AIDS. But we come from a tradition that has a lot to say about tearing down the walls. Joshua marched around the walls of Jericho for seven days to tear down those walls. Even Paul himself says that "Christ is our peace, who has broken down the dividing wall that is the hostility between us" [Ephesians 2:14]. Jesus went into the temple which was full of walls that divided people, excluding women, and gentiles and the unclean, and separating them from the priest, and he turned over the tables saying, "This is my Father's house and it is a house of prayer for all people." When are we going to understand that if the Gospel does not liberate, it is not the Gospel? May God have mercy upon us for the stones we have put in the wall. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Testimonies Redwoods Presbytery Dialogue The Presbytery of the Redwoods held a dialogue on integrating sexuality and spirituality at their September 16th meeting at Westminster Woods in Occidental. Five people of different sexual orientations and life experiences spoke about how they have and are integrating their sexuality and spirituality (a lesbian elder, a lesbian minister, a heterosexual mother of a gay son, a male heterosexual minister and another heterosexual male.) Lorna Shoemaker, a Presbyterian Minister, was the last speaker on the panel. First though, before the panel discussion, in the morning when the docket was introduced, David White made a motion to amend the docket to remove the dialogue and replace it with a discussion on how to go about having a dialogue. After some commotion, the motion failed. Then it was announced that the Safe Covenant Agreement had been set aside. The night before, Mr. White was able to get the Synod's judicial commission to stay the agreement because the trial on that case is not scheduled to be heard until January. We were fairly certain that the Safe Covenant Agreement would not have ensured anyone's safety, but it did, at least, reflect the general feelings of the presbyters. It was made clear then that those ordained lesbigay folks who chose to come out during Presbytery did so at their own risk and without any assurances that charges would not be brought against them. The lesbigay folks who had planned on coming out during the panel discussion and the small group dialogue following the panel came out anyway. They were all incredible -- as were our heterosexual allies who joined with us. -- Sue Rostoni Speaking the Truth, in Love by Lorna Shoemaker [Copyright 1994 Lorna A. Shoemaker. Used with permission. This statement may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form or medium without the express written consent of the author.] I want to begin by expressing the pleasure I take in the Presbytery of the Redwoods' decision to honor the request of the 205th General Assembly to enter into three years -- now two -- of dialogue on topics surrounding our incomplete understandings of human sexuality. I am also grateful to be among the five who have been given the privilege of speaking before all of you for the next several minutes. Gratitude does not, however, preclude a certain amount of anxiety, which I believe all of us share in varying degrees and for differing reasons. Strange but true: we tremble more to speak of the mystery of sexuality than the mystery of sacred; and to speak of both together . . . well . . . Nevertheless, we try. *On May 24, 1893, six-year old Eva Wolff went to school for the first time. Walking into the classroom that opening day, she saw on the blackboard in careful Spencerian script the sentence: "The cat is black." An independent child, eager to get started, she took her neatly ruled slate in her right hand and with her left carefully began to copy. Starting from the letter "K" she traced from right to left every single letter. With assurance and delight, she presented it to her teacher. The gentle Miss Williams looked carefully, and then, with quiet directness, responded, "Oh, yes, my dear. But now suppose we take the pencil in the other hand and begin at the other side of the slate and the other end of the sentence."[1] [footnote: 1. I encountered this story in a text, the title and author of which I have since lost. I quote it with no intention to claim it as my own, and apologize to my readers and its author for my lack of rigor and consideration.] In an analogous way, just as six-year old Eva knew without thinking that her left-handedness was natural and appropriate for her, I knew at a very early age that female bonding on the deepest level was natural and appropriate for me. I cannot remember a time in my life when I did not orient toward my own gender first and males secondarily. I did not shun little boys; but I did not find them interesting or especially attractive. Very early on I recognized that males possessed privilege and held pride of place; power resided with them. But, having been late to understand the dynamics of power and status, it didn't occur to me that linking myself with a male would lend power or status to me, or that that would be desirable. Little girls band together; so do little boys. Some, many, experience a shift in orientation at puberty. I didn't. Women provoked inchoate longings and fantasies -- men didn't. School dances were not romantic. High school was lonely. My "other handedness" or simply "otherness" prevented me from feeling congruent with my peers -- I didn't feel what they felt when they felt it. And I could not articulate for anyone, even myself, the way the sentence of my life really ran. Not until late in my college career did I allow myself to think consciously about my own, real feelings and recognize that I was a lover of women -- the word "lesbian" wouldn't cross my alert synapses, much less my hesitant lips. I am ashamed to say that with astonishingly little effort, I learned and believed that I was not wanted as I was and would have to reorient myself in isolation and secrecy in order to pass. I chose to attempt the writing of my sentence with my other hand, from the other end; I chose to deny who I am and to side-step matronly and patronly questions about beaux and husbands with bland rejoinders about the right person not having come along -- yet. If your imaginations are slowed by the warmth and hour of the day, let me simply tell you: this variety of self-denial is deadly -- both spiritually and physically. You see, I am a lesbian by birth and a Christian by baptism; and the latter took, too. I was raised in the Presbyterian Church, nurtured by it, and heard unambiguously my call in it, years before the words "sexual orientation" or "homosexual lifestyle" were ever uttered in the Church or much of anywhere else. I knew my life was in some compelling and significant way dedicated to the Church of Jesus Christ when I was very young. Every step of my life in the teaching and structures of the Church blessed me and confirmed me -- over and over again. Some of you here present have participated in my preparation for ministry. Some of you here present witnessed and validated my ordination to the ministry of Word and Sacrament twenty years ago. And some of you here present have shared my ministry in parish, classroom, governing body, camp and conference. Now, today, sisters and brothers, I repent in your presence. I repent of having lied to you about who I am by preventing you from knowing me in the fullness of my God-created being. I repent of having spoken so glibly about my ministry and your ministries, my spirituality and your spirituality, all the while my own soul was withering within me for want of an authentic word. And I repent most heartily of my slow, inexorable descent into alcoholism, and the harm I did during that ghastly period of my life; for I have come to believe, now, five years later, that at the heart of my insidious disease was a need to drown the pain of an isolated, bifurcated, disingenuous life, and that only when I embraced the person I have been created to be and began to work through my fears and angers, did I begin to recover. I repent of believing conventional mores and the courts of the Church more than the words of life and the power of the resurrected Christ which I have experienced in my life. I have prayed that God would create in me a clean heart. I believe my prayer has been answered. I know now, from the abundance of God's mercy, that my sexuality is sacred -- as is yours -- and is essential to my wholeness and integrity -- as is yours. I believe it is an expression of God's grace and love -- as is yours. And I believe that as I wind my way out of isolation and secrecy into community and truth that I will live an increasingly spirit-filled spiritual life. I understand spirituality as having to do with experiences of the sacred within myself, within my relationships, within my surroundings. I understand spirituality as having to do with my way of believing, belonging and responding to the power and presence of a transcendent God who is a paradox of utterly unknowable and emanuel -- *God-with-us*. I might say, spirituality is who I am in a community which includes God. And a community which includes God has, to my mind, some particular characteristics: that community welcomes truth; it affirms creation; it constantly moves toward inclusion, integration and integrity -- or wholeness, shalom; it seeks to recognize and receive God's grace wherever it may appear; and it strives to demonstrate grace-filled and compassionate love as a grateful response. It is one sadness of my past life that I failed to recognize a moment of grace seven years ago when the woman who has since become my life partner, who is also a minister member of this Presbytery -- Holly Hearon -- took the courageous step of revealing herself to me and I could not reciprocate. We've gotten beyond that! But the community I am describing is the Church I wish to serve. As I have come to know and be true to my own authentic self, as my understanding of my spiritual center has deepened, and as I have been compelled to rely more on God and less on myself and human approbation, my ministry has begun to mature. And from this day forth, I cannot imagine hesitating to bring my whole being to every act of worship and ministry I celebrate. My own struggle informs my compassion for and solidarity with other oppressed peoples. My experience of God's transforming and redeeming love through those who have stood with me, loved me and literally called me back from death into life, gives me the courage and joy to preach the good news of release to all captives and proclaim the dawning of God's realm in our midst. I am enjoined by my ordination vows to speak the truth to you -- in love. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dialogue on Gay and Lesbian Marriage *We excerpt Louie Crew's comments on gay and lesbian marriage from a dialogue on the "Quest Coffee Hour," an Anglican internet discussion on Ecunet. Louie is the founder of Integrity, our counterpart organization in the Episcopal Church. The story of his marriage to Ernest in 1974 was featured in the September 1994 issue of the **Update.** This is a sequel.* Louie writes in response to the following comment: "In terms of dialogue, I have several friends who are gay. They seem to me to have a sort of permission for promiscuity not allowed for the rest of us. Is this true, or just my bias, again?" Louie replies: I can't speak for your friends. As for me, I have no such permission for promiscuity. My husband and I have made commitments. Our relationship is still young and vulnerable: we do not want to adulterate God's blessing to each in this sacrament. The church, however, has constantly attacked this relationship, constantly suggested that we are play-acting by calling it a marriage and by claiming to experience sacramental blessing through it. Nothing I have said or written seems so much to disturb the church as my marriage. If I would get AIDS and be decent enough to die, the church would give me a glorious funeral. The church is not really disturbed that I have helped bring faggots into the pews -- thousands upon thousands; after all, they add to the collection plate and do wonders in gussying up old buildings. Yet 106 bishops have recently signed a statement trashing not lesibgay people, but lesbigay commitments, telling the whole world that we are living in sin. It's a bit difficult when those same people wonder why so many lesbigays would not dare take on the awesome responsibilities of a relationship. It's much easier and socially safer to sin with stranger after stranger, confess, tithe more, and keep it all private. Many have been known to make it all the way to the House of Bishops playing by those rules. Three years ago, one became vice-president of the House of Deputies. Even at 58 I could risk less condemnation from the Episcopal Church by having sex with 4-6 lonely strangers on my way home from the coffee hour than the condemnation I risk in most parishes by saying, "Hello, meet my husband Ernest." The Church cannot have it both ways, however, even as hard as it tries. We cannot at once trash lesbigay commitments and then trash lesbigays for not being committed to each other. Upon coming to their senses, at least two dozen priests have gently, privately approached Ernest and me to ask whether we would like for them to bless our relationship. With all due respect and appreciation, we have turned them down, for you see, God has already done that. She was the only guest when we married on Feb. 2, 1974, using the 1928 *Book of Common Prayer* in our tiny apartment in Fort Valley, Georgia. To go back to first base (oops, my mascara is running with a sports metaphor!) would be to say that Ernest and I are the ones who have been living in sin: but it is the Church that has been living in sin in its abuses of us and of all lesbigay Samaritans. Jesus teased our ancestor about her multiple husbands and the current one who "wasn't," but He did not go back to the House of Bishops and sign a resolution to say how immoral she was. Instead, He told how thirsty. The water he offers to us Samaritans he offers to straight folks too: it's not who you are or where you worship. Blessed heresy of heresies first revealed at Samaritan Wells: God is a spirit, and we who worship God worship in spirit and in truth. The good news is that *repent* does not mean "bow and scrape and apologize and be embarrassed and feel bad about yourself and . . . ." *Repent* is at once both easier and harder than that: it means "re-think." May God give you and all other straight pilgrims the rich blessings She daily pours on me and my husband. Our cup runs over. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Monogamous Romantic Unions by Eugene Godilo-Godlevsky M.A., Deacon, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) The September 1994 *More Light Update* was an uplifting and enlightening piece of journalism. Recent issues had convinced me that my gay/lesbian/bi/transgender brothers and sisters were intent on rewriting the Bible and reinventing the Christian religion to suit the perceived revolutionary needs of gay liberation. Instead, the September issue contained articles which illustrate the capacity of gay/lesbian/bi/transgender persons to live in monogamous romantic unions as per the long tradition of the Christian Church. Although the rights of gays/lesbians/bis/transgenders are a real issue in society today, and although no person should be denied the basic human rights of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, including the right to work and have a home, simply because of his/her sexual orientation, it is also true that the Christian Church is not simply a microcosm of society as a whole, but a community with its own rules and standards dating back two thousand years and more, which require of its adherents sacrifices and principles exceeding those required by society. Promiscuity is at best an immature, and at worst an immoral solution to the question of fulfilling our sexual and emotional needs. Even the proposed amendment to the Presbyterian constitution which would require officers to be either married or celibate (i.e., *chaste*), and which, although it has a Biblical basis, would effectively, although not theoretically, discriminate against homosexuals, would become harmless if homosexuals were free to marry legally, as the test case in Hawaii will soon determine. On the legal front as on the religious front, we must therefore strive to make homosexual marriages a reality. The Presbyterian Church will look awfully silly if it repeals the rights of homosexuals to holy unions (which were always considered as not equal to heterosexual marriages) only to be faced with the necessity of recognizing homosexual marriages. Without even labeling people according to a specific sexual orientation, it should be clear that people should be free to marry those with whom they fall in love, regardless of their sex or the other person's sex. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Spiritual Rewards at General Assembly by George Link Among the abundance of spiritual rewards that I, George Link, experienced as a result of my "witness" to General Assembly last June in Wichita, Kansas, was a true sense of hope that our church is almost ready to answer God's call for full inclusiveness of our homosexual brothers and sisters. I'm sure many of you will find this rather amazing after my scorching accusations against the church following the Orlando General Assembly, but I now know that this was only one of the many rewards God intended for me in answering the call to witness for love and justice at Wichita. As I shared with you in a previous newsletter, I experienced a clear call in March to take my plea for change to the church using a prayer vigil and bread and water fast during the seven days G.A. was in session. As I learned on the fateful day at Christmas twelve years ago when I answered God's call to say YES to my homosexuality, you can't possibly imagine the rewards which God will heap upon you. I'll admit that I had some doubts about the wisdom of this action, but they were dispelled after my story came out in the May PLGC newsletter. I was amazed by the show of support I received with cards, letters, and checks supporting me financially (over $500 including a motel room provided by PLGC). Particularly cherished were letters and checks from Rev. Janie Spahr, Rev. Howard Warren, and Jeanie and Owen Wells. I can't take the space to share all the great experiences I had. so I'll mention two of importance. The first occurred as I sat as a volunteer in front of the PLGC exhibition booth. A woman charged up to me and waving her finger in my face demanded to know if I was with "them" while pointing to the PLGC sign. Mustering my composure I politely offered to help her. Hatefully she proceeded to tell me how much God condemned me for who I was, etc., etc. My prayer for God's help was answered when I was overwhelmed with pity for her, and responded to her in love by giving her a big hug, and telling her that Jesus loved us both just as we are. I was afraid of her reaction because she became rigid and I feared a heart attack. Thank God she didn't have one, but she was visibly shaken as she staggered to her embarrassed friend who stood some distance away. As they left I prayed that God would free her from the heavy burden of hate and prejudice she was carrying. The second incident occurred as I was attending a hearing on the Savannah overture, which would require all clergy and lay officers of the church to be celibate or in a "marriage" of fidelity to be eligible for office -- [Needless to say, this "marriage" did NOT include our same-sex unions! -- JDA]. During a hot debate an obviously troubled young man testified about his struggle with the "sin" of homosexuality. He was crying, and as I listened to him I empathized with his pain and prayed that God would give me the chance to talk with him. Lo and behold, he was standing directly in front of me as I exited during a break, and, without hesitation, I went to him, and as I gave him a big hug I shared my experience of saying YES to God and how it changed my life positively. He thanked me and walked away with a smile on his face. All told I gave out over 250 pink fliers and nearly 300 "Say YES to God" buttons. Most of those responding were supportive with only three people showing disapproval. I was blessed by many pats, hugs, and smiles. Needless to say, I plan to witness again at G.A. in Cincinnati next year, and, of course, in Albuquerque in '96, because I know in my heart that the church will answer God's call after a positive report on the results of the dialogue. For you skeptics, ask me or anyone who experienced the work of the holy spirit on the reimagining controversy! * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Sliding Down the Rainbow An Advent Story by Chris Glaser [Copyright (c) 1994 by Chris R. Glaser. All rights reserved.] Once upon a time, God was fashioning a rainbow in the heavens. Jesus sauntered by, looked puzzled at God's activity, and asked, "Hey, what's that?" "I'm trying to make a sign," God said, "A symbol that says, 'All is forgiven, everything's going to be okay. No more worldwide floods.' Something like that." "It's wonderful, Dad!" Jesus exclaimed. "Quit calling me 'Dad'! Where'd you get that kind of language?" God thundered. "Down there," Jesus pointed to earth, embarrassed. "That's what they keep calling you down there," he said, to excuse himself. "They'll get over it," God replied with a touch of impatience. "That's very beautiful," Jesus offered quickly, to change the subject. "But can't you keep it straight? It droops on the sides." "I kind of like it that way," God said brightly. "It's the way I made earth that causes it -- y'know its curvature and all. It's in the nature of things. To rise so high, it's got to have its feet planted in earth. And look at all the colors -- it's absolutely fabulous! Nothing's too good for my children!" "What about the flood?" Jesus asked mischievously. "Too much of a good thing!" God brusquely countered. "But since they're likely to blame me, I've got to show 'em I'm still with them." "What are you going to call it?" Jesus asked. "I'll let Noah name it. I did something right when I created him!" God smiled proudly. "You didn't create him," Jesus admonished, "He was born." "You think I'm not involved in *every* creative process?" God corrected. Both God and Jesus peered out of the heavens toward Noah on earth. "He called it a rainbow," Jesus said. "It does look like a bow." God frowned. "Didn't you notice his wife whisper something in his ear before he named it? *She* named it, and he's taking credit! There they go again!" God said, frustrated. Nevertheless, God shouted down to earth, "When the bow is in the clouds, I will look upon it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth." "Rain-bow. I kind of like the word," Jesus mused. "It did come after all that rain. Rain-bow. Nice ring to it. Kind of romantic." Then, getting carried away, Jesus began to sing, "Some-where, o-ver the rain-bow . . ." "Will you stop!?" God admonished. "People live *under* the rainbow, under my covenant promise." "Which is . . .?" "That I love them, that they have nothing to fear. That our relationship is permanent. I'll always be with them." "Yeah, but under the rainbow there's suffering. Look down there: Job just won the creative suffering contest." Jesus grimaced at Job's angst. "He droops just like your rainbow. Is that in the nature of things, too?" "Here, put your hand on the top of this rainbow," God instructed Jesus. "Ouch!" Jesus said as he did so. Then, "Ooh! Somehow it both hurts and tickles!" "Pleasure and pain are on a continuum. Life is that continuum. From up here, at the top of the rainbow, we experience both at the same time. But below, they experience pleasure and pain as radically opposite, like two ends of the rainbow. It's all in the perspective." "So the best thing for them would be to develop some detachment from both pleasure and pain?" Jesus questioned. "Some people believe that," God answered. "But life embraces both. That's what passion is all about." "Do I have passion?" Jesus asked. "Is the pope Catholic?" God laughed. "Who's the pope? What's 'catholic'?" "You'll see," God smiled. "Sure, you've got passion -- my passion. And you're going to show these people what passion is all about. That's why I want you to slide down one side of this rainbow." "You mean, go *under* the rainbow?" "Your sister, Spirit, has been living there since creation. She'll help you. But it will be difficult. You'll be tempted just as they are." "By you?" "I tempt no one. But your perspective will change. Sister Spirit will help you focus, keep the vision. Once you grow up, I want you to fast and pray --" "I have to start at the very beginning?" Jesus said, astonished, "As a baby?" "I think we should be subtle. Besides, all who enter my realm must do so as children!" "But I thought *this* was your realm!" "Not really. My commonwealth is under the rainbow, under my covenant. That's why I'm sending you." "Don't they already know that?" Jesus asked. "It's not so clear to them down there. Once you're there, things won't seem so clear to you either. Doubt will cloud your mind." "I won't remember you?" "You'll be inundated with stuff that might lead you to believe you're not my child, just as many of them have forgotten. Look to the rainbow, and remember." "You know, God, someday people will be able to explain rainbows . . ." "I should hope so! I didn't create dummies! You'll be their new rainbow, less easy to explain. You too will be lifted up as a sign of the covenant." "Will I droop like your rainbow?" "Yes," God said, with great sorrow, "And you'll think I've abandoned you, but I'll bring you through it and lift you still higher. And you'll lift them, too, by the compassion you inspire." "Lift them?" "So that they'll remember they are people of the rainbow: diverse, beautiful, revealing the spectrum of life just as the rainbow reveals the spectrum of light. They'll march under the banner of the rainbow, proud of themselves and yet proud of being a part of creation, a creation loved into being." "Loved by you --" "So loved by me, that . . ." God's voice broke with emotion. "I'll go now -- I see they're waiting." "And hoping . . ." * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *