QuakerInfo.com Forum

[kevin roberts]

Is homosexuality a sin? I don't think so, but it was a reason behind my YM supporting the disowning of one meeting a few years ago, when all the members were read out and the meeting laid down because it therefore no longer had any members. This was done by the Quarter, over which the Yearly had no authority. But the Yearly supported the decision, and those who disagreed decided to stand aside.

There was no unity in the decision, and it has been a source of disharmony ever since, both among people who disagree about homosexuality, and by people who thought the process used was out of order. Recently there have been some new developments, and since some of the folks here are homosexual and otherwise, I know it will be of interest.

The question has been posed as to whether Christian Scripture has been interpreted correctly with respect to homosexuality, or whether many generations of Christians have substituted their own cultural biases into their readings, translations, and interpretations of Scripture. The keys lie in the original meaning of the Greek and Hebrew, whether Christians are obliged to observe Jewish law, and what Jesus Christ would have us do as a result of the answers to these questions.

So far, no other issues other than Scripture are part of the official conversation.

http://mysticspoetsandfools.blogspot.com/

[avalon]

Hi kevin,

[michaeldavidjay]

This issue has the disadvantage in that, in some communities, it has become an 'orthodoxy test.' Why this one, specifically - I do not know... perhaps because it can be used politically. (again, I do not understand why).
_________________
Do Friends speak to today's condition, or are we only a historical footnote?

[kevin roberts]

The Quarter's logic was that because homosexuality is a religious abomination, any group of people who practice it or support it must be out of unity with God, and therefore out of unity with the Society. Because the meeting contained some unrepentant sinners who not only would not change their ways but didn't feel any leading to do so, the Quarter chose to disown them all. (Without individual laboring: another process issue.)

The issue of Scripture is important because it is the outward guide that is generally used to support the arguments against homosexuality. Before any of the other sides of the homosexuality question can be weighed, whether it is a Christian sin must be determined. If it is a sin, then it is correct to discourage it, and the disownment becomes a moot point. If it is not a sin, then the whole thing was a botch from the start, which is my own opinion.

Hitting the Scriptural support goes right to the heart of the question: is it unacceptable to God, or is the YM reading Scripture incorrectly?

I am not Jewish, and I don't follow the Law. Arguments from Leviticus and Deuteronomy mean nothing to me, especially when they come from someone who eats pork and washes dishes on the Sabbath. If you read the original languages, the NT condemnations are almost all clearly of Canaanite temple prostitution, and not of peaceful, committed, supportive relationships.

Whether it is a Christian sin is the discussion that needs to be held first, I think. It will probably take decades to work this through, and I do mean several generations. But the conversation has now officially begun..

[michaeldavidjay]

The conversation in my YM was 15 or so years earlier and had the exact same results. (disownments, laid down meeting.) Actually -- my understanding is that the discussion itself is taboo.

*edit* Iowa Yearly Meeting will likely force some discussion *edit*
_________________
Do Friends speak to today's condition, or are we only a historical footnote?

[michaeldavidjay]

What he is saying is the WHOLE worship group was disowned -- because they did not eject the "sinners" from their meeting. We had 2 recorded ministers stripped of recognition and disowned, as well as laying down the meeting they attended... (because of #1: a paper they wrote, #2: their toleration of homosexual attenders.)
_________________
Do Friends speak to today's condition, or are we only a historical footnote?

[kevin roberts]

MDJ, it's interesting that your ministers can be un-ministered. Since Ministers are recognized and not appointed, did that mean that the original recognition was in error? I can't think of any ministers ever being un-ministered with us. I don't know what they did during the separations here when everybody disowned everybody else.

With us, there were two women members who had been together for many years, who wanted their meeting to acknowledge that they felt that they were married. The meeting dithered for a long time, and then those that were against it compromised by absenting themselves one First Day. The meeting acknowledged the relationship by minuting that the women considered themselves married.

I think that's how it went. I haven't read the endless paperwork, but I imagine I will have the opportunity.

OYM has no procedure for disowning a meeting, so the Quarter did it by reading out all the members individually at Quarterly Meeting. Then they laid the meeting down, which has continued on quite happily without us. The Yearly Meeting affirmed the Quarter's action at the next Yearly Meeting by saying that there was nothing it could do (which was nonsense, of course).

I have homosexual seekers ask me regularly about joining OYM, and I tell them that I will support them, but that being a test case will exercise everybody. One Friend I know is going to be doing just that, it seems, by asking a very conservative OYM meeting to take his worship group under their care in preparation for joining OYM as a full meeting. He's homosexual, so there's at least one in his worship group, and our procedure is for worship group applicants to join OYM as affiliate members during the process.

Right into the dragon's mouth, to quote Fox himself.

[michaeldavidjay]

our Faith and Practice give these reasons:

#1: Out of Unity with the Faith and Practice, or traditional Christianity.
or
#2: It becomes evident that the person 'lost' the gift for ministry. (though, most who are recorded for vocal ministry are not relieved of recognition after a stroke, or some illness that makes it impossible to speak... in fact, I cannot think of an example. I can only think of two who were de-recorded.... ever, and it was because they tollerated a homosexual attender... and wrote a paper defending their meetings position. (I shudder at this as an orthodoxy test when I realize that toleration is not allowed, but unrepentant, continued adultery is.)
_________________
Do Friends speak to today's condition, or are we only a historical footnote?

[kevin roberts]

avalon brought this same point up yesterday.

Why is being homosexual worthy of disownment, but something else isn't? We have full birthright members serving active duty in the US Navy, and we forbear with them in the hope that they will come round. It's okay to stick a bayonet into someone of the same sex, but not your genitalia.

Only sex is the issue these days. The only people we've disowned recently have been a man who molested the children of another member, and the members of Cleveland, most of whom were not homosexual and were merely assumed to support the actions of their meeting in being out of unity with their Quarter. There were no personal interviews prior to disownment that I know about. Very poor process.

Part of it is a reluctance to return to the old pattern of disowning anybody for anything, which is one reason we've diminished in number.

[michaeldavidjay]

I blog and write essays now (An essay I wrote on the use of humor in spoken ministry is in the current issue of Quaker life) Right now I'm working on an essay on the Friends Business method (wish me lots of luck).... I'll be out of unity soon enough... since I know paper-writing is grounds for disownment in my meeting .
_________________
Do Friends speak to today's condition, or are we only a historical footnote?

[Anthony]

It makes one wonder what, in their wisdom, those responsible would have said to William Penn when he asked if he should wear his sword?
_________________
"There is not an animal on Earth, nor a bird that flies on it's wings, but they are communities like you" The Koran 6:38

[Hope]

In a society where there's no creed and everyone should be led by their consciousness, why do we have to have a common consensus about our feelings towards homosexuality?
People are entitled to feel uncomfortable with the idea of homosexual marriage or even homosexuality as such -let them have their feelings, but no one has the right to treat other people respectless or harm them (deliberately) in any way!
In comparison:
There are people who can't stand the thought of treating pets like family members, they would not even allow an animal in their house... Are they entitled to their personal opinion? Yes. Should they be allowed to stop people loving their pets? No!
_________________
Light & Love
Hope
xx

[SteveT]

Hmmm.....

A slightly different view is held this side of the pond to say the least!!!

I can do no better than to quote from our epistle written at the end of Yearly Meeting this year, where a decision was reached to move towards same-sex marriages. This has been through a long process of discernment within Britain Yearly meeting since the 1960's.

If we stay in the light, we will find spiritual energy to help us create new relationships and renew existing ones. In our dialogue and connections we are challenged to be inclusive, nurturing and constructive.

We have worked with openness and courage to discern the next stages in the recognition of same sex committed relationships, following the extensive consultations that have taken place over the past three years. Over many years attitudes within our yearly meeting have developed and shifted radically. We are now resolved to make significant alterations to our procedures, whilst remaining sensitive to those who would like us to move at a different pace.

Hearing personal accounts of a variety of patterns of relationships has greatly helped our discernment. We have heard moving examples of experiences of meetings for worship to celebrate committed relationships.

We are led to enable same sex marriages in a meeting for worship under the care of a meeting as we currently do for opposite sex marriages. We see this as embarking on a new phase of our life together. Registering officers are not, however, asked to step outside the law at this time. Revisions to Quaker faith & practice will be prepared. We are led to uphold this affirmation to the testimonies to truth and equality. Marriage is God’s work and we are the witnesses.
_________________
Pop in and say hello at www.kendal-and-sedbergh-quakers.org.uk

I Started Out With Nothin’ and I Still Got Most of it Left

[kevin roberts]

Steve, to what extent does Britain Yearly Meeting consider itself guided by Christian Scripture in its discernment processes?

[BillSamuel]

As I recall, in the case of Cleveland Meeting, what the Quarter stated was that the Monthly Meeting had disaffiliated by taking its action despite warnings from the Quarter. And for those who don't know, the MM was a member of 2 YMs so it was not left without a YM by being declared to have left Ohio YM.

Under Ohio' s discipline, the action did not require approval by the YM. The MM had the right to contest it, but they did not submit a formal appeal through the Clerk of the YM. Instead, they sent a letter to all resident members of the YM telling their side of the story. Apparently, they viewed that as an appeal although it was not worded explicitly as that. They did send representatives to press their case.

I was at those YM sessions, and they were rough. The issue was not on the agenda as such. When the membership report came up, those with concerns about the matter raised it in the light of members of Cleveland Meeting no longer being included in the membership statistics. There was sufficient concern that the matter be aired that the Clerk made a special time on the agenda for it.
_________________
Bill Samuel, Silver Spring, MD, USA
Co-Coordinator, Friends in Christ