Then on Sept 26 Wes writes a letter to Priscilla's pastor in which he takes responsibility and places it on Priscilla as well for causing a family rift. He says he believes that the pastor is the only one who can help. He explains his view of the family situation and then goes into some untrue statements which I will deal with one at a time. He also enclosed copies of 8 letters that it looks like he wrote since they are in his computer system. I cannot see where he sent any that Priscilla wrote to him.
He says a deep schism has developed between those who chose to see them and those who chose not to. I do not believe this is the cause of the schism. He has some examples that I wish to address one a time from my personal knowledge. If his real concern was his relationship with Priscilla, the personal issues between families had no place in his letter to her pastor. They would have been up to each of us to deal with. Certainly, he did not think Priscilla’s pastor would be able to do anything about me and my daughters. I believe the pastor would have understood "deep schism" without details over which Priscilla had no control.
#1. My cousin Sisser had us over to her place a day before the family reunion. She was ostracized at that event -- cut off from the rest of the family.
I also heard that Sisser was ostracized (I think I heard from Cybill). Since I attended the event and did not witness it, I called Sisser and asked her if she felt she had been ostracized or in any way treated badly. Her response was that when she first arrived she felt uncomfortable but no one treated her badly and everyone talked to her. She said she kept herself out of a couple of conversations about the situation but that was her own choice. I had also heard of a couple of remarks that Jethro said to her, which she confirmed that he did, and clarified with her what those remarks were. They were not what was said to me although bottom line they mean almost the same.
#2. Aunt Barbie is very upset that her children chose to see us, even though both daughters explained that they felt they were following Christ' mandate to love everyone, regardless.
I thought I had made myself perfectly clear to Susan and again to Wes at brunch that I had no problem with adults seeing them. Why would I? Out of love for you, Wes, I was willing to do so myself but Tom bowed out. My girls are both adults who make their own choices. I would not want to be nor am I responsible for the decisions they make. Neither daughter explained anything about following Christ's mandate to love everyone. Why would I, even if I could, stop my girls from following Christ? If I was willing for Cybill to go anywhere in the world to follow what she believed was Christ's will for her, it does not seem logical for me to have decided I would not want them to follow Christ. Think about it! I believe they both chose to see you because they love you enough to go along with your bottom line whether they agree with it or not. I think they felt pressured about the fact that it might be the last time they will see you.
I was very upset, and both girls knew it, that they chose to have their children in contact with the homosexual relationship. I still do not understand why it was so necessary since it isn't as if you have any kind of relationship with their children. The only reason I can see for it is that it would make them think their parents were condoning of homosexuality and thus prepare the next generation to be more accepting of it. I was extremely upset that Mary Jo did not communicate to me that she had Wes and Tom at her home with her children present. Even though I would not have liked it, it still would have been her choice but I would have preferred hear it from her prior to it taking place.
#3. Priscilla and my father are not speaking.
He hung up her. I don't think Priscilla’s pastor can do a thing about that since he does not even know Swede.#4. Priscilla's two daughters appear afraid to speak to my sister Susan for fear of upsetting their mother.
It seems strange to me that since Betty and Buffy have both spoken with Susan and met her at the Dairy Queen to discuss her letter of August 3 (which Susan says was directed at Priscilla) that they are suddenly afraid. What they have refused to do is continue in the same relationship they had prior to the letter of August 3 and the "snake letter" being sent to their mother. I think their feelings are that their loyalties belong to their mother and that apologies need to be made. Even after this, Betty talked with Susan on the phone at least three different times. Although Susan placed the calls it does not sound like Betty is afraid to talk to her. See enclosed copy of letter from Betty and Buffy.
#5. My Aunt Marge, who had us over for cookies, was told by Priscilla that she needed to change churches and go to one less liberal.
Priscilla says she made this statement to Marge but not because she had you to her house or gave you cookies. I think it had to do with practicing homosexuals having an active part in worship services and church ministry. I have also made the same comment to her since Marge’ church is American Baptist and their doctrinal stand is different from Conservative Baptist.
#6. You may be accurate in your assessment of Joy's position.
The next statement about getting back to being a loving family will take more efforts than just yours because you are not the sole cause of the problem. I appreciate that you are willing to make steps in that direction and hope others follow. It certainly would have been better to allow adults to make their choices without all of the hoopla that has gone on.
After hearing of the letter being sent to Priscilla's pastor, I decided some one needed to respond to the letters that had been written. I called my brother Swede and then wrote both of you so you know what I planned. For the life of me, I cannot understand why a letter was written to Reverend Lovejoy when family members could have delivered it. It certainly was not necessary to go outside of the family. I think it would have been far more logical and fruitful to send it to me or one of Priscilla's kids, or even William.
So when Wes called me on November 1, had to ask why. This was his response. I took it down in shorthand as he spoke so I believe it is accurate. "I wanted to send it to Aunt Joy and when I talked to Susan she said she did not want to get involved. I asked Susan about sending it to Betty or Buffy. She said they thought because of their religion it would be better to go to the reverend. Susan told me that if some one is not acting appropriately, the reverend talks with them and if it does not change they take it to the congregation."
Apparently there is once again a difference in positions regarding what was said. (See Betty and Buffy’s letter, which follows.) They state that they told Susan that it would not be a good idea and Susan says they suggested doing it. Since none of us heard the conversation between Betty and Susan, we will each have to decide for ourselves who we believe. It will not mean a person loves anyone less than before only that it could cause you to doubt the whoever you chose not to believe in other areas of their personal life. Another consequence of personal action.
I don’t know that putting all of this down on paper will have any effect on anything but it helps me to be objective about the whole situation. I hope it helps both of you in your personal evaluation, future dealings with people, and in your relationship with the Lord. I love you both.
PS I will be allowing anyone who wants to read this the opportunity to do so and I have sent copies to your Dad and Aunt Priscilla prior to mailing it to you.
Other than the first paragraph and the date that I inserted, this letter was complete and ready to send when I received the "in your face" Christmas newsletter from Wes. I am very sorry, Wes, that you have caused a problem with the style of your letter. I will address my feelings about it here so there will be no doubt in your mind what I think.
I can hardly believe that you had the audacity to mail a copy of it to Priscilla’s home. She has specifically asked you not to send her letters about your homosexual lifestyle. I suggest that you are using this as a very strong form of harassment. It leads me to believe that the letter went to the pastor for the same reason. People do not look on one’s actions in isolated incidents but rather as a whole. In thinking it over, I don’t think your actions have been very credible for some one who claims he was trying to fix a bad problem and not die with the legacy of having caused a huge family rift.
I take exception to "then a big mess happened." It did not just happen – it was the result of actions taken and an unwillingness to view things from another person’s perspective.
You know and I know, Wes, that if you put any information regarding Priscilla on the Internet, you will be opening her to all sorts of harassment and intimidation from gay and lesbian people the world over. YOU will bear the sole responsibility for the harassment. Is it really worth it to you? Think about how you would like her to open you to harassment because you are gay. She would not do that to you and she has as much right to her opinion as you do to yours. We should all be able to communicate our feelings to family members without it being made into a life threatening problem. You need to reconsider.
Priscilla is not responsible for discriminating against you because she did not want to have you and your homosexual partner in contact with her grandchildren. If that is discrimination, then we all discriminate in not wanting to expose ourselves to people and situations that we deem either unseemly, unhealthy or unfriendly. Do you consider it discriminatory on your part that you would not want to attend and participate in a friendly manner at an OCA meeting? Bottom line is still PROTECT CHILDREN from those influences. Apparently, you are not willing for anyone to protect their children or grandchildren or you would not have put your picture on the outside of your card and then mailed it to homes that you knew chose for their children not to see it. I would say that this is pretty darn one-way behavior on your part and pushing very hard to force the homosexual issue. You claimed earlier that you knew what appropriate behavior is. Is this really appropriate? I have a lesbian sister in law and she has never behaved in any manner close to what you have done. You are making it hard for your own kind.
Just for your information, I want you to know that I am aware of the fact that homosexuality was classified as a mental illness in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Psychiatric Disorders which is the manual that psychiatrists and psychologists use to define and categorize various forms of mental illnesses and sexual perversions. In 1970 a group of militant gays attacked the American Psychiatric Association during their convention in San Francisco. The attacks and harassment against the APA continued until psychiatrists became extremely fearful. By 1973, the homosexuals were allowed to work with several members of the APA to redefine how homosexuality was to be dealt with in their manual. Did it change homosexuality? No. Just how it was dealt with by the APA as well as opening the door to the societal problems we now face. So you see, it was by harassment and intimidation that the change was made that resulted in the APA declaring homosexual behavior as normal. It appears to me that your tactics are much the same and I am very disappointed in your choices.
The fact that I am disappointed in your behavior does not mean that I love you any less – only that I am disappointed and wish you were willing to quit making such a big deal out of the fact that another family member successfully opposed your influence on her grandchildren.
I continue to love you both and want the best for you in the spiritual as well as the physical and emotional realm.
Love,
Aunt Barbie.
Previous part of letter |
Attachment letter 