What is in Kelvin's Head?

  • What the Pope said was depressing not liberating

    Here’s what the Pope said today according to the BBC:

    Pope Francis said gay clergymen should be forgiven and their sins forgotten.

    “The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains this very well,” Pope Francis said in a wide-ranging 80-minute long interview with Vatican journalists.

    “It says they should not be marginalised because of this but that they must be integrated into society.”

    But he condemned what he described as lobbying by gay people.

    “The problem is not having this orientation,” he said. “We must be brothers. The problem is lobbying by this orientation, or lobbies of greedy people, political lobbies, Masonic lobbies, so many lobbies. This is the worse problem.”

    Well, we might have a slight change in tone from Benedict but this is a depressing statement not a liberating one.

    There’s nothing new here that is helpful and something that really isn’t.

    The bits that are not new simply follow the Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church Sections 2357-2359

    The bit that is depressing is the suggestion that gay lobbying is the real problem. In other words, gay people exist but shouldn’t do anything about their lives, should not advocate a better world for gay people, try to improve the lot of gay people nor try to save the lives of gay people in parts of the world where they are under threat.

    This is nasty stuff and I’m sorry to hear it.

    I’m even more sorry that the headlines that this has engendered will make people think there is hope when there isn’t really much hope to be had.

    Today the pope made an oppresive statement about gay people and the world’s media is reporting it as a great step forward for gay rights.

    Tell me, is saying bad things in a nice way better than saying the same old things in the same old way?

    I don’t think it is.

    And while we are at it, note that he condemned political lobbying. That’s chilling for different reasons.

    Of course, all this was in the context of being asked about the Vatican. (The existence of a “gay lobby” in the Vatican is currently much under discussion). All the same, these words are damaging words that will be read far from their original context. They do nothing to bring in the kind of world I hope for.

    , ,

7 responses to “Newsnight Scotland”

  1. ryan Avatar
    ryan

    Great stuff! Compares favourably with Fr.Gadgetvicar’s Holy Week appearance a few years back although I’m not sure if, personally, I’d rank it up there with Italian Vanity Fair 😉

    Good to see the LGBT Network and Stonewall too – and encouraging that, unlike what would have happened a mere five or six years ago, the BBC didn’t feel the need to rope in some spokesman for a homophobic lobby in the interests of ‘balance’.

    Reply
    1. kelvin Avatar
      kelvin

      Thanks Ryan

      On your last point, I think its interesting that in those five or six years, the opinion polls have been overturned. (That’s what John Curtice was telling us). The BBC can deal differently with the issue now because its not just a hypothetical issue that holy people are arguing about but a mainstream issue that the majority want but which politicians are wary of.

      I took the view a few years ago that campaigning for these issues was more fruitful within society generally rather than simply going over the same ground again and again in the church. I’m proud to be a tiny part in the process that has brought about that change in opinion. That’s a process that is now bearing fruit. The end of the process is equality and justice for all inside and outside the church.

      There are still debates to be had in the media where a pro/anti debate is what they are looking for and the balance argument comes into play. Indeed, I’ve turned down a request to do just such a media debate this week. I don’t think it takes people very far. Incidently, that was my view 6 years ago when I turned down the chance to debate with Fr Gadgetvicar on Newsnight during Holy Week.

      Reply
  2. SomeRandomBint Avatar
    SomeRandomBint

    I very much enjoyed your discussion last night – especially when you re-iterated the fact that being against homosexuality ISN’T the standard Christian view of the matter. I’ve been told I’m not a true believer because I refuse to see the harm in others being in relationships with others of the same sex. I also don’t see the validity of the argument that it’s the thin end of the wedge, and opens churches to the possibility of legal action if they refuse to perform these ceremonies. I don’t see the difference between this choice, and the choice of celebrates as to whether they perform ceremonies of divorcees. There’s much talking still to be done on the issue, but I wanted to thank you for presenting such a measured view of the opinions of those of us who are Christians AND inclusive of all sorts of people.

    Reply
  3. David McCarthy Avatar
    David McCarthy

    Kelvin was standing as a candidate in the election when Newsnight called me in 2005 – as it happens I was at his house drinking tea. They were very surprised that we were being quite so convivial.

    I felt it a pity that an another point of view was not represented the other night – it was hardly a discussion, more a presentation of one side’s opinions.

    Reply
  4. kelvin Avatar
    kelvin

    Sides? When did we begin to have sides?

    Reply
  5. ryan Avatar
    ryan

    ”If you are not with me, you are my enemy!” as Darth Vader and evangelical posterboy George W Bush are fond of remarking 😉

    Also , even you, David, say you are in favour of civil partnerships, a view shared by many conservatives. So despite the presence of ‘Christian’ Institute lying bigots, they are largely a loud insignificant minority (even, happily, in your congregation!) and not the legitimate ‘opposing point off view’ . Curious (or not so much) that the BBC had stephen green on in the past, but never felt the need to have antisemitic, racist or sexist speakers to provide ‘balance’ on certain issues.

    Reply
  6. Sammi del brocco Avatar
    Sammi del brocco

    Really enjoyed watching that, and thankyou for standing up. I am gay and have been with my partner for 7 years and to me civil parnership is not a marriage we should be able to get married just like everyone else. as for me marriage is all about committing,loving and spending the rest of your life with some one you love regardless of gender, are we all not human beings and supposedly have human rights? Once again thankyou very enjoyable viewing.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • Back to work

    Back to work today after a fortnight’s holiday. Most of the mail was responses to a consultation document that I’ve published about one or two aspects of the cathedral’s life. I’ve put a copy on the blog too in another post. Responses are welcome from far afield as well as from within our own community.…

  • Consultation Paper

    The following paper has been published to the congregation. Comments welcome from outside the community as well as within. Dear Friends I spent some time this week reading a sermon that was preached by a former Provost of this church some years ago. It contained the following quote: I remember in my third week at…

  • Blog Migration

    I’ll be migrating this blog over the next day or so. I’m moving from postnuke to wordpress. Those who read via RSS may need to resubscribe. UPDATE – Wednesday 1930 The update is now complete. Whole site moved from one CMS to another. Like the redesign? You need to refresh the page a few times…

  • Two weeks off

    Someone has started a Wikipedia entry on me. I’m trying to follow the convention that you don’t edit the entry about yourself. Not easy. Do fill in the blanks.Two weeks off blogging is in order I think. Back soon. Comment moderation on until I get back.