Christian Science: Its Encounter With Lesbian/Gay America...2nd Edition

By Bruce Stores

Author Bruce Stores has shed light on a hitherto unknown chapter in the annals of Christian Science. Here is the story of lesbian/gay believers. Herein is their pursuit for respect and dignity in the Church of Christ, Scientist. Th e narrative traces stormy encounters from the days of near-total rejection up to the frien

• Language: English
• Publisher: ARPress
• Release date: Mar 18, 2024
• ISBN: 9798893566697

Bruce Stores

Bruce Stores did not begin serious writing until after retiring. His first book came out at age sixty-six. He believed he was unfairly ex-communicated from his Church due to its lack of understanding of sexual orientation issues. This led to his writing, Christian Science: Its Encounter With Lesbian/Gay America (iUniverse 2004, 248 pages). It wasn’t until five years later that his second book was published. A long interest in Mexico’s unique history and a special interest in the Isthmus of Tehuantepec led to the publication of The Isthmus: Stories From Mexico’s Past, 1495-1995 (iUniverse 2009, 360 pages). Nilo and Demetrius is his third book. Bruce Stores was a Peace Corps Volunteer in Guatemala working in community development programs near Quetzaltenango in the early 1960’s. Later he was a community development officer involved with refugee resettlement in Vietnam at the height of that war with the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). His third venture overseas was to serve as Recreation Coordinator for American employees and their families with Bell Helicopter/Textron in pre-revolution Iran. He also served the YMCA as Youth Director in Vineland, NJ and Branch Director in Midland, TX. He later worked with self-help housing projects near Seattle, WA and was a contributing reporter for many years with Seattle Gay News. After relocating to Mexico in 1995, he was an English teacher for six years. He has lived in the Mexican City of Oaxaca since 2007. He is a graduate of Springfield College, Springfield, MA with B.S and M.Ed. degrees in humanities. He was married in 1967 and divorced in 1980. He has one son and two grandchildren.

Book preview

Copyright © 2023 by Bruce Stores

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner and the publisher, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law. For permission requests, write to the publisher, addressed Attention: Permissions Coordinator, at the address below.

ARPress

45 Dan Road Suite 5

Canton MA 02021

Hotline: [phone]

Fax: [phone]

Ordering Information:

Quantity sales. Special discounts are available on quantity purchases by corporations, associations, and others. For details, contact the publisher at the address above.

Printed in the United States of America.

Library of Congress Control Number:  2024904145

Christian Science:

Its Encounter with Lesbian/Gay America

And Ruth said [to Naomi], Intreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God:

Ruth 1:16 KJV

…[T]he soul of Jonathan was knit to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul… I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan; very pleasant have you been to me; your love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women.

I Samuel 18:1; II Samuel 1:26 RSV

Judge not, that ye be not judged.

Christ Jesus, Matthew 7:1 KJV

I recommend that Scientists draw no lines whatever between one person and another, but think, speak, teach, and write the Truth of Christian Science without reference to right or wrong personality in this field of labor. Leave the distinctions of individual character and the discriminations and guidance thereof to the Father, whose wisdom is unerring and whose love is universal.

No and Yes, 7:21-2, by Mary Baker Eddy

DEDICATIONS

This book is dedicated to the memory of the late Kentner Scott who dedicated his time, energy, devotion, talents, love, and just plain hard work in the first nine years of Emergence International. He served as President, Treasurer, and Editor of Emerge! Magazine -- all at the same time! He will be remembered for setting The Emergence International organization on a sound basis through his strong leadership and intense dedication. He is truly the father of Emergence.

This book is also dedicated to the wonderful women and men in Emergence International. Their on-going friendly words of encouragement from beginning to end gave much incentive for completing both editions of this book.

Other works by Bruce Stores

CHRISTIAN SCIENCE: Its Encounter with Lesbian/Gay America, First Edition, 2004, iUniverse, Bloomington, IN, 276 pages

THE ISTHMUS: Stories from Mexico’s Past, 1495 to 1995, iUniverse, 2009, Bloomington, IN, 392 pages (The Isthmus is reviewed at the end of this book.) Spanish translation pending.

EL ISTMO: Historias del Pasado de México: 1495 a 1995. (Pending)

NILO & DEMETRIUS: Brothers in Classical Greece (Pending)

CONTENTS

Acknowledgements 

Preface to the First Edition 

Preface to the Second Edition 

Introduction 

PART I THE PIONEERS 

Chapter 1 Kay Tobin Lahusen 

Chapter 2 Craig Rodwell 

Chapter 3 Ernest Barnum 

PART II THE STIRRING UP 

Chapter 4 The Reginald Kerry Letters 

Chapter 5 Save Our Children 

Part III UNITING FOR A COMMON CAUSE 

Chapter 6 Beginning of LGBT Christian Science Groups 

PART IV SPIRITUAL WICKEDNESS IN HIGH PLACES" 

Chapter 7 The Chris Madsen Affair 

Chapter 8 Chris Madsen’s Trial 

PART V PERSEVERANCE AND VICTORY 

Chapter 9 The Christian Science Board of Directors 

Chapter 10 That City of Ceaseless Enterprise 

Chapter 11 The Healing Begins 

PART VI INTO THE THIRD MILLENNIUM 

Chapter 12 Principia College 

Chapter 13 Branch Churches 

Chapter 14 Tom Taffel 

Chapter 15 Epilogue 

PART VII APPENDICES 

Appendix A Chronology 

Appendix B Text of the historic pamphlet, Gay People in Christian Science? and a response 

Appendix C Keynote address by Carl Welz at first Emergence Conference 1986 

Appendix D Keynote address by Dr. John Near at the 2015 Emergence International Conference 

Appendix E Principia’s Board of Trustees Historic Change of Policy Statement 

Appendix F Letters 

1. By Jim Bradley to the Christian Science Publishing Society, et al

2. By Dr. John Near to the Principia community

3. By Tom Taffel to the Christian Science Publishing Society, et al, and a Response by The Mother Church

4. By Jeffrey Walter to Principia College administration et al

Appendix G Coming out for good article by Tom Taffel 

Appendix H Survey Letter Sent to Christian Science Practitioners and Responses 

Appendix I Websites for LGBT Christian Scientists and Their Supporters 

Appendix J What the Bible forbids: 14 items 

Appendix K Imprisoned Ideas 

Appendix L My Answer to Fourth Church, Seattle 

Appendix M About the Author 

Appendix N Gratitude and Withdrawal 

Appendix O BIBLIOGRAPHY 

PART VIII FOOTNOTES AND INDEXES 

Footnotes 

Indexes 

Name Index 

Subject Index 

Acknowledgements

Much appreciation is extended to those who contributed to this book (in its first edition and/or the second) with their time, detailed information, logistical support, computer skills, editing, and just plain encouragement.

The extensive personal interviews that were granted provided by far the bulk of the information for both editions of CHRISTIAN SCIENCE: Its Encounter with Lesbian/Gay America. All the main players in the narratives that follow showed a willingness and great patience to provide extensive information. In some cases, follow-up interviews were necessary. In this regard, deep gratitude is extended to Ernest Barnum (Little Rock, AR, deceased); Kay Lahusen (Kennett Square, PA, deceased May 26, 2021); Robert Mackenroth (New York, NY, deceased March 31, 2008); Christine Madsen (Moretown, VT); Bob McCullough (New York, NY); Carol Pierson (San José, CA); Craig Rodwell (New York, NY, deceased June 18, 1993); Ray Spitale (New York, NY); David Stores (Oaxaca, Mexico); Tom Taffel (San Francisco, CA); and Jeffrey Walter (Boston, MA).

Also helpful were Jim Bradley (Washington, D.C., deceased Dec. 25, 1993); Chandler Burr (New York, NY); Amy Duncan (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil); Dr. Stuart Grayson (New York, NY, deceased July 12, 2001); Jim Huer (Portland, OR); David Hosely (San Jose, CA); Kathelen Johnson (Stockton, CA); Hugh Key (Key West, FL); Laura Matthews C.S. (Framingham, MA); Kentner Scott (San Rafael, CA, deceased May 4, 2011); Katherine Triantafillou (Cambridge, MA); George Wadleigh C.S. (Lake Villa, IL, deceased November 7, 2022); Earl Welther (Chicago, IL, deceased September 3, 2010); David White (Washington, DC); and Dell Yarnell (Chicago, IL, deceased Sept. 5, 2015). Thanks to Michael K. Hughes (Seattle, WA) for permission to re-print his letter from the Readers’ Write column in the Christian Science Monitor, and Susan Ambrosius (Port Townsend, WA) for permission to use her comments in Yahoo! group’s blog, cslesbigay. Thanks also to Diego Flores Cortés (Puebla, Mexico) for drawing the cover’s cross and crown design, Glen Hunt (Seattle, WA, deceased Dec. 1994) for his valuable logistical help, and the late Tim Mayhew (Seattle, WA, deceased April 30, 2017) for his untiring help in sharing his computer expertise for edition one.

Special appreciation goes to my editor, Steve Silha (Tacoma, WA), for carefully proofreading the text and providing valuable suggestions, and to Heath Synnestvedt (Oaxaca, Mexico) for doing the same with both editions. Public Radio station KQED-FM, San Francisco, was unusually generous by making available its extensive files covering the five-year history of its negotiations with Monitor Radio. Thanks to KQED Program Manager Carol Pierson and Station Manager David Hosely for taking much time in sharing detailed information about their station’s history of relations with San Francisco’s LGBT communities and with The Mother Church. Thanks to Dr. John Near for permission to include his keynote address at the 2015 Emergence International Conference and his letter to the Principia College community. Thanks also go to the following publications for permission to quote from articles: National Review, U.S. News and World Report, New Republic, Newsweek, Gay Community News (Boston), Bay Area Reporter (San Francisco), and the San Francisco Chronicle. Gratitude is especially extended to The Spectator magazine of London, UK for permission to include the entire article Imprisoned Ideas (Appendix K).

In the second edition, Chapter Four, The Reginald Kerry Letters, was greatly amplified with the help of two works: Mr. Young Goes to Boston by the late Alan Young (deceased May 19, 2016), and a work by Reginald Kerry’s widow: Elaine Kerry’s Reminiscences of Reginald Kerry. Gratitude also goes to Tom Taffel (San Francisco, CA). He was a significant contributor to the revision of chapter four and another chapter, that of his name.

For a list of all published sources helpful in producing this book, readers are referred to the bibliography (Appendix O).

Revised Preface to the First Edition

The present flux in religious faith may be found to be a healthy fermentation, by which the lees of religion will be lost, dogma and creed will pass off in scum, leaving a solid Christianity at the bottom—a foundation for the builders.

The First Church of Christ, Scientist and Miscellany by Mary Baker Eddy, page 301

Some American churches have been in crisis. Defining the place of sexual minorities (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons, or LGBT) in their ranks have brought about their most difficult and painful turmoil since slavery. We may yet see some churches come apart with new denominations formed. These conflicts in many denominations have not gone unnoticed in the national news media.

In some denominations—and especially concerning Episcopalians, Methodists, and Presbyterians—the media have given intense coverage to their internal divisions regarding their LGBT members. This was especially true when the first gay Episcopal Bishop, Gene Robinson, was ordained in 2003. By contrast, the change of position from blatant discrimination against sexual minorities to some degree of acceptance by Christian Science Church officials occurred quietly—so quietly most church members did not know it was happening. The change in policy that took place near the end of the decade of the 1990s was never announced in the church’s religious periodicals. Not even the Christian Science Monitor mentioned it. It was all but unnoticed in the wider media. Only when the Christian Science Mother Church seemed to backpedal by relieving a Christian Science teacher and lecturer of her positions in 2004—after she legally married her long-time partner—did some media coverage occur. The narrative that follows will try to identify and describe some of the events and forces behind the Christian Scientists’ quiet (hush-hush) change of opinion regarding gays. The pursuit of fairness and justice in the Church of Christ, Scientist by sexual minorities is set against the background of the wider lesbian/gay movement for full equality, civil rights, and marriage.

What this book does not emphasize is teaching religion. Its purpose is to convey a segment of the ages-old conflict between freedom of conscience and ecclesiastical authoritarianism. The reader can, however, find a very concise listing of some Christian Science beliefs in the footnotes section under Chapter 15, Epilogue, footnote 9. They are presented succinctly without discussion or elaboration.

The gaining of positive self-acceptance by LGBT people of their sexual orientation in the wake of the Stonewall riots in 1969 led to their desire for approval from the general populace. This provoked conflict. Serious conflict. Much of this conflict developed in ecclesiastical arenas. Many (most?) religious denominations became involved to some degree of having serious conflicts with their LGBT members and their supporters. The concerns, most of the time, included: Could LGBT persons become or remain members in their church, and could they attain or remain in high positions? In the early years of these conflicts, LGBT people were losing most of the battles. This resulted in the flowering of LGBT support groups throughout the wide spectrum of America’s religious denominations. This book narrates these developments as they relate to lesbian/gay Christian Scientists and their church. The narrative is not limited to the pursuit by LGBT people to attain fairness within their denomination. Their story is intricately locked into the wider LGBT movement for equality. From this context, the dedication of lesbian/gay Christian Scientists can be better understood. What follows is a segment of sexual minority history. Some of this history has never been told. At the same time, it is also a slice of recent Christian Science history, much of which is all but unknown in its wider (non-LGBT) church membership.

Readers, be warned. What follows is not a neutral history of sexual minorities in Christian Science. How can it be? The author has been an active player in gay religious and political arenas since 1979. He admits to having a strong bias in favor of the LGBT Christian Science groups. How can it be otherwise? Beyond that, it may be helpful to point out other concerns readers may have.

While the author is biased against ecclesiastical authoritarian tendencies in the Church of Christ, Scientist, he also sees a brighter side. In its non-organized form, Christian Science honors man’s individual right of self-government (Science and Health, page 447, line 2; hereafter (Science and Health 447:2) It treats all believers as kings and priests unto God (Revelation chapter 1, verse 6, hereafter Revelation 1:6; quoted in Science and Health 141:20-21). And it champions Christ Jesus’s admonition to Judge not, (Matthew 7:1). Religions, churches and individuals that agree with and practice the above are worthy of respect and support.

All Bible quotes are from the King James Version unless otherwise noted.

To the extent the Church of Christ, Scientist has been an authoritarian entity, I have opposed the organization. Examples of authoritarianism include telling members how they must enhance their spirituality, what members should and should not read to further their spiritual progress, defining members’ social conduct, and especially by having prescribed with whom they should and should not share physical intimacy in their human experience. It is sad that Christian Science Church leaders desired to impose their will over how individual members conduct their personal affairs. But a larger question begs itself: Was, or was it not, its Founder’s desire for her church to oversee members’ behavior and their gentle emergence from sense to Soul (Christian Science Hymnal 64), or should this be a prerogative for members alone? How you, the readers, answer this question may affect how you will feel about the pages that follow.

The author has been profoundly influenced by Mary Baker Eddy’s writings, biographies of her life, and the works of a few other metaphysicians. As to Mrs. Eddy’s published writings, it is astonishing that so few of them are readily available. The 400 plus editions of Science and Health constitute most of the overwhelming number of published writings by Mrs. Eddy. Yet of all the different versions of Science and Health, the Church of Christ, Scientist would have its members only read and study the 1907 edition. That leaves members at the mercy of learning the content of the other editions from those relatively few who have studied them. This will be explored in chapter nine, The Christian Science Board of Directors.

The writer believes spiritual growth can come entirely through one’s own efforts. It can also come from collaborating with a teacher, and/or with others through informal study groups. It can also come from a highly structured organization such as a church. Mary Baker Eddy saw positive, as well as not so positive, elements in human organization such as a physical (material) church. In that context, her counsel that material organization has its value and peril (Retrospection and Introspection or R&I 45:6) is a warning to us in our spiritual and human journeys. She added, organization as well, has its uses and abuses. (R&I 45:15). Her counsels are signals for us to have the utmost caution in how we relate to organizations of all kinds, such as political, academic, and social groups, as well as churches.

A central concern or focus of Christian Science today should be whether Mary Baker Eddy’s Discovery was to be largely restrained within a human organization or was her revelation an inspired blueprint primarily meant to show us how to live out our human experience.

History is replete with perils of organization. A case can be made that the Christian Science Church has been as much a victim of power and love of organization for its own sake, as was the Hebrew religion in the time of Jesus, and Christianity itself, a few centuries later. Evolving from autonomous communities of spiritually equal believers, early Christians developed a sophisticated hierarchical structure. The structure demanded special privileges for those who supposedly became intercessors between congregants and the Holy Spirit. (The Cross and The Crown by Norman Beasley, pages 627-644) A similar proclivity emerged following the passing of Mary Baker Eddy. Here, the Christian Science Board of Directors saw themselves as ultimate arbiters in defining exact meanings of the Bible, Mrs. Eddy’s writings, and legislating behavior for church members in highly personal areas. This included defining for members correct (authorized) literature for members to read. Some Christian Scientists have found that for them to yield total allegiance to the Christian Science Board of Directors—and/or any ecclesiastical authority on spiritual matters—would be inconsistent with their denomination’s sixth tenet:

…[W]e solemnly promise to watch and pray for that Mind to be in us which was also in Christ Jesus; (Science and Health, page 497:24-25)

Dissidents have always been part of the greater church scene. But until the last quarter of the twentieth century, a sense of near invincibility protected the Christian Science Board of Directors from disloyalty and competition for the conscience of rank-and-file members.

Nearly solid support for the Christian Science Board of Directors began to unravel when Reginald Kerry’s infamous letters to the church field made their shocking debut in 1975. Yet, it would take many more events to cause what U.S. News and World Report fourteen years later called, a crisis of confidence that could threaten the faith’s very survival.² The events, in addition to the Kerry revelations, included loss of the coveted copyright once given as an act of Congress to the denomination’s basic text, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, and losing in court its legalized monopoly over the very words Christian Science to an excommunicated congregation. Confidence was further eroded following a decision to allow a previously unauthorized book in Christian Science reading rooms worldwide. This caused a rare push-back by members, one that has almost never been seen in Christian Science history. The Mother Church was offered a ninety-million-dollar donation in exchange for a controversial book to be accepted by a substantial number of Christian Science Reading Rooms around the world.

Official publication of [one] volume has led to a rare outburst of protest from within the ranks, with critics charging that apostasy has resulted from both a bizarre bequest [$90 million dollars from the author’s family tied to Church acceptance of the book as ‘authorized’ for members to read] and the faith’s fiscal crisis.3

The Mother Church was also involved in heavily publicized courtroom trials due to parents withholding medical treatment from their children.

Accompanying the turmoil has been a steady erosion in membership resulting in an average of about 32 branch (local) churches dissolved in the United States each year between 1961 and 2018. In the 1990s, the number of lost churches in the U.S. had risen at times to forty or more a year.⁴ But as far reaching as these quandaries have been, they were only symptomatic of a much larger problem.

The overriding dilemma in the Boston-based church has been a membership asleep to the injustices of an unresponsive hierarchy. Injustice was manifested by a Board of Directors seemingly unable to tolerate criticism. Constructive and even healing-based criticisms were often treated as treason. A perception arose by many church members and employees, as well as dissidents and free thinkers, that the Christian Science Board of Directors were fearful of new ideas and felt threatened by others’ opinions. This was manifested by the Board’s reluctance to dialogue with any group that suggested tinkering with the status quo, not just sexual minorities. According to former Mother Church Communications Director and one time highly popular lecturer for the denomination, the late Alan Young: …[T]his [Christian Science] Board [of Directors] over the years, has established an aura of irreplaceability and infallibility. It has mantled itself in the cloak of authority so that now any criticism or even advice is considered treason…The Board’s tyranny pervades every aspect of Christian Science…⁵

Here’s what official Mary Baker Eddy biographer, Dr. Gillian Gill had to say:

The unelected and self-perpetuating five-member Board of Directors, which has governed the Church since 1910, has often been criticized inside and outside the Church as being closed and autocratic. (Gill page xvi)

There will, no doubt, be readers who would love to see even stronger condemnations of the church’s leadership for what they believe are former discriminatory policies and other injustices. They might also point out the policies were usually accompanied with harsh judgmental overtones, insisting, for example, on healing as the only adequate response to an individual’s lesbian, gay or bi-sexual orientation.

Others take the opposite view. They would have church authorities seen only in a light that would absolve them from the slightest suspicion of wrongdoing. Conflicting viewpoints such as these no doubt cause predicaments for anyone writing about church history.

A constructive way to approach the issue came from a church-authorized practitioner. Learning of the first edition of this book in progress, she wrote the author:

Please try to love both sides as you write. This is the only way to be balanced and to really educate. There is no enemy here, just a bunch of people doing their best as the moment presents itself.

The advice is practical. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be pointed out that the author assumes all players in this narrative are acting out of sincere beliefs. Then, what we are left with are sincere, albeit profoundly divergent views. The question may arise here as to the appropriateness of recording past injustices by the church. The answer to that is to point out it would not do justice to record United States history by omitting the slavery years, the injustices of the reconstruction era, factory sweathouses, child labor, the oppression of women, legalized racial segregation, Watergate, the Vietnam war, being caught off-guard on September 11, 2001, for some, the error of invading Iraq coupled with wide-scale prisoner abuse, and a presidential condemnation of same-gender marriage as a result of entrenched homophobia, even in 2004. Yet, through all this, Americans, for the most part, including lesbians and gays, love their country. The same is true for many toward The Mother Church even when profoundly mistaken policies are handed down by their officials.

Another reason to bring up ecclesiastical faux pas is that it may make it less likely for past errors to be repeated.

Part of the uniqueness of Christian Science is its claim that it is not just another religion. This is because it takes issue with foundational premises of physical science, medical science, and orthodox theology. It also claims its teachings to be the very Comforter promised by Christ Jesus, that he may abide with you forever (John 14:16). If this is true, one wonders how the church could have been infected by racism, homophobia and especially authoritarianism. Sadly, the Church of Christ, Scientist has followed others by becoming mired in such ills. The question then becomes a problem for those adversely affected by Mother Church policies. What can they do to create change in an authoritarian, often unapproachable, non-democratic, non-transparent organization with self-perpetuating leadership and no checks and balances? No easy answer presents itself. Throughout the ages, however, many have turned to writing to get the attention of the masses. But the challenges remain in how to state on paper, with logical form, the best ways to create change.

The author is trying.

No doubt the most appropriate guideline for writing was laid down over a century ago by Mary Baker Eddy. Her motto for the international daily newspaper she founded is, To injure no man, but to bless all mankind. That is a noble axiom by anyone’s standard. But what a shame it would be to limit Mrs. Eddy’s motto only to the domain of the Christian Science Monitor! It is indeed a sound basis for all writing. Many lesbians and gays, however, do not feel Mrs. Eddy’s motto has been extended to include them by some writers in the church’s religious periodicals. For this reason, many sexual minorities and their supporters believe their church has violated Mrs. Eddy’s motto for her newspaper, as well as the Golden Rule many, many times over.

In the decades of the 1960s, ‘70s, and ‘80s, lesbians and gays were spoken of derisively in the church’s religious publications. Referring to gays and lesbians, the harshly judgmental vocabulary included such pejorative, prejudiced (and some may say hateful) terms as aberration, abnormal, bizarre, cursed, deviants, immoral, outcasts from society, perverted, promiscuous, second class, unhealthy, unnatural, unseemly, and vile.⁶ But it wasn’t just The Mother Church that was throwing stones.

A long-held concern among sexual minorities is that they were considered sick by the medical establishment, criminal by the legal profession, and sinners by theologians. Within this triad are found many religious communities which have consistently been the most intractable when it comes to acknowledging the inherent dignity of LGBT people and granting them basic human rights.

The overwhelming majority of lesbians and gays in the 1950s, ‘60s, ‘70s, and to a lesser extent the ‘80s, were deeply closeted, and for good reasons. But there were exceptions. The narratives that follow provide a close look at some of those exceptional people who chose to live outside the closet doors in those perilous years. These activists defied conventional wisdom. They not only disagreed with the pervasive homophobia in their churches and society-at-large, but some of these activist pioneers went far beyond being open about who they are. Indeed, they made it a personal mission to confront their accusers while seeking to eradicate their erroneous thoughts and actions. In so doing, their efforts made the world a better place for those sexual minorities who followed.

This work has its limitations. Chief among them is the scant attention paid to The Mother Church’s perspective. Nearly every event is seen from the viewpoint of outsiders alone. No doubt the debate among top-ranking church officials over their positions and policies toward LGBT people in their ranks was, at times, intense. But complicating its documentation is a deep reluctance by church officials to make internal conflict known. Having connections with one or more deep throats from the church’s top echelon would have brought greater perspective in this book with more clarity as to how Mother Church policy evolves. Unfortunately, no such opportunity presented itself for this work. How regrettable for its members that there is so little transparency as to how Mother Church officials arrive at policy decisions, as well as other matters.

A second limitation comes from not expressing the full depth of personalities. Sexual minorities have personalities as diverse and complex as heterosexuals. In the interest of brevity, their complexities and divisions are not always fully explored. So it is that some personalities may be seen at times as being one-dimensional, both in their individual and collective conditions.

A third critique is that some readers may feel this book digresses too much into LGBT politics that are outside the Christian Science Church. It is difficult sometimes to separate church politics from purely political ones. Both are related to the political process, especially when their politics include social issues, such as policies affecting the LGBT communities.

Another critique may be the author’s mentioning other church-related issues besides LGBT concerns, especially those about organization. Church organization is something Mrs. Eddy opposed strongly in early editions of Science and Health and in her collection of writings named Prose Works. It is brought up here because perils of organization include Mother Church acceptance of past racist and homophobic policies from our culture.

During the times when those having a same-gender orientation mostly saw themselves in the same way as society did by seeing themselves as guilty, sick, sinful, and shame-ridden, the word homosexual is used to describe them. But when most of them became aware of their true selfhood as moral, healthy, upright citizens who deserve to feel proud, the word gay is employed in this book to describe them. There is, therefore, a stark difference in this book between a homosexual and a gay person.

It is hoped this narrative will be helpful to non-Christian Scientists as well as those within the denomination. This is because same-gender sexuality has become the most divisive issue within many or most Christian and Jewish faiths since the Civil War. My desire is that this work might contribute to the development of new frameworks in defining the place of sexual minorities in ecclesiastical institutions. Foremost among these frameworks is that sexual orientation may be responsible for one’s attractions, but never one’s behavior. This is as true for sexual minorities as it is for heterosexuals. Another framework is overcoming the fallacy that certain sexual orientations need to be healed and replaced by a different sexual orientation. Yet another is the need to change the misguided perception that an individual can choose his or her sexual orientation.

Around the turn of the new millennium, the Christian Science Board of Directors must be commended for having reached out in dialogue to other religious denominations and even the medical profession. It is also hoped its quiet change of heart as to the place of LGBT persons in the Christian Science Church will be accepted by all members, branch churches, and students of Mary Baker Eddy’s writings. Beyond that, if all believers are made ‘kings and priests unto God,’ as she affirms (Science and Health 141:19-21), then why shouldn’t they all have a place at the table?

Finally, the naming of individuals in this work does not connote their sexual orientation, except where such orientation is indicated. The author accepts full responsibility in the event of errors or omissions in the text. He would appreciate hearing from readers should they want to send perceived corrections needed and/or comments. He can be reached directly at [e-mail].

Bruce Stores

Oaxaca, Mexico

Preface to the Second Edition

This second edition of CHRISTIAN SCIENCE: Its Encounter with Lesbian/Gay America is both a revision of its first edition as well as a sequel to it.

Some might ask why a second edition is needed. The answer is time changes many things. We see things differently both as individuals and as a society. Beginning in 2012, for example, public opinion polls showed most Americans supporting same-sex marriage for the first time. A new edition gives an opportunity to improve how events are presented. A second edition also provides space for events occurring after publication of the first edition. The main reason, however, for this new edition is that the wider public has undergone a radical change in its perceptions of LGBT persons in the third millennium’s first two decades. The wildest expectations for lesbians and gays were exceeded. It is noteworthy that the Christian Science Church went along with those changes to some extent. At the same time, branch churches in the new millennium have been given more freedom as to their self-conduct, services, and other activities.

It could be said that certain innovations by some branch churches in the twenty-first century might not have been allowed had their changes been desired in the previous century. The extent to which the dramatic loss of branch churches and members may be responsible for allowing local church innovations in the new century is unclear.

What remains saddening is that changes to meet modern times have not included openness. The Mother Church continued holding its cards close to its chest. But is transparency good or not so good for church government? Much of what goes on behind the scenes is seldom revealed to members. This has been particularly true with financial decisions, questions of morality, and policy changes. The church also remained silent on LGBT issues even as major policy changes were made. Chapter eleven, for example, discusses the five-year successful effort by San Francisco’s public radio station KQED to have The Mother Church end discrimination based on sexual orientation in hiring in its broadcasting division. Although this was the first step in establishing its non-discrimination policies with gays, the church never made this known publicly through its publications or elsewhere. Only when asked directly would church officialdom confirm and discuss its new policy. It is regrettable that transparency is not a virtue of Mother Church officials. This is significant. It rarely happens that controversial decisions by its Board of Directors are announced to the membership, much less the wider public. Announcements of such matters are seldom seen in church media. Press conferences or general announcements on controversial topics do not occur. Many (most?) of the events in this book have been ignored in church publications. The Christian Science Monitor can be commended on increasing coverage of the changing landscape with LGBT issues in other religious denominations. However, it had hardly mentioned progress (or lack thereof) for LGBT people in the church that sponsors the newspaper until the 21st century.

The author believes that outside of jurisdictional political arenas, the most important entanglements between pro and anti-LGBT forces are those within religious organizations.

The Mother Church has not been as engaged in recent years in the denomination’s evolution from being anti-gay to being more supportive of LGBT people as it was in the years covered by the first edition. Therefore, the emphasis for LGBT people in the added chapters in this second edition has shifted the scene from its Boston-based headquarters to branch (local) churches as well as to Principia, a school system that includes the world’s only college for Christian Scientists.

During most of the time covered by the first edition, it was the exceptional branch church that welcomed LGBT people. By the time this second edition came out, it is the exceptional branch church that refuses membership to them. As with the first edition, this book is not about religion per se. Readers wanting a detailed explanation of Christian Science teachings will not find them here. They are referred to the denomination’s textbook, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures and other writings by Mary Baker Eddy. The Bible and Science and Health are the basic texts—indeed, the pastors—for students of Christian Science.

Another reason for writing this book is that many or most church members have felt aghast over the dramatic decline in churches, practitioners, and members since 1961. That was the first year the number of members passing on or leaving the church was greater than the number joining the organization, as was pointed out in a letter to the members at that time. Over the years, it seems little has been done to reverse the trend. In 1963, however, The Mother Church sent a letter to every member. In it, the church asked each member to give a copy of Science and Health to a non-Christian Scientist. Much fruitage was reported from this activity, but it was not continued after 1963 nor knowingly followed up by other activities. There seemed to be no other major activity presented to members to reverse the trend of a declining membership. It is important, therefore, to identify reasons for the decline and suggest ways to reverse it.

Treatment of LGBT people by the church is only one of the many reasons young people have dropped out of the movement. Another is a church culture that demands more from members than many can meet. The author has known many who have felt too uncomfortable returning to their branch (local) church if they have strayed from the straight and narrow positions held by the church. An example of this is those who do not feel they can return to their branch church following a medical operation. As to young people, straight and gay, many do not feel they can comply with the church’s teaching that sexual conduct is only permissible in the context of a legal marriage. In this context, it cannot be stressed enough that Mary Baker Eddy’s Manual of The Mother Church restricts membership only to believers in Christian Science who are over twelve years old and are free from other denominations. That is all! All! Despite prohibitions prescribed by church officials, Mrs. Eddy gave no list of thou shalt nots to disqualify potential members, not even to include the use of tobacco and/or alcohol and drugs. So, one may wonder, where did the Christian Science Board of Director’s authority to override the Church Manual originate by adding additional prohibitions to membership that for decades included the prevention of gays, lesbians, and bisexual persons from joining The Mother Church?"

In her works, Mrs. Eddy describes what one must do to maintain good health and spiritual growth. For those able to reach the lofty heights of Christian Science, she wrote,

It is not wise to take a halting and half-way position or to expect to work equally with Spirit and matter, Truth, and error… On this fundamental point timid conservatism is inadmissible. Only through radical reliance on Truth can scientific healing power be realized. (Science and Health 167:22-24, 29-31).

For the rest of us, however, Mrs. Eddy cautions us to,

Emerge gently from matter into Spirit. Think not to thwart the spiritual ultimate of all things but come naturally into Spirit through better health and morals and as the result of spiritual growth. (Science and Health, 485:14-17)

That Mrs. Eddy did not forbid church members to work with the medical community is shown by her following statements:

Christian Scientists are harmless citizens that do not kill people either by their practice or by preventing the early employment of an M.D. (Message for 1901, 33-34:29-1).

Until the advancing age admits the efficacy and supremacy of Mind, it is better for Christian Scientists to leave surgery and the adjustment of broken bones and dislocations to the fingers of a surgeon… (Science and Health 401:27-30).

If Christian Scientists ever fail to receive aid from other Scientists…God will still guide them into the right use of temporary and eternal means. (Science and Health 444:7-10).

We can try to imagine what Mrs. Eddy might have said or written had she known the medical field was going to make highly significant strides and progress in the decades following her passing.

She also counsels her followers to show respect to those of different opinions.

A genuine Christian Scientist loves Protestant and Catholic, D.D. and M.D., - loves all who love God, good; and he loves his enemies. (The First Church of Christ, Scientist and Miscellany, 4:14-16).

Those who have read the first edition of this book are encouraged to read the same chapters as they appear in this edition. The reason is that much editing has gone into some of these chapters, often from source materials the author did not have when the first edition went to press. Chapters with the most changes are: two, four, and nine. Four chapters and ten appendices have been added. Also, an Index is now included.

It is hoped this book will produce more interest for the study of earlier editions of Science and Health due to their strong spiritual content. However, it is felt that Mrs. Eddy had to tone down much of the strong spiritual content that is found in her textbook’s first edition so her teachings could be understood. (See Mary Baker Eddy by Gillian Gill, page 222). It took over 400 editions for Mrs. Eddy to find the best balance between having strong spiritual content with the need to be understood. Might she have felt like Christ Jesus when he said, I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. (John 16:12) Mary Baker Eddy is the Albert Einstein of the metaphysical movement. And like the mathematical genius, few have come close to understanding all that she offers. Some attention in this revised and updated book is given to controversial aspects of the first edition of Science and Health, first published in 1875.¹

The author weighs in at times on topics that may seem unrelated to the title and subject of this book. He continues a subject brought out in the first edition relating to human (material) church organization. This is important. Can we pay homage to a material human church organization while desiring to hold onto a spiritual sense of church at the same time? It was only the humanly organized church that was infected by a man-made culture that once averred that widely held human attitudes such as racism and homophobia were the way things ought to be .

The author has been profoundly touched by Mary Baker Eddy’s writings in a positive way. Yet, he is conflicted about the institution named the Church of Christ, Scientist. The latter has tended to be on the wrong side of some issues depending on society’s sentiment at any given time. The human side of church has often been influenced to a detrimental degree in areas not only of race and sexual orientation, but also by cultural leanings with other social issues, including pacifism, the use of fluoride in the public water supply, and at one time, perhaps, even left-handedness. This will be brought out further in the pages that follow.

Also brought out in this book is what may be an even more controversial topic relating to the nature of God and man as brought out in the first edition (1875) of Science and Health. Some readers may be turned off by these departures from the main subject of this book. As most of these discussions have been relegated to the footnotes section, it will not be difficult for readers uninterested in those topics to avoid them.

It will be noted that dates appear below most chapter headings. They refer only to the period covered by each chapter, not to the life span of its main character.

Finally, as mentioned in the preface above to the first edition, the naming of individuals in this work does not connote their sexual orientation except where such orientation is specifically indicated.

Bruce Stores

City of Oaxaca, MEXICO

Introduction

Christian Science and Christian Scientists will, must, have a history;

Miscellaneous Writings by Mary Baker Eddy 106:4-5

That both the first serious modern LGBT religious and political movements began only eight months apart (October 1968 and June 1969) may imply the gay awakening was an idea whose time had come. For the first time in modern history, LGBT people in large numbers, would come to see themselves as equals to heterosexuals. From this idea, there would be no retreat. They would never return to believing that their sexual orientation was anything but right for them. Their religious awakening began in southern California while their political wakeup call came in New York City. Interestingly, for this history, the religious awakening came first. It started with a young clergyman named Troy D. Perry Jr.

The young Troy Perry fulfilled his childhood dream by becoming a Pentecostal minister. But after five years of preaching, he felt compelled to come to terms with his sexual attractions. He was not sure how to start, so he found information by reading books about homosexuality. These books convinced him that he was indeed gay. He relayed this information to his superiors and was relieved of his ministry. He then separated from his wife and two sons. After discarding his pastoral responsibilities, he went to work for Sears. He stayed with Sears until he was drafted into the Army.

Following his military discharge, he returned to the Los Angeles area and settled himself in Hollywood. Once settled, he began to take account of his situation and the LGBT communities. He had not yet discovered his purpose in life, but he had a heart-felt yearning to help his fellow persons with same-sex attractions. He had no idea how this help might take form, but, like Moses, …he went out unto his brethren, and looked on their burdens. (Exodus 2:11). He met someone in a gay-friendly club who was arbitrarily arrested by the police. Troy Perry was able to bail the man out of jail but calming him down was not as easy. The man told Reverend Perry, he believed no one cared about him because he was a homosexual. When Troy Perry pointed out, God cares, he could only say adamantly, No! Not even God cares.

It was at that precise moment, Troy Perry discovered his calling. It occurred to him that he should minister to lesbians and gays by forming a church to support them.

But, as it was, many did not agree with him.

By today’s standards, such an act would seem a natural step in the development of an emerging lesbian/gay consciousness. In 1968, however, it was such a radical idea that most would not give it serious thought. The idea of a church ministering to people of such inclinations was considered blasphemous to the consciousness of 1968, even among many or most homosexuals. Nonetheless, Reverend Perry persisted. He began his ministry by placing a small display ad in The Advocate (a gay newspaper in Los Angeles, which later became a national magazine). He met resistance. One neighbor told him he would be raided on the first Sunday. Another said no one would attend a church like that. Such were the prevailing beliefs when the first known church service by and for gay people was held. The historical day was October 6, 1968, in Reverend Perry’s living room. Twelve persons were present.

What followed was not just a new church. The idea soon spread to other cities and a new denomination was born: Metropolitan Community Church (MCC). Its theology was in line with mainstream Protestantism, but with an eclectic flair. Not only did it combine liturgies of ceremonial churches such as Roman Catholic, Lutheran, and Episcopalian; it also brought in elements of handclapping, foot-stomping Pentecostals. Its emphasis varied from city-to-city, usually depending on predominant local religious sentiment. More importantly, MCC was the only denomination in the world composed almost entirely of sexual minorities. Its wings kept spreading. Proof that its time had come, MCC developed—within a brief span of eighteen months—congregations in Chicago, San Diego, and San Francisco. Perhaps the best indicator that MCC was having an effect was how much the rising denomination irritated traditional churches. Evidence of this came from Christianity Today, a national magazine for evangelical Christians. The magazine felt it necessary to denounce the upstart church that dared to proclaim, gay is good. Its issue for April 26, 1970, included an attack on MCC teachings in an article titled, Metropolitan Community Church: Deception Discovered. But despite the concern among evangelical Christians and others, MCC kept on growing and spreading its message throughout the country and abroad. By the mid-1980s, most major American cities and many small ones had at least one MCC church. By the century’s last decade, some metropolitan areas could boast several MCC churches. In the year 2020, MCC reported having nearly 300 congregations in twenty-two countries.¹ It has knocked on the door of the National Council of Churches as a credible applicant, almost gaining admission, and may someday become a full member of that ecumenical body.² Many LGBT people rejoiced that a religious denomination was organized to support them. But even among them, there were many who did not want to leave the teachings and customs of the denominations in which they were raised. Therefore, these believers set up support organizations that adhered to most of their former denominations’ teachings. The big difference was that these support groups provided a haven for sexual minorities. They proclaimed God’s love for LGBT persons as much as Her/His other children. On a national level, these groups include: Affirmation (Methodist), Affirmation (Mormon), Al-Fatiha (Muslim), Axios (Eastern and Orthodox Christians), Common Bond (Jehovah’s Witnesses), Dignity (Roman Catholic)³, Friends for Lesbians and Gays (Quakers), Gay Apostolic Pentecostals, GLAD (Disciples of Christ), Integrity (Episcopalian), Interweave (Unitarian/Universalist), Keshet (LGBT Jews), Kinship International (Seventh Day Adventists), Pink Menno (Mennonite), More Light Presbyterians, Rainbow Baptists, Reconciling Works (Lutheran), United Church of Christ Coalition for LGBT Concerns, and the list goes on to also include Emergence International for LGBT Christian Scientists, their families, friends, and supporters.⁴

MCC was one of an extremely few existing efforts--nationally and locally-- supporting sexual minorities as the decade of the sixties neared its end. This would soon change. An event outside a New York City club catering largely to homosexuals who were mostly African American, Hispanic, and transgendered persons would soon dramatically transform the LGBT movement and much more importantly, the collective consciousness of sexual minorities everywhere.

PART I

THE PIONEERS

It is the task of the sturdy pioneer to hew the tall oak and to cut the rough granite. Future ages must declare what the pioneer has accomplished.

Science and Health by Mary Baker Eddy, page vii

Kay Tobin Lahusen

1948 to 2007

Statistics on the vile, scripturally condemned practice of homosexuality, on vicious sex crimes, marital infidelity, and the like, are appalling.

Christian Science Sentinel, February 17, 1962, page 281

Kay felt ill. The pain in her head was throbbing. She had to lie down. It appeared serious. In reflecting through her situation, she discovered the reason for her discomfort. She recently sensed she had a sexuality different from the norm: Kay was attracted to women.

It was 1948. Soon after graduating from high school, Kay met someone who would be meaningful in her life for the next several years. After a year of spending much time together, she discovered the other woman was more than a best friend. Kay came to see that her attraction to her was exactly how heterosexuals feel.

Discovering herself to be something so opposed by society appeared to be the cause of her illness. The ailment lasted two weeks. Because she knew its cause was her conflict over her sexuality, she reasoned through her situation. In doing so, she made a startling discovery one that was highly unusual for her time. Her discovery was that there was nothing wrong with the love she felt. I am right; the world is wrong, she concluded. That was an incredibly unthinkable conclusion for anyone to make in 1948.

After coming to terms with her sexual orientation and becoming convinced it was no more than a normal variation of sexualities, Kay soon found herself well.

While it was one thing for Kay to come to terms with her sexuality, it was not the same for her partner. But despite her partner’s reservations about their intimacies, the two women went on to maintain a secret relationship for six years.

They attended Ohio State University together and were roommates all four years. They were active in the Christian Science Organization on campus. Kay admitted her partner was the one who kept the organization together.

She was the reader and the active worker. I just attended the meetings. We were isolated at Ohio State; we did not come out to anyone else. We thought we were the only people there who were gay. We were terribly naive, and I thought maybe there were some other lesbians somewhere—maybe in Paris. But I really thought we were surely the only ones in Ohio, and maybe about the only ones in the United States.

Their relationship continued for a year after graduation, albeit on shaky ground.

She would tell me there was simply no place for homosexuals in our society as it was then, and that the only way to lead a good and happy life was to be married at that point in time. She left me. I was totally devastated.

Kay was not only distressed for herself. She felt her former partner was not getting a good deal either. In time, she learned from mutual friends how things were working out with her and her husband.

I learned later that their experience was not a happy one. She looked to him [her husband] as an authority figure who told her what to do. Before, when she was with me, she felt laid back and totally untroubled. . . What a price to pay!

Adding to Kay’s devastation, she had no one in whom she could confide.

I couldn’t talk to anybody out there about it, least of all to my grandparents, who had raised me and who were too many generations removed to really open to them. And so, I turned to religion. I decided to go to Boston and throw myself into the [Christian Science] movement and try to find some salvation, somehow in that direction. I got a job in the publishing house in the library [of the Christian Science Monitor]. They made me start out in the clipping and filing sort of thing. Then I worked my way up rapidly to doing research for the [Monitor] writers there.

While working at the Monitor, Kay could not be quiet about her main concerns. She became unusually outspoken about lesbian issues.

At the time in our reference library, homosexuality [was filed] under ‘vice.’ So of course, I bristled at that. I used to argue about that. I took my disgruntlement to the people I thought I could make some headway with and people that I thought ultimately might be in positions to do something. I remember arguing with those who I felt were some of the more enlightened and liberal people in the Monitor. We had a young chap who had come from England to work for the Monitor, and I used to argue with him about homosexuality. And there was a woman whom I liked a lot who had been to Smith College, who was very liberal and enlightened on most things. I used to argue with her about it.

Kay was learning and fretting that even the most liberal-minded persons wouldn’t take a more compassionate and understanding view of lesbians. But what was unusual about Kay’s aggressiveness on this issue was the period. Being perceived as a homosexual was one of the most dangerous things that could have happened to a person in the 1940’s, ‘50’s and 60s.

As to her personal life, Kay was getting nowhere. But eventually, she became determined to do something about that.

After six years [of working at the Monitor], it finally occurred to me to research my own situation and to use some of the research tools there.

For those growing up in the twenty-first century, the depth and pervasiveness of the homophobia in the previous century may be difficult to imagine. Consider the case of Alan Turing.

Mr. Turing was named by the BBC as the Greatest Person of the 20th Century. His picture came out on the British fifty-pound notes released near the end of 2021. Among his many accomplishments, Alan Turing headed the work that broke Germany’s Enigma (secret) Code, thereby speeding the end of World War II. He was also a phenomenally successful early pioneer in digital computing, making significant advancements. After the war, however, Mr. Turing was arrested for being gay, which was illegal in Britain at the time. He lost his security clearance. He was given a choice to decide between prison or chemical castration. He chose the latter. Two years later, Alan Turing committed suicide.

Life for homosexuals in the United States was no better. In 1953, President Eisenhower signed into law a proclamation banning homosexuals from employment in all federal agencies. More than five thousand people were fired for their sexual orientation. Gays were considered sick by the medical profession, criminals by the legal profession, and sinners by theologians. They had no important allies in any of those fields.

Throughout the United States, wherever there were clubs for LGBT women or men, they were subject to police raids. Police often took the names of patrons and turned them over to the press, allowing employers to know their identity.

It was during this