Salvation Army Gives a Lump of Coal to Gays

Here we go, the spirit of the season upon us, the Christmas kettle dusted off, and the Salvation Army taking up positions on street corners to remind us all that “sharing is caring.”

But only up to a point.

The evangelical Christian organization, which brought out the first kettle in 1891 to raise money for the poor, has decided it must be careful not to endorse certain kinds of lifestyles. A careful reading of Scripture, they determined, leaves them no choice.

The story goes like this:

Early this month, the national leadership of the Salvation Army decided to let its four regional governing bodies decide for themselves whether to extend benefits to the domestic partners of army employees.

The move was celebrated by gay rights groups, especially after the western region chose to provide benefits to domestic partners. But last week, under pressure from its more conservative Christian constituents, the national board reversed itself. No benefits for domestic partners, it ruled, nixing the western region’s decision.

In Los Angeles, among other places, this could mean the forfeiture of millions of dollars and the elimination of army programs. The city of Los Angeles, for instance, which is paying the Salvation Army in the neighborhood of $2 million this year to provide services for the poor, requires that contracting agencies provide domestic partner benefits.

Kathy Lovin, communications director for the Southern California division of the army, said the search has already begun for alternative funding. But that’s a lot of coins in the kettle, which accounts for only 15% of the army’s budget nationally. If they don’t raise enough money, she said, an acclaimed program like Casa Alegria, a Silver Lake agency that provides housing for 45 families that have a member with AIDS or who is HIV-positive, could be in jeopardy.

“I don’t know the answer,” Lovin said when asked if Alegria would be shut down. “I’m going to say it’s a remote possibility.”

L.A. City Councilman Eric Garcetti, who represents that district, is sending a letter to the national leadership of the Salvation Army, asking them to reconsider their position. “Alegria has become a model,” he said, not just in terms of serving a great need for a down-and-out community, but as a symbol of the good work the army does.

Lovin said it is not yet clear how many other contracts the Salvation Army will lose in Southern California, but an employee for one of them said colleagues are preparing for the worst.

“It’s very disconcerting that a number of employees are going to be laid off, but we can find jobs,” said this source.

“I’m more concerned about families and children that will have no place to go, and simply do not have the life skills to live on their own without support,” the employee added, asking not to be named.

Capt. Kenneth Hodder, general secretary for the Southern California army, said contracts are being reviewed to see if there’s a way around the domestic partner requirement. Maybe there’s a way to save Alegria, he said.

Whether that happens or not, an internal debate on domestic partners has raged for months, said Lovin. In May, the army approved a policy on homosexuality that says, in part:

“Scripture forbids sexual intimacy between members of the same sex. The Salvation Army believes, therefore, that Christians whose sexual orientation is primarily or exclusively same-sex are called upon to embrace celibacy as a way of life.”

God help the gay Boy Scout who dreams of enlisting in the Salvation Army.

To get around anti-gay sentiment, the clever strategy of the army’s western leadership was to extend benefits to “extended household members,” said Lovin. This didn’t actually award health and other benefits, but gave employees the right to purchase them through the army plan for “a friend, grandmother, adult child, a sibling, anybody.” But that didn’t stop the hyperventilating that was going on in some quarters of the army.

“Basically, we had folks who said this is not a reflection of what we understand about Scripture, and based on our understanding of the Bible, this is not a good decision,” Lovin said.

“The Salvation Army mission statement is the key document in this regard,” said Hodder.

And what might that be?

“To preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ and to meet human needs, in his name, without discrimination.”

Well pardon me, but how in God’s name, or Jesus’ name, is the benefits policy not a case of discrimination?

The mission statement is meant to apply to those who come to the army in need, Hodder explained. It is not meant to apply, he said by inference, to employees or officers.

I often wish I knew Jesus as well as others claim to. It’s all a matter of interpretation, I suppose, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he was more tolerant than some suggest. Or if, as a single guy, perhaps he . . . But that’s just me thinking out loud.

Either way, he’d probably say ‘tis the season to open your heart and help those who need it most. And happy holidays to all.

*

Steve Lopez writes Monday, Wednesday and Friday. He can be reached at steve.lopez@latimes.com.