Where the Edge Gathers:. Yvette A. Flunder

couples who have so few examples of sexual fidelity and long-term commitment.

      In my pastoral experience, I have been involved with ministries where there were large numbers of SGL African American persons. These ministries often placed a major emphasis on music and other forms of artistic expression. I have seen the theological and doctrinal positions of these churches change progressively as they sought to include SGL persons who were integral to the life of the community.

      It seems difficult in most cases, however, to cross the line from benevolent tolerance to full affirmation; to create a community of affectional orientation parity along with gender parity, class parity, and the like. The struggle seems to be centered on finding a socially acceptable, normative, and safe way to fully incorporate homosexual parishioners, alongside straight parishioners. What does a predominantly straight ministry do with its SGL parishioners, without offending the straight folks?

      What has occurred is a subculture of SGL persons in the Christian community who are not necessarily condemned for being SGL, but who are also not given equal status with heterosexual persons in a heteronormative environment. SGL Christians are not often free to celebrate anniversaries, be close in public, or share a last name. Marriage and relationship seminars and “how to” workshops are often limited to heterosexual couples. Betty Berzon, in her book Permanent Partners, suggests that heterosexual couples expect permanence in their partnerships because the structures of extended family and the legal system built around their relationships reinforce their permanence.⁵ “Gay and Lesbian people, on the other hand, tend to approach their partner relationships with the hope that these will be long-lasting, even though the prospect is largely unconfirmed by their own experience, and that of most of the people they know.”⁶

      In the same way that little attention was given to the “invalid” marriages of slave couples, little attention is given to developing same-sex families. SGL couples are not challenged to answer the hard questions regarding commitment—to do so would validate an invalid marriage. Even in theologically liberal environments this model seems to give a message that says, “If you are SGL we accept you, without any accountability, just to let you know how inclusive and gracious we are; but we hold straight Christians to a higher moral standard.” In an ethical sense, this is still second-class treatment and a step below full acceptance of SGL people into the church community. The ethicist Robert Bellah noted this second-class treatment in relationship to African Americans and Native Americans in this country: “There is first the assertion that a certain group of people lacks the qualities that would allow its members as individuals to rise and then there is the systematic deprivation of that group of all the resources necessary for its members indeed to rise.”⁷

      When visible SGL persons are not held accountable for faithfulness in personal relationships or held to a “standard” of moral requirements for leadership, they are not considered strong candidates for certain roles within the church. Interestingly, these roles are most often the roles that strongly impact the social norms of the community—that is, pastor, teacher, deacon, youth leader, and similar roles. In order to make all privileges and opportunities available to all persons, responsibilities, requirements, and expectations should also be equal. For example, where there is strong emphasis placed on counseling and preparation before, and support and accountability during marriage, there should be a similar means by which SGL persons can have their relationships accepted and part of church community life. I believe same sex unions would do a great deal to bring about equality.

       SECOND-CLASS CITIZENSHIP

      In Professional Ethics, Karen Lebacqz suggests that we should not only be virtuous, honest, and trustworthy in our actions, but that our doing honorable things should be reflective of our being honorable persons.⁸If a person feels forced to live a secret life in order to sustain an intimate relationship and simultaneously be accepted by a beloved community, how can that person be internally honorable? Life then becomes a web of lies, disjointed and lacking integration. After a period of time, the life story becomes one of survival deception, and the person becomes a deceiver in order to survive in the community. Lebacqz says, “When we act, we not only do something, we also shape our own character. Our choices about what to do are also choices about who to be.”⁹

      The SGL Christian’s life becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy; the accusation is that there is something secret going on, and sure enough there is. How can it be possible for SGL Christians to move to a place of trustworthiness if there is no framework in which to come forward and be honest? It is the inaccessibility of first-class opportunity that creates a second-class subculture. The opportunity to demonstrate capability, competence, and commitment is overshadowed by a negative perception that demonizes, even amidst an atmosphere of tolerance; a perception that says “this person is not really capable of lofty ideals . . . this person’s character is automatically flawed, by virtue of his or her being SGL, and we will not allow him or her an opportunity to prove otherwise!”

      I find it alarming that many who suspect the entire SGL community of being severely promiscuous also resist normalizing SGL monogamous unions. This lose-lose situation will in time do great harm to a person’s self-esteem and does cause many individuals to seek clandestine, anonymous intimate encounters in order to live out their sexuality while staying in a place of guarded acceptance by the church. In this age of AIDS, the church ought to be more concerned than any other institution on earth about the prima facie duty to do no harm. The church must remove the pejorative assumptions regarding SGL people and provide equal access and equal opportunity for full participation.

      Integrity is the way our lives fit together in some orderly sensible fashion, implying predictability and continuity. It is impossible to live an integrated life and simultaneously have something as important as a committed love relationship that must be perpetually hidden from the community of faith. William N. Eskridge in The Case for Same-Sex Marriage says that such unions “civilize” relationships.¹⁰ When I first read this word in relationship to SGL unions I was offended. After reading further I understood Eskridge’s position and have listed some of the “civilizing” aspects of same–sex unions.

      The law currently makes intimacy between same-sex people a criminal offense in some states; hence legal same-sex unions would legitimize intimacy. Same- sex unions would offer an alternative to the exaggerated benefit of promiscuity, which according to Eskridge has not been liberating to SGL men, and has encouraged a cult of youth and beauty worship and the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. Unions would provide a more stable environment where children are present.

      It is important that I acknowledge the opinion of those who feel this position is restrictive and limiting and that what I am suggesting seeks to, in Eskridge’s words, “tame” the same-sex community.

      There are SGL persons who think same-sex unions are simply a parody of heterosexual marriage and resist the notion of state recognized unions. They do not consider monogamy a viable option, and not everyone is interested in connecting to a community. I do not believe it is just for coupled people to enjoy insurance, tax, and housing benefits not available to single people or people whose intimate circles are made up of more than two persons. Some individuals are more suited to and even called to single life. Some are bisexual and live in intimate circles of mutual respect, love, and understanding. I do not seek to demonize or vilify any people or any family, but rather I seek to demonstrate that it is just and right for church and society to support and affirm same-sex couples, thereby providing a long-term relationship option for those who feel such an option is impossible.

       LONE WOLF ALTERNATIVE

      Some of my sisters and brothers feel that a full, unrestricted freedom for sexual intimacy between consenting adults is much more liberating and such freedom should not be accountable to the community by respecting existing relationship boundaries. I call this a lone wolf alternative where connections and relationships shift and change according to present feelings and without regard to commitments made, leaving enormous emotional and spiritual damage in its wake. There is great division in the SGL community around this issue. Although I do not seek to judge