The Hope of the Believer . . .

Visiting Other Churches: New Series, No.7...  

A CHURCH FOR GAYS AND LESBIANS 

After I visited every church in my hometown of Denton, Texas, 70 in all, a new one came to town. It meets on Sunday evening at the Unitarian Universalist Church, which is probably the only church in town that would allow these people on their property. They are a pariah church, hated and rejected by other believers and by society in general. In places where they have buildings of their own crosses are sometimes burned in the yard, facilities are on occasion destroyed by arsonists, and their offices receive obscene phone calls. Their ministers cannot study in the seminaries of other churches, and as a denomination they were rejected for membership by the National Council of Churches. They may well be the most scorned church since the first century, and yet it is made up of intelligent, affluent, and peaceloving people.

Its official name is the Universal Fellowship of the Metropolitan Community Church, MCC for short. Now only 20 years old it is one of the few growing churches, with more than 30,000 members in 200 congregations in over a dozen nations, with headquarters in Los Angeles. It is not in disfavor because of any doctrinal peculiarity, for it is doctrinally consistent with mainline Protestantism. There is one and only one reason: It is predominantly gay and lesbian. And yet they do not seek to impose their lifestyle upon others. They contend that while God has made most people heterosexual he has made some homosexual and that this should be recognized.

It is estimated that upwards of 10% of the human race is homosexual, all around the world and throughout history. This means there are many millions of gays in the world today, some of whom may be your close kin, even if you don't know it. We can rave and rant and hurl invectives all we please, but nothing will change the fact that homosexuals are here to stay. They are not going to cease being homosexual anymore than heterosexuals are going to cease being heterosexual. There is evidence that many of these people did not choose to be gay but they were born that way. For the modern church to accept gays into its fellowship only on the condition that they cease being gays not only runs the risk of being contrary to the spirit of Christ but is woefully unrealistic as well.

In 1968 a Pentecostal pastor in Los Angeles by the name of Troy Perry was defrocked when he "came out" as gay. Seeing first hand how the established church rejects gays and lesbians, he proceeded to form the MCC. His autobiography has the stunning title The Lord Is My Shepherd And He Knows I Am Gay, in which he admits that Paul doesn't like homosexuals.  

While the Denton MCC is a tiny church of about 25, the Dallas MCC is so large that it overflows two Sunday a. m. services. It is the 12th largest church in Dallas and among the top 100 in the nation. I visited both of them, and if one did not know he would have no reason to suspect that they were gay churches. People of our tradition would be impressed that they observe Communion each Lord's day, and they seem to do it less perfunctorily and more devotionally than we do. The minister lifts the bread and the cup and pronounces the words of institution, as Jesus did and as the church through the ages has done, but which we do not do. The communicant kneels at the altar and is served either by the pastor or by several "lay ministers." Into each ear it is whispered, "This is the body and blood of Christ."

But a keen observer at Dallas MCC would pick up clues that it was different. Whoever heard of a church that has far more men than women present? And most of them young, well under 40 for the most part. They were often paired off, men with arms around each other at the altar, women likewise, but few if any couples of mixed sex, though some were of mixed race. I saw only one couple that might have been a man and wife sitting together. And only an occasional child, accompanied by a female pair, probably from a previous marriage.

I had heard that I would see men kissing each other on the lips all over the place, but I saw only one instance of this, in the activity hall. A holy kiss it was, like the Bible talks about, I am sure they would say. But there were tons of hugs between both sexes, like brothers and sisters would. They were joyous, friendly, and concerned for each other. I was hugged so much, by men and women alike (I prefer the women's embraces in case you are wondering!) that I felt as if I were at a love feast. They were really turned on, lots of enthusiasm.

I felt more accepted than I often do among my own Churches of Christ, and that may be because I was with people who are also rejected by their churches. We were all rejects, only for different reasons, and this drew us close together. People find a common bond in what they perceive as persecution, and this helps to explain the dynamic of the gay church.

One man at the Dallas church told me he came there from the Church of Christ and that there was a great difference. When I asked him in what way he said, "The Holy Spirit is present here."

In the activity hall I sat down beside another visitor, a woman from New Mexico who was visiting her sister, and almost certainly "straight." When I casually commented that the MCC was different, she said, "What of it, we're all different, and besides no one asks me what I do in my bedroom, and I don't ask anybody what they do in theirs. Its none of my business." But few Christians are as tolerant as she. Even those who are usually tolerant toward others have a problem being that way toward gays. There are readers of this journal who will take offence at this article if I do not condemn homosexuals and homosexuality, and I understand how they feel and love them no less for it.

I met one person I knew, who was as surprised to see me as I was to see that person, and who asked, "Don't tell my parents that you saw me here; they are not ready for this now." There was a sigh of relief when I gave assurance of confidentiality. This points up a problem for the gay church. While it seeks to evangelize the gay community, one has to come out of the closet, or at least take the chance of being found out, when he attends a gay church. It is true that parents are usually devastated when they learn that a son or daughter is gay, which may be motivated mostly by selfish pride. It is certainly not unconditional love. What kind of love is it that says, "I love you so long as you are like me and so long as you do not embarrass me"?

A touching incident in the Denton MCC pointed this up. During their sharing time a man who is a financial counselor reported on his visits to AIDS patients. It was getting to him he said, almost in tears, ministering to those dying of AIDS. He wanted the church to pray that he might have strength to carry on. And he asked them to pray especially for Ron who is not only dying of a dreadful and infamous disease, but he has to die rejected by his own parents.

If one wonders, as my own dear wife does, what the gay church does with "all those passages that condemn homosexuality," he can read pamphlets published by the church that deal with them, such as "Christianity and Homosexuality" and "Homosexuality: What the Bible Does and Does Not Say." The gist of what they say is that sexual perversion, which is what these passages condemn, is of course sinful whether it be homosexual or heterosexual. Sexual perversion is lustful, loveless sex, or "burning in their lust one for another" (Rom. 1:27). This is always wrong, whether between husband or wife or those of the same gender. They grant that the Bible condemns some homosexual acts, just as it condemns some heterosexual acts, but not homosexuality itself, and that it never deals with homosexual love and certainly does not condemn it. The "pervert" is the one who practices "unnatural" sex, which is sex born of lust and without love, which describes the way some men have sex with their wives as well as the way some homosexuals have sex with each other.

They point to the case of David and Jonathan, not to suggest that there was genital love between them, but to show that a great and good "normal" man like David might love another man more than he loves any woman, as David did Jonathan. It becomes a question of how that love between them could be rightly manifested.

Their most impressive point is that Jesus, who lived among homosexuals, said not one word about homosexuality, even though he often named long lists of sins. They note that the sins that really mattered to him were pride, injustice, greed, and hypocrisy. They point out that if Jesus would associate with such pariah as lepers, despised tax collectors and harlots, he would not reject a gay or lesbian. A favorite passage is: "Anyone who comes to me I will in no wise cast out." Anyone! If you sit with them in worship and see how they praise the Lord, you will be convinced that they are assured that Christ accepts them. Their invitation to Communion is: "You don't have to be a member of this church or any other church. You only have to be a follower of Jesus Christ." Their official prayer is, "God be merciful to me a sinner."

As for the gay church's interpretation of the anti-homosexual scriptures, the church at large sees this as indulging in self-justification, for the passages make it clear that "unnatural" sex is sex between those of the same gender. John Murray of Westminster Theological Seminary speaks for the church catholic when he says, "The offence of homosexuality is the abandonment of the divinely constituted order in reference to sex." The passage that especially speaks to the sincere gay Christian is 1 Cor. 6:9-11, where it shows that homosexuals could and did change by being "washed" of their sin. As for Jesus not condemning homosexuality per se, there are many sins that he did not explicitly mention that are nonetheless sinful. But there is a growing consensus that a distinction must be made between being homosexual, which is not sinful, and homosexual acts, which are sinful. And so, most Christians say, those who are gay by "nature" must be celibates if they would be Christians. The gay church disagrees, insisting that we all have the right to be all that God has made us.

The gay church is against promiscuous sex and encourages one on one relationships based on love and respect. The pastor of a gay church sets the example by having but one lover. For this reason the church has the ordinance of "marriage," which they call Holy Union since homosexuals cannot be legally married. In the worship bulletin at Dallas MCC there was a notice that the flowers on the altar were given by two male members "in celebration of the first anniversary of their Holy Union."

So as to do some hard thinking about this question let's take the case of two Christian women who deeply love each other and are sexually attracted to each other, and who have not the slightest interest in men. The gay church would say they would practice "perverted sex" if they forced themselves into a loveless relationship with men, and would we not agree? If a woman cannot truly love a man she should not marry him. What then may these women do? Can they not live with each other and delight in each other's company? Could they sleep in the same bed? Could they spend the night in a loving embrace? Many of us have sisters who slept that way and we never thought anything about it.

Could they hold hands and kiss each other? Would these be lesbian acts? Are we prepared to tell these sisters in Christ precisely what liberties they can take with each other's bodies and remain faithful Christians? If so, why stop there? Why not also dictate what a man and his wife can and cannot do in their bedroom? Some married couples do things sexually that others would consider "perverted" and would not think of doing. Perhaps the wisdom of the lady from New Mexico is appropriate: It is none of our business. We should at least concede that this problem is more complicated than we have made it.

I consider my own position as liberating: I do not have to serve as judge over other people's lives. I am committed to being like Jesus Christ, who said he came into the world not to condemn people but to make them whole. I will accept and associate with all those that Jesus accepted and associated with, and I know of no class of humanity, however scorned and despised by society, that he rejected. This does not mean that he always approved of their lifestyle.

That is where I am, I can love and accept people without approving of all they do. And since Christ's church is to be a haven for sinful humanity, I believe that my church and your church should accept all people who show any inclination at all to follow him whom we all love, having never seen. — the Editor