After my wife Cat and I had spent six years as members of our very first church home–a Presbyterian USA church—we were asked to sign a document asserting that under no circumstances should anyone involved in a same-sex relationship be allowed to hold “any position, of any authority whatsoever” at that church.
We had both been elected deacons of the church—which is how we learned that you couldn’t actually become a deacon at our church until you signed this document.
I actually thought the Deacons Committee lady was kidding when she laid copies of the anti-gay statement before us. We knew this lady. She was in the weekly small group Bible study Cat and I had attended for years. We liked her.
“Wouldn’t it be funny if there really was such a document?,” I laughed
Looking slightly confused, our friend said, “But there is. That’s this document right here.” She nudged the papers a little closer to our side of the table. “You have to sign this.”
I looked at Cat, whom I saw was already looking at me.
Whoops. Now boarding for Crazy Town.
We both silently bent to read the document.
Done with that, I asked our friend, “Do we really have to sign this in order to become deacons? Are you actually not kidding?” I’m a fairly private person. Plus, I’m sane. So I like to keep to a minimum signing my allegiance to clumsily articulated amalgams of theological proclamations and discriminatory hiring policies.
“No, I’m not kidding.” She smiled sweetly. “You have to sign it. All deacons have to sign it.”
“But … that doesn’t really make sense,” I said. “Why would we have to sign something like this before we’re deemed worthy to man the donuts table between services, and to help pass around the collection plate? That’s a little … draconian, don’t you think? Actually making someone sign their name to something? Isn’t that just a little too … Joe McCarthy? You understand how that feels a little extreme, right?”
She did not understand this. At all.
“Plus, Cat and I have been members of the church for six years. In all that time, I’ve never once heard anyone associated with this church say a single thing about homosexuality. Never a word about it from the pulpit; never in a meeting; never in a class; never in the bulletin; nothing on our website; never a word about it in our Bible study class. Total silence. And yet this issue is so important to the church that you can’t become a deacon here unless you sign something specifically about it. Doesn’t that seem a little weird to you? If we’re going to believe in a position about something as strongly as we clearly believe in our position on this matter, shouldn’t we, at least every once in a while, say something about that belief? If we believe it, we should preach it. People in the congregation have a right to know the rules of the club they’re in. It’s not fair that we’re just learning about this now.”
“Well, I’m sorry that you weren’t aware of our church’s position on this. But this is what we believe. And you both have to sign this if you want to become representatives of our church.”
“But we’re talking about being deacons, right?” piped in Cat. The slight hint of maniacism I detected in her voice almost made me feel sorry for the woman across the table. “It’s not like we’re being named pastors of the church. We’re talking about being deacons. Visiting shut-ins. Helping put out chairs at meetings. That sort of thing, right? Nothing that has anything whatsoever to do with who should or shouldn’t be hired at the church. Just deacons, right?”
But, alas, our choices turned out to be exactly two: Either sign the “no homosexual should be so much as a door greeter or janitor at our church” document — or, by virtue of not signing it, fail to qualify as deacons.
“Please let us be deacons without signing the paper,” we later begged the powers-that-be at our church (almost all of whom were in our Bible study group). “We love this church. We’d love to help with it. It’s not like we’re going to be in a position of hiring anyone at the church anyway. Isn’t it possible to allow us to serve as deacons without our having to sign the paper?”
Yeah, that’d be a no.
Which put my wife and me in the weird position of being members of a church we’d been deemed unworthy to be deacons of.
Don’t you just hate it when you’re reduced to the status of second-class citizen in your own church?
The Sunday following the week in which I tried to get anyone in our church to just talk to me about the whole gay issue, the pastor of the church — someone I considered a personal friend, whose house Cat and I had often visited, with whom I’d been going to lunch once a month for years — placed in the lobby of our church, right beside the doors leading into the sanctuary, a stack of stapled copies of a paper he wrote about how people who don’t hold the “correct” view on homosexuality are heretics.
Everyone knew perfectly well for whom the message of his paper was intended.
And just like that, Cat and I were understood to be heretics.
Pretty soon thereafter Cat and I left that church, which had always meant so very much to us.
Cat cried for weeks.
[Update: Some ten years later, I had the distinct pleasure of writing Meet Scott Anderson, Soon To Be the First (Openly) Gay Minister Ordained by Presbyterian U.S.A.]
Additional Reading in Christian Issues...
- From hell to Crazy Town
- They’re here; they’re queer; they’ve plenty to fear: LGBT students form secret club at conservative Christian university [now including updates]
- When evil is serious, it reaches for a Bible and cross
- Guest post: “A Good Week to Hate Christians”
- From gay-hating fundie to righteously angry lesbian. Now what?
![John Shore on The Huffington Post](http://johnshore.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/huffpost.jpg?w=120 "John Shore on The Huffington Post\")
{ 94 comments… read them below or add one }
← Older Comments
Newer Comments →
I actually wrote/co-wrote a whole BOOK on punctuation and grammar: http://www.amazon.com/dp/0312342551
As Marx once wrote: “I refuse to belong to any club that would have someone like me as a member.” (No, not Karl; the funny one)
Couldn’t put this on your Facebook wall. My daughter gets upset when I mention her to anyone, even though I never use her name online.
Anyhow, she and her husband joined a new Presbyterian church plant when they moved, about 10 yrs ago. They like it. It tried to be contemporary. But is was the conservative branch (whichever one that is). Anyhow, they are quite liberal. Still, they were unaware of the stance on homosexuality until they were taking part in the small groups. They asked why the church took that position (on other things as well) and were told that was the way it was. The Bible said so. The bylaws said so. Period. No discussion.
Well, they left the church. They have not been to any church since. They declare themselves to be agnostic, and are raising the kids that way. But I now live near them, and they know what I believe – and that it has changed over the years to where I am quite liberal myself. I don’t fit in at any church much anymore. I am happy though, because there are great people like John on Facebook/gracebook!
Thank you for being you, John.
I dont think this is a policy for all of the denomination. I was never asked tosign such BS to be either a deacon or an elder
No, it was just something our church made up.
I go to and am on staff of a very large PCUSA congregation. The topics of homosexuals in leadership and membership has recently been quite the topic of conversation, but only behind closed doors. We even had a staff meeting where is was talked about and basically we were asked anything about it to send people to the director of communications.
By the way, our local presbytery voted against 10-A. And the leadership from my church were opposed to it as well.
Someone in the staff meeting asked a very good question. “How did you and the other presbyters know how to vote when we never talk about this topic?”
I was shocked and dismayed by the reply. “It’s not really a representative government. We are voted for and then we are led by the Spirit.”
So even though our congregation is very mixed on the issue, as a whole we aren’t.
I am sticking it out for now because the Lord is working in powerful ways in the ministries I serve. But I am struggling.
Peace,
Sharon
It’s an interesting call. People SAY “They were mean to Carol and I,” but you’re supposed to WRITE “…Carol and me.” I almost always prefer to go with usage over rules. But … maybe not for headlines, after all.
This is how I do it.
1. always put the other’s name first and mention yourself last.
2. if you would have said me if Carol weren’t in the story then you say Carol and me. If you would have said I if it had just been you then you say Carol and I.
I think: “they were mean to Carol and me. ” is best because you never would say they were mean to I.
.02
I was going to point out that grammar thing too! But another great post.
I did! thanks for catch
Yep, been there. Somehow, I have more ‘respect’ for churches that are open in their bigotry than those who hide it from their own members. Kudos to you guys for standing up for YOUR faith. It isn’t easy to leave a church you love.
I should change that. I will!
If you change that hed to the grammatically correct “My Wife and Me,” I’d love your blog more.
The former English teacher in me agrees with this.
Jesus was, I believe,the first heretic.
Stunning, John, and, yet, painfully familiar.
Reminds me of the McCarthyist “loyalty oaths.” Ugly.
Well, we’re seeing a revival of that. Are we not?
This was movingly written, but behind the obvious “what the hell?” or “Those bastards!” response it immediately generates, I’m just a little incredulous that you could attend ANY gathering for that period of time and not have a sense that there was some seriously rigid thinking going on there.
After a while of listening to how people (especially the clergy) frame stories, choose THIS word over THAT word, select messages – doesn’t one sort of get a picture about what’s going on at more than the surface level?
Did anyone publicly point out that “While I may be a heretic (and Jesus was called a lot worse), you’re a homophobic moron” to the pastor? I sure would have enjoyed that. Or were you NICE?
This really saddens me…
I was raised in the most conservative of the three Lutheran synods, Wisconsin Synod. Our entire family of four children was baptized and raised in that church. Later, after I had been in the Air Force for a few years and still receiving the church mailings, I finally wrote them back and suggested they may as well save their money because I would probably never be a regular attendee or member again. So they did that. They took me off the roles and I was no longer a member.
Later, the time came when my sister was being married in "our" church and she wanted me to sing. So ok, I was honored to be asked. To our stunned surprise, we were informed I would not be permitted to sing at her wedding. When we asked why, we were told it was because I was no longer technically a member and only members may partake of a "holy" ceremony of the church and singing was considered "partaking". But I could be an usher.
We were flabbergasted and it prompted some seriously strained discussions within our family, especially from me. I finally called the minister and asked if I could sing if I rejoined the church. He asked if it was just so I could sing and I said yes, because I didn't live there anymore anyway. This was on the phone and he replied, "Isn't that like splitting hairs?" I replied, "I think that's what's being done anyway." There was dead silence on the other end. I don't remember if I spoke something or not before I hung up.
We all decided to shut up about it rather than ruin my sister's wedding and I agreed to usher.
To this day I have not set foot in that church except for my parents funerals.
ugh!
If there weren't people on this Earth to challenge our beliefs, our beliefs wouldn't mean anything. All of the judgement in society doesn't change the fact that we aren't the ones appointed to do the judging.
John i totally agree with not signing the form….
I don't remember Jesus asking Mark, Luke, Peter, John and the rest of the Twelve to line up and fill in a form before becoming Apostles… It's weird hearing Christians doing thing that THE Christ himself doesn't do…
Yeah, leadership is may seem like some biggie to some.. but it's actually REALLY simple. You believe Jesus saved you? Then He lives in you… Now spread the love of Christ.. NOT to promote anti- this and that.. it's welcoming the misfits and introducing them to Jesus..
You're married. What's the form for? haha.
Romans 14 vs 23-23
So whatever you believe about these things [b]keep between yourself and God[/b]. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin. (NIV)
Cultivate your own relationship with God, [b]but don't impose it on others[/b]. You're fortunate if your behavior and your belief are coherent. But if you're not sure, if you notice that you are acting in ways inconsistent with what you believe—some days trying to impose your opinions on others, other days just trying to please them—then you know that you're out of line. If the way you live isn't consistent with what you believe, then it's wrong. (Message)
What Part of love the sinner hate sin does the church not understand? Why do our organized religions feel they must sit in judgement and dictate who is welcome in God's House? Christ came into the world not to condem the world but that the world might be saved through him. To quote an old addage "Church is a hospital for sinners not a museum for saints" Jesus invites and welcomes all to come to him and when we do he will take control and show us the truth of life. If we all concentrated more on living by Jesus example, in love and acceptance of PEOPLE not their lifestyle or the sin they live in but of that person as a precious soul that God loves, we would win a lot more people to the kingdom. While walking on this earth Jesus hung out with the worst of sinners, showed them love and directed them to a better way of life. Not by condemning them but thru love and the truth. I want to be like Jesus!!!
What part of loving another human being qualifies as a sin?
The gay part, apparently.
Whoops!
So tempted to become Buddhist.
My brother did.
Great blog John and I pretty much go along with your observations.
One of the things I realise as a Christian of some 25+ years is that each day is a balancing act – We have to walk the line between not slacking off and not becoming a Pharisee.
There are far too many poor people in the world that need our attention, for us to be wasting time on this sort of legalism.
Keep up the excellent work.
Stuart
Live wrote: “Maybe we need to give ‘em a name — in case you use them in the future to serve as a bad example: How about the malignant micro-managers? Or the hardhearted, half-witted deacons? Just give us a warning that it’s the same bunch, and we’ll all sleep better at night.”
The Dreaconians
How’s that? A kind of dreary/draconian/deacon mélange. I love new vocabulary!
I'm a deacon in my church. A very solid, conservative, Bible-believing and teaching church. And I didn't have to sign anything. The elder who asked me to pray about joining the deacon council did no more than that — he just asked me (on behalf of the Elders, who had prayed about asking me) to ask the Lord whether He would like me to serve His body in the capacity of deacon.
I asked. I listened to His answer. I went to the elder who invited me to consider it and I told him it was a go. We prayed together that the Lord would lead me in and give me strength for this service. And that was it.
I've known people in similar situations. There seems to be a tendency for many to 'hang in there' – your loyalty towards you church should compel you to stay. We shouldn't be jumping ship over differences of opinion and so forth.
But then who are we following – the church or Christ?
Even skinheads know not to speak publicly about their publicly unpalletable ideas. Knowing they would face riducule for their anti-gay stance, they choose to press it quietly and subversively. Uber-kudos to you John and Cat for walking away. Many, in an effort to keep connected to their beloved church community, would have signed that paper. But had their anti-gay rhetoric been poured forth from the pulpit…maybe it wouldn't be such a beloved community.
I'm so relieved to know it was ONE church responsible for BOTH of those crushingly bad deacon decisions you've described.
Maybe we need to give 'em a name — in case you use them in the future to serve as a bad example: How about the malignant micro-managers? Or the hardhearted, half-witted deacons? Just give us a warning that it's the same bunch, and we'll all sleep better at night.
As the baby of the family I learned along time ago that cute goes a long way. My wife calls it the "adorability factor." If ever called before a judge and jury don't think I won't use it.
Oh, Anita. Somehow, you always manage to make plagarism seem less morally offensive than it is.
No joke on your second comment, though. That really is awful. Just … painful.
How much do I love this?! And how often am I going to use it and not give you credit?
So the post. What bothered me most about it was how little response I had to it. I hate that those are the kind of scenarios I've come to expect (and accept?) within the institutional church.
← Older Comments
Newer Comments →
{ 1 trackback }