Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

I am a member of a church in which many of its members wish that it
was not necessary for a separate church to exist.  The majority of
the members and attenders of my denomination (Universal Fellowship of
Metropolitan Community Churches) are of minority sexual orientation.

Sadly, it is the only church I've ever known that for the sake of the
safety of its members doesn't distribute a directory of its membership.

Most would rather feel welcome and at home in the church in which
they grew up or feel some established attachment.  They would really
rather be Baptists, Episcopalians, Roman Catholics or whatever.  But,
the pain has become too unbearable.

Some, however, do decide to stick it out in their "denomination of origin."
In doing so, some choose to remain 'invisible' or at least 'inconspicuous'
in the church.  Some may choose abstinence.  A friend of mine is on his
way to becoming a priest.  He says that at his age it's not so difficult
to be "asexual."  (God forbid that such a fate should ever befall me!)

Sometimes there is no easy solution.

Peace,
Richard

If you believe the church has a sense of Shalom - on earth as it
is in Heaven - or that you believe the chuch might be willing to work
toward it - then stay with the church.  

If the church works to be an inclusive church, breaking down the gates
that separate one from another, then stay with the church.  If the
church is being an exclusive club of straights only, of gays and
lesbians only, of the righteous ones only - then the church has
stopped being a church - so, click your sandals together and drop the
sand from your feet and move on out - to seek after the church
that is seeking after ...

	Shalom,

	
	Ron
 

    Re: .2
    
    I believe in the inclusive, rather than exclusive, nature of the Gospel
    myself.  I find that many of my Christian brothers and sisters do not,
    however.  This vexes me.
    
    Shalom, Salaam,
    Richard

Re: .1

>Sadly, it is the only church I've ever known that for the sake of the
>safety of its members doesn't distribute a directory of its membership.

Richard,

This sounds real funny to me (and not in the ha, ha sense :-).  Could explain
further what you mean by this statement, and reasons behind it?

Thanks,
Jeff

>This sounds real funny to me (and not in the ha, ha sense :-).  Could explain
>further what you mean by this statement, and reasons behind it?

	Most of the members are gay. Many would assume that anyone who is a
	member is gay. Or at least tends towards that. Many gay people do not
	want everyone to know they are gay. Gays often get a lot of flack for
	being gay. They lose their jobs or get beat up or worse. So do people
	who are even suspected of being gay. So it's not always safe to be on
	a list of gay people.

		Alfred

    Re: .4
    
    	I think Alfred articulated the situation very well.
    
    Peace,
    Richard

It seems like people in the church would respect that and keep a church
directory somewhat "confidential".  But if someone really wants to know
if you attend the church they can tail you on Sunday morning :-)  It just
seems like a church directory is more of a support list than a black list,
and would do more good than harm if treated properly.

Anyway, this is kind of a diversion.  Sorry...

Thanks for the input,
Jeff

Note 338.7

>It seems like people in the church would respect that and keep a church
>directory somewhat "confidential".

Jeff, in my opinion you're absolutely right.  I've exchanged phone and
address information with many of the members and attenders of my church.
But there's just something about having your name and other basic information
in print and on an organizational list.

Personally, I've never had a problem with people knowing I'm a member of MCC or
having my address and phone number (Just don't use that information to try
to sell me something!).  And in case you're curious, yes, some people have
falsely concluded that I, too, am gay.

>But if someone really wants to know
>if you attend the church they can tail you on Sunday morning :-)  It just
>seems like a church directory is more of a support list than a black list,
>and would do more good than harm if treated properly.

There are people and organizations that, in the name of righteousness, would
just love to slip such a list to employers.  It would be so much easier than
trying to target and tail someone suspected to be a member of a church which
is known to be predominantly gay.

>Anyway, this is kind of a diversion.

Perhaps not.  Perhaps relative anonymity is sometimes reason enough to stay
in a church.

Peace,
Richard

    It is with a sense of profound sadness that I read this note and the
    other notes which show in real human terms the extent to which
    many churches exclude, shun, and even denigrate persons who are not
    heterosexual.  I believe that it is a basic need of every human to have
    their religious and spiritual needs fulfilled.  Any church that denies
    people the fulfillment of these needs because of sexual orientation is
    not practicing the Gospel message of love.
    
    Pat

Re: .9

Pat,

	As the Quakers say, "Thee has spoken my mind, Friend."

	It is truly a sad situation.  I see a lot of pain where I worship.
So many times the people who've been rejected by their church have also been
rejected by one or both of their parents, possibly siblings and other
relatives, and even longtime friends.  It hurts my heart to know people who
yearn for the love of a parent and who've been denied from even speaking
to their mother or father or both on the telephone.  Often letters sent are
never answered.

	I sometimes wonder, with all the pain they've experienced, how the
people in my fellowship can tolerate anything church-related at all.

Peace,
Richard

re Note 338.10 by CSC32::J_CHRISTIE:

> 	I sometimes wonder, with all the pain they've experienced, how the
> people in my fellowship can tolerate anything church-related at all.
  
        I believe that it's because God is real, God is love, God
        accepts and forgives them, God will never leave or forsake
        them.

        Bob

Note 338.11

>        I believe that it's because God is real, God is love, God
>        accepts and forgives them, God will never leave or forsake
>        them.

Bob,

	I'm in strong agreement with you.  The lambs hunger for the
nourishment only the Shepherd can provide.  And, as is the case
in the Realm of God, the black sheep, the ones rejected by others,
often find love and acceptance in the Everlasting Arms.

Peace,
Richard