Untitled Document

News & Musings
Claiming the Blessing Platform for '06

Integrity USA responds to Bush' call for a Constitutional Amendment
Bishop V. Gene. Robinson, One year later - John Shelby Spong
Doing Theology, The Rev. Susan Russell
New York Court Rules Gays must be permitted to marry
It would be funny if it weren't so scary
Sermon points out slavery was defended on the basis of Scripture
Sin & Sexuality - The Rev. Tom Shepherd
Where we Stand: (long) Background paper on Gay/Lesbian Inclusion in the Church - Susan Russell

Doing Theology The Rev. Susan Russell

Part of what we inherit as Anglican Christians is a particular historic method of "doing theology." A method coined in the Latin phrase Lex orandi, lex credendi, which can be translated "As we pray, so we believe" Praying shapes believing. At the heart of this methodology is the assertion that our believing (theology) can and will be changed by our praying. (Our bringing to God the yearning of our hearts and listening for God's response.)

It presumes:

* That revelation is an ongoing process never fully contained in any text or creed.

* That God continually calls us to new and wider expressions of the infinite love that lives beyond our ability to imagine

* That we are partners with God in the work of calling all creatures into loving relationship with their Creator and each other.

It is out of that historic dialectic process that we strive to articulate a theology of inclusion. This theology of inclusion springs from our foundational understanding of God as the ultimate source of abundant love. As Trinitarian Christians, that understanding manifests itself in prayers such as the blessing often given by Ed Bacon, rector of All Saints Pasadena: "The blessing of God, the one who creates us in love, the one who liberates us to love everybody, and the one who brings us into communities of love be with you this day and always."

It is also summarily expressed in the traditional All Saints Church invitation to communion: "Whoever you are and wherever you find yourself on the journey of faith, you are welcome to come to the Lord's Table and receive the gifts of bread and wine made holy."

Those prayers, along with many others throughout the decades, have shaped our believing that one of the chief callings of our baptismal covenant is to prioritize the manifesting of God's inclusive love in all aspects of our mission and ministry. Our believing and our theology is firmly grounded in the traditional Anglican triad of scripture, tradition and reason.

In scripture we claim the over-arching theme of both the Hebrew and Christian texts we inherit: the relentless pursuit of a loving God calling all people into community with God and each other. In our Anglican identity we claim a tradition that has historically and sometimes uniquely managed to establish an inclusive "via media" where diverse voices living together are enriched, rather than threatened by their differences. And our reason tells us that the proactive articulation of this theological perspective has perhaps never been more needed as we struggle in these early days of the 21 century with the challenge of multicultural, interfaith dialogue in a climate of increasing polarization and empire building.

New York Court Rules Gays Must Be Allowed To Marry

by Beth Shapiro 365Gay.com New York Bureau Posted: February 4, 2005 11:41 am. ET

Updated: February 4, 2005 1:22 pm. ET

(New York City) A New York State court ruled Friday that same-sex couples must be allowed to marry.

State Supreme Court Judge Doris Ling-Cohan said that the New York State Constitution guarantees basic freedoms to lesbian and gay people, and that those rights are violated when same-sex couples are not allowed to marry.

The ruling said the state Constitution requires same-sex couples to have equal access to marriage, and that the couples represented by Lambda Legal must be given marriage licenses.

"This is a historic ruling that delivers the state Constitution's promise of equality to all New Yorkers," said Susan Sommer, Supervising Attorney at Lambda Legal and the lead attorney on the case.

"The court recognized that unless gay people can marry, they are not being treated equally under the law. Same-sex couples need the protections and security marriage provides, and this ruling says they're entitled to get them the same way straight couples do."

Lambda filed the suit last March in Manhattan on behalf of 5 gay and lesbian couples. The case was the first of its kind to be filed in New York since the Massachusetts high court ruled that same-sex couples are entitled to full marriage under that state's Constitution. In today's ruling, Judge Ling-Cohan said, "Simply put, marriage is viewed by society as the utmost expression of a couple's commitment and love. Plaintiffs may now seek this ultimate expression through a civil marriage."

"I was even more moved than I thought I'd be when I heard about this ruling. All of us cried; me, Mary Jo and our 15-year-old daughter. For the first time, our family is being treated with the respect and dignity that our friends, coworkers and neighbors automatically have," said Jo-Ann Shain, a 51-year-old New York City resident who is a plaintiff in the case with her partner, Mary Jo Kennedy, 49.

"Last week, Mary Jo and I celebrated our 23rd anniversary together, but we've never had all the protections and rights that come with marriage. We need these protections to take responsibility for each other and for our daughter, and we are enormously grateful that the court saw that and said our family should be treated equally."

Another of the couples was Daniel Hernandez, 46, and Nevin Cohen, 42, who have been together for over six years. When the suit was filed Hernandez said they were looking for the same rights as those enjoyed by his parents.

"We're lucky to both have parents who've been happily married for more than 50 years," said Hernandez. "Is it too much to want that for ourselves?
A Call to Listen - Integrity Fort Worth

is a concerned group of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered Episcopal Christians and their friends and families. We call on the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church of the USA, the Executive Council of the Episcopal Church, the Bishop of Fort Worth, and the Executive Committee and the Standing Committee of the Diocese of Fort Worth to actively listen to us as we seek a safe haven from a world of prejudice and hatred. Recent events have presented members of the Episcopal Church with a unique opportunity to inspire the rest of the world. Mark 9:42 calls us to love one another rather than to place a "stumbling block" before any who believe, so let us show the world that we truly do "respect the dignity of every human being."

No LGBT person wants her or his actions to cause anyone to stumble, including those who condemn us. But our own experiences have taught us that those who act and speak against homosexual persons, whether they be bishops, clergy or laity, certainly can and do cause LGBT persons to question the safety of the Church itself.

The Fort Worth Diocesan Convention called upon the Episcopal Church "to implement and abide by all the recommendations of the Windsor Report." We all must be mindful of the Archbishop's words that "we can never call on others to repent without ourselves acknowledging that we too . . . are sinners in need of grace". We hope that by passing this resolution our diocesan leadership feels called upon to honor those parts within the Report pertaining to the diocese itself and its baptismal covenant, which calls for all to "strive for justice and peace among all people," and to "respect the dignity of every human being" regardless of whether all experience a harmony of opinion.

We appreciate the message from the recent meeting of the House of Bishops in Salt Lake City, Utah, wherein they "rejected a moratorium on the election and consecration of additional LGBT bishops and the authorization of additional diocesan policies permitting same-sex blessing" because this leaves the door open for active dialogue. The House of Bishops further state that our Church is a church that "requires conciliar involvement by all the baptized of our church, lay and ordained". They fully recognize that they cannot "preempt the canonical authority of the General Convention of the Episcopal Church."

We remind the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Presiding Bishop and the Executive Council of the Episcopal Church, the Bishop, the Executive Committee and the Standing Committee of the Diocese of Fort Worth that Lambeth 1998 "declared that violence in word or deed and prejudice against homosexual people were unacceptable and sinful behaviour for Christians." The bishops' Salt Lake City statement reminds us that Lambeth Conferences of 1978, 1988 and 1998 strongly recommended a Communion-wide study and discernment process on matters of human sexuality. It also pledged to actively listen to the stories of faithful LGBT Christians and to engage in dialogue with us. Listening is the primary part of any study and discernment process.

The faithful heterosexual and LGBT Christians, laity and clergy of Integrity Fort Worth have stories to tell and we wish to be heard. We call our diocese, the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion as a whole to love us as our Lord and Savior does and with that love, to listen to us as part of a "Communion-wide study and discernment process on matters of human sexuality."

Integrity/ Fort Worth-It would be funny if it weren't so scary

Barbi Click, President/Convener

It would be funny if Britney Spears gets married for the second time this year. She married her boyfriend in Louisiana this weekend. For the second time now, Britney enjoys almost 1900 legal rights that she did not have before. At the same time, Louisiana became another state to ban civil marriage between same sex individuals while also taking away ALL rights associated with same sex couples.

Written into the Louisiana constitution is a ban on the giving of any rights and "incidents thereof" to same sex couples. This means that I could be prevented from seeing my partner in a Louisiana hospital if he gets sick during one of our trips to New Orleans. This means that my family could contest my living will if we were to live in Louisiana (or the other states with similar laws). Just think about how you would feel if the one person who matters to you the most lies sick in a hospital and you are prevented from seeing him or her. This is how far the anti-gay groups are going in trying to prevent gay couples from having loving, supportive, and committed relationships. AGAIN, we are not just talking about banning marriage between same sex couples. These laws could take away all rights between same sex couples.

You may be disinterested in the concept of marriage rights for same sex couples, but Louisiana is the second state to make such an extreme law. Virginia lawmakers passed a similarly stringent law earlier this year. Many states are voting on this exact issue in November. You may not care about this issue because you are not directly affected, but these groups are just beginning to try to implement laws that promote their particular view of morality. Be careful because Big Brother may soon be looking in your bedroom. You don't have to go far to see this already happening. Just a couple months ago, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an Alabama law banning sex toys. The same court upheld Florida's ban on adoption by any gay person. Yes, there is a law in Florida that says that I cannot adopt any child because I am gay. It is the only state to have such a law. This means that if my brother were to die and wanted me to adopt my nephew, I would not be allowed, I would have to move out of state to adopt him. The gay adoption ban was upheld when Bush's most recent recess appointment to the bench cast the deciding vote. Without his vote, the ban would have been ruled unconstitutional.

Sometimes it is important to become engaged in issues that may not appear relevant to you, because you will want everyone's support when your rights are taken away. When you go and vote for President this November, keep in mind that the president will be appointing judges that will affect our lives for years to come. These recent rulings by the 11th Circuit should give you pause when voting this November.

To also see how far a minister would go in stopping gay marriage, see this link mms://www.freedomstream.net/jsm/jsm_091204.wmv (you will need to go to minute 36 to see the hate).

In case you don't want to watch the tape, here is a excerpt from www.andrewsullivan.com that describes what is on it:

"I'm trying to find the correct name for it ... this utter absolute, asinine, idiotic stupidity of men marrying men. ... I've never seen a man in my life I wanted to marry. And I'm gonna be blunt and plain; if one ever looks at me like that, I'm gonna kill him and tell God he died." - televangelist Jimmy Swaggart, on his television show last week ... in Louisiana. Here's the tape (he gets riled up around the 36th minute). He then goes on about those politicians who defend gay rights and dignity: "They all ought to marry a pig, and live with it forever... And I thank God that president Bush has stated that we need a constitutional amendment that says marriage is between a man and a woman." (Swaggart also claims he has nothing against "the poor homosexual." He'll just kill one if he gets a chance.) Watch this broadcast and see the forces that this president is riding toward victory on.

Bishop V. Gene Robinson - One Year Later
John Shelby Spong

It has been more than a year since Gene Robinson was elected Bishop of New Hampshire by the clergy and lay deputies of the Episcopal Church in that state. The election and its confirmation, which took place at the General Convention of the Episcopal Church in September of 2003, created debate and elicited strong reactions from every segment of the Christian Church.

Pope John Paul II sent his official greetings to the dissident Episcopalians who convened in Plano, Texas to nurse their wounds. The Holy Father, who will not allow Roman Catholics to receive the Eucharist at 'schismatic' Anglican altars, nevertheless offered tacit recognition and support to these homophobic Episcopalians. It is amazing how a commonly held prejudice can unite strange bedfellows.

America's television evangelists, Jerry Falwell and Pat Robinson, ridiculed the Episcopal Church, suggesting that its death, which both predicted with glee, could not come too soon.

Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, called together the primates of the various national bodies of this church to stave off what he feared was an inevitable break in the unity of the Communion. Some African primates had indicated that this American action was for them a "departure from the true faith." They demanded that the Episcopal Church be brought into line or else they would leave the Communion, transforming it into what they thought would be a dying Northern Hemisphere Church, while true Anglicanism would shift to the South.

In the United States, those bishops who felt that the Episcopal Church "had blessed what God has called evil," sought legal sanctions to enable them not only to leave the Episcopal Church but also to take the property of their churches with them. Now a year later it is time to assess the situation and to separate the fearful rhetoric from the reality.

One notices first that the issue has been relegated in the Church Press to an occasional letter to the editor. Next the dire predictions about the demise of the Episcopal Church have not occurred, and the Anglican Communion is still in tact. Third world bishops have proclaimed a state of "impaired communion," and they continue to lobby world Anglicanism to expel the Episcopal Church. A powerless special committee may even get lots of publicity by recommending this action, but no mechanism to accomplish this exists in Anglicanism. It may even be the catalyst to put some steel into the spine of a very weak Archbishop of Canterbury.

Inside the United States there was no great exodus from Episcopal congregations. Yes, there were some who left but not many. Individual congregations and some dioceses, rather typically, practiced their historic pattern of monetary blackmail, "We will support this church," they said, "only so long as we can dominate it." We have heard that negativity from the same sources so often that no one any longer pays much attention even when the threat is wrapped in the rhetoric of sweet piety. At the same time, in a story that the press never notices, the Ordination of Gene Robinson was actually the cause for new interest in the Episcopal Church around this nation. People came to our churches to see whether this new attitude meant that the Episcopal Church was now open to other things like scholarship and the future and thus might actually be something they would want to investigate further. Over a period of five years, it would be my guess that the act of ordaining Bishop Robinson will produce a net gain for this courageous church, if statistics are to be considered the measure of truth.

The ecumenical movement, which has for some years been largely ineffective, still seems to be intact. Protestant churches, wrestling with this same issue of homosexuality, actually felt helped by the decision of the Episcopal Church. The Roman Catholics issued rather loud statements about "grave difficulties" that this step created in the cause of church unity, but the Vatican had said the same thing when women were ordained to the priesthood and later, when women were made bishops, so it created little concern. Homosexuality is clearly a source of great anxiety in the Roman Catholic Church. Its public war on all movements that might issue in equality for homosexuals rises out of enormous fear created by two facts. First, the tide is flowing against its dated and homophobic attitudes, and second the cover behind which it hides the fact that a majority of its priests, bishops and cardinals are gay men is no longer holding.

As happens in every moment of transition, there are clear winners and losers. One loser was Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh, who, though never a leader of anything before, became the leader of the dissident group. Like so many prejudiced people he was so single-minded that he assumed that everyone in his diocese agreed with him. When he sought to secure legally the property in his diocese so that he could take it with him if he left the Church, he was immediately sued by his biggest church and was forced to back down. He is a rather pathetic figure today.

A winner was the Bishop of Virginia, the Rt. Rev. Peter Lee. An attorney prior to his ecclesiastical career, Peter Lee was the quintessential safe, pulse-feeling leader. When I was told that he had voted to confirm Gene Robinson, my remark was that "his vote proved that the issue was now socially acceptable." But Bishop Lee faced a southern constituency that was angrier than he had expected. It was led by a few of his evangelical clergy who were shocked that they could not convince their bishop that their prejudice was appropriate for the Church.

Not used to confronting hostility, Peter Lee wavered and offered a weak rationale for his action. He voted, he said, "to affirm the decision made by the people of New Hampshire, which should not be interpreted to mean I approve of homosexuality." It was a pitiful defense that had no integrity and he knew it. So this bishop, prompted by his wife who said to him, "Peter, you need to decide whether you are going to be part of the Church's past or the Church's future," bit the bullet and announced finally that he had voted for the confirmation of Gene Robinson because it was the right thing to do and this was the right man to be the recipient of his support!

The stature of the Bishop of Virginia grew visibly and he experienced the dividend that courageous leadership always produces Support gathered around him, his evangelical clergy were reduced to whining and the issue soon disappeared from center stage.

Another loser was the Archbishop of Canterbury. When Rowan Williams was chosen for this post there was such hope. He is a man of intellectual brilliance with a liberal spirit wrapped around a theologically conservative center. People believed that he might restore that office to the luster that it had before his predecessor George Carey carried it to an all time low.

His early actions, however, revealed a fatal character flaw. He has no courage, no backbone and no ability to lead. Seldom have I watched a quicker collapse of potential. Shortly after being chosen, he assured the third world bishops that he would not press his personal openness on his homophobic colleagues. It was an abdication of leadership, so dramatic as to be breath taking. In response to Gene Robinson's election, he demonstrated a willingness to place unity over truth by accepting the uninformed and prejudiced opinions of those who believed that ignorance should not be challenged and that homophobia must be accepted as a Christian virtue. Later, when an outstanding celibate gay priest in England was chosen, with his approval, for an assistant bishop's position in Oxford, an uproar from British evangelicals scared him so totally that he forced this man, Jeffrey John, to resign his appointment. The Archbishop does not seem to know that once he surrenders to this mentality, his weakness will be exploited every time he tries to stand for anything.

He is now destined to be a long serving, but ineffective and empty man who has been revealed to be incapable of carrying the responsibility placed upon him. The unity of the Church can never be placed ahead of truth and justice. Had the issue been slavery instead of homophobia, one gets the feeling that he would support unity by tolerating slavery. That has no integrity and he has little support today. Leaders have only one opportunity to make a first impression. Rowan Williams has failed that test miserably.

A winner was the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church, the Rt. Rev. Frank Griswold. He, like Rowan Williams, is bright, articulate and learned. My experience with him over the years, however, led me to think that he too would never be a strong leader. In the House of Bishop's debates, the only issue about which I ever saw him stand firm was his contention that in the recitation of the Psalms, we should take a long pause at the asterisk in the middle of each verse! I was not encouraged when after his election as primate, he tried to withdraw his name from a statement he had signed in favor of homosexual persons and homosexual priests.

I knew that as the Bishop of Chicago, he had ordained many gay clergy. He looked like another safe leader, lacking the stuff that made for greatness in former Presiding Bishops like John E. Hines.

However, to my surprise and great joy, Frank Griswold grew in this process. He never wavered; he never tried to force Gene Robinson to step down "for the sake of unity." He named himself as the Chief Consecrator and carried out that duty with dignity and competence. He met the press without compromise. He never spoke negatively of his critics. He made me proud, as I had not been since 1973, of the leadership of my church.

The passage of time does give us perspective. The Episcopal Church has a gay bishop. There is no position in this Church that is now closed to homosexual persons. That is an incredible breakthrough. This Church has done an audacious thing, and better yet, it is no longer trembling at its own audacity.

-- John Shelby Spong

Gay row dean attacks prejudice in church

Sermon points out that slavery was defended on the basis of scripture

Stephen Bates, religious affairs correspondent
Monday April 26, 2004
The Guardian

In a move likely to provoke renewed aggravation from conservative
evangelicals, Canon Jeffrey John, the dean of St Albans, yesterday broke his
silence in a sermon in which he reminded the Church of England that Jesus
excluded no "untouchables" such as homosexuals from his special care.

The dean, who is gay, attacked "prejudice, bigotry and oppression" within
the church, and said Jesus himself was condemned to death by fundamentalist
zealots who believed they were obeying scripture - remarks which mirror the
argument of his opponents that they are defending biblical orthodoxy in
opposing his ministry.

The words will sting because Dr John, canon theologian at Southwark
cathedral, uses biblical arguments against the evangelicals. They have
insisted that he should not be allowed to challenge the church's policy and
that his appointment defies biblical injunctions against homosexuals.

Dr John was appointed suffragan bishop of Reading a year ago but was
subsequently forced to stand down following a worldwide campaign
orchestrated by mainly evangelical pressure groups and bishops, when they
discovered that he had a 27-year relationship with another clergyman, even
though he had been celibate for many years. They demanded he should "repent"
the friendship.

Canon John's sermon will infuriate evangelical pressure groups, which have
begun to mobilize again following the announcement of his appointment to St
Albans a week ago.

One group, Anglican Mainstream, has called for a meeting with the prime
minister to question whether the post, which is in the gift of Downing
Street because of the Church of England's established status, is part of an
attempt to move the church in a more liberal direction.

Hitherto the canon has largely maintained a dignified silence over the
attacks on him. He said last week that he had learned "the value of silence"
but has clearly now decided to answer back his critics.The sermon, released
on the website of the Inclusive Church network - another pressure group, set
up last year to oppose the evangelicals' campaign - argues that church
attitudes to gays are akin to those put forward by Christians against the
abolition of slavery in the 19th century, because that was equally
unbiblical.

Dr John wrote: "The ability of the church to ignore the deeper implications
of its own scriptures is horribly plain throughout history. Remember it took
18 centuries for Christians to realise that slavery is against the Gospel.
Remember that those who supported slavery claimed to do so on biblical
grounds ... Remember too that Jesus was condemned to death for his own
inclusive attitudes by fundamentalist zealots who believed that they were
obeying scripture.

"In all these cases those who opposed change could quote the Bible in their
defense. With hindsight the church sees that they were wrong; they were
killing the spirit with the letter ... In the same way the church will one
day look back on the issues that divide us today and find it incredible that
it once thought it right and 'scriptural' to treat women and other
minorities as it does now.

"The struggle to make the church inclusive is not based on some secular,
woolly 'liberal agenda' (the charge endlessly parroted against us) but on a
scriptural imperative to do what Jesus did. It is the same struggle to
oppose prejudice, bigotry and oppression and open the kingdom to everyone,
especially the most marginalized.

"Inclusivity is not a soft option. It is harder to live in a truly diverse
and welcoming community than it is to live in a community of the respectably
like-minded, just as it is harder to be an intelligent student of scripture
than it is to be a fundamentalist ... All of us must be challenged and
changed in every department of our life, by the Gospel and by one another,
whether we are male or female, black or white, gay or straight, rich or
poor."

Canon John called on like-minded supporters to stand up for a church which
was welcoming to others, "especially in present circumstances standing
firmly against those who would turn it into a sanhedrin of the Pharisees" -
the religious high court of the strict and sometimes hypocritical Jewish
sect of biblical times. "By definition, a church which lives in the spirit
of Jesus will be genuinely, not just theoretically or conditionally, open
and welcoming to everyone. Building and defending that kind of church is the
most truly biblical thing any Christian can do. We need to say so now, loud
and clear."

The remarks are likely to be taken up by clergy members of Inclusive Church,
which is to hold a special Sunday of services in June to pray for a more
open and less rancorous Church of England.

However, some evangelical clergy in St Albans diocese are to meet this week
and are threatening to withhold financial contributions to the church -
frequently threatened as a tactic by conservative evangelical churches,
though less frequently implemented, as a form of protest against policies
they dislike.

In a statement on Friday, Anglican Mainstream warned of its concern that, by
appointing Dr John, the government was trying to influence debate within the
church and society generally about human sexuality.

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004

From the Chaplain - Rev. Tom Shepherd:

"... We're trying to get out the word that a person does not have to be gay or an Integrity member to attend (our) service...

We think it's important that members of the church, gay and straight, come together in our lord Jesus Christ in a spirit of greater love, communication and understanding. We hope that in the months to come Integrity members will be invited to our parishes as speakers to further this objective.

While Integrity is an organization that provides support to gay Episcopalians, we want to look beyond ourselves into the gay community of South Florida which is one of the largest gay communities in the United States, and growing. We know we have brothers and sisters who are isolated and hurting deeply, who have been alienated and turned off because they hear too many so called Christians imply that they are beyond the love of God. No one is beyond the love of God and we know and affirm that! We'll work to get this message out to the gay community."

"Sin and Sexuality" Rev. Tom Shepherd

"A few years ago I was conducting weekly Bible study classes for a group of prison inmates. A lay perosn from a nearby church asked if he could help, and I agreed. After a few sessions it was obvious he was on the far religious right, and soon we were leaving the sessions barely speaking to each other. He broke the ice and suggested that we needed to meet. He had my attention. He said that recently his sister had told him that she was a lesbian. Apparantly, they had talked for hours during which she convinced him that her sexuality was not her choice. He said his sister would never lie to him, and so it had to be true that her sexuality was not her choice. As sin involved choice, his sister's homosexuality could not be a sin. Would that other conservative Christians could come to the same conclusion.

That's right. Sin is a matter of choice, and we know we don't choose to be gay. So it's not a sin to be gay. Then why have some of us felt guilty, ashamed, and lived with a sense of self-loathing? I don't know exactly, but I think in large part it must have something to do with the homophobia around us that we internalized. It took me years to work through my guilty feelings and shame. Now I wonder why I didn't have the sense to get some help. Once we get over the false notion that gay equals sin, we have to remember that along with the rest of humanity we commit sins.

Gays sometimes struggle to claim their full humanity. Well, full humanity sins and gay persons as part of that humanity can sin in some very interesting and unique ways. For example, I've always felt guilty that gay men sin when they are uncaring and rejecting each other in the bars and using each other for their own selfishness. To be selfish and unloving is high up on the Christian sin list. But then, all of humanity was loved by God so much, for reasons we can not comprehend, that God's Son died on the cross for us. Let's not forget Romans 5:8 - 'while we still were sinners Christ died for us.' That is, God didn't wait for us to do better before he acted. He acted first.

If I refuse to admit that I have sinned, how can I possibly accept the forgiveness that comes from the cross? If I have not sinned there is nothing to redeem. Only sinners need redeeming. As a gay person, I claim full humanity, sinner that I am, loved by God and redeemed by Christ."

Integrity USA responds to Bush
Response to President Bush's call for a Constitutional Amendment

The constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage called for by President Bush is clear and unabashed discrimination against gays and lesbians and their families. It will do nothing to defend the institution of marriage and everything to deny equal rights under the law to a segment of the population. We agree with President Bush that "On a matter of such importance, the voice of the people must be heard" and we intend to make our voice of opposition heard loud and clear

We wholeheartedly disagree with the argument that extending equal access to the constitutional protections afforded heterosexual couples by civil marriage to same gender couples will undermine families. To the contrary, our lived experience in the Episcopal Church is that the blessing of gay and lesbians unions has been a blessing not only to the couple but to the community - strengthening straight marriages by their example and witness

Equal protection is guaranteed by the Constitution as a civil right for all Americans - not just a chosen percentage. We believe that this effort to write bias into the Constitution is inherently unconstitutional. As Episcopal clergy stood in solidarity with the Freedom Riders who challenged segregation in the 60's, we stand in solidarity with those in San Francisco who today challenge discrimination against gay and lesbian families. We follow in the footsteps of those who spoke in opposition to segregationist leaders when they railed against the courts implementing integration in public schools as we speak in opposition to George Bush and his expressed intention to amend the Constitution to institutionalize the marginalization of gay and lesbian Americans.

We stand opposed to efforts to offer gay and lesbian families as sacrificial lambs on the altar of presidential politics. We stand committed to this great nation and to working together to realize the dream of a place where "liberty and justice for all" really means all. We stand convinced that the American dream will be closer to being realized when gay and lesbian families are afforded the equal protection to which all families are entitled under the Constitution.

The Claiming the Blessing Steering Committee: