What is in Kelvin's Head?

What institutional homophobia looks like

19/04/2017

Here’s a quick example to illustrate what institutional homophobia looks like.

Yesterday the report of the Theological Forum of the Church of Scotland to the General Assembly was published and it deals with a number of issues of interest to LGBT people. (It is well worth a read).

Amongst the “deliverances” ie proposals to go to the General Assembly from that Forum is this very clear call for an apology to LGBT people.

The General Assembly:

Invite the Church to take stock of its history of discrimination at different levels and in different ways against gay people and to apologise individually and corporately and seek to do better.

What could be clearer? Should the General Assembly apologise for discrimination against gay people it would be a huge and significant moment and very much to be welcomed.

However, listen to what the Principal Clerk to the General Assembly, the Very Rev John Chalmers of the Church of Scotland said on TV last night about the proposal:

“What the General Assembly is being asked to do this year is acknowledge and apologise for some of the harsh things that have been said on both sides of this debate over the last 20 to 30 years and I think the General Assembly will readily want to do that.”

This is very clearly not what the General Assembly is being asked to do.

This is a good example of institutional homophobia. In describing a call to apologise to gay people, gay people and their supporters are represented as being people making statements for 20 or 30 years which need to be apologised for.

I don’t believe that John Chalmers is a homophobe. Just the opposite. I’m quite sure that he is charming to gay people and I suspect he wants the church to accept gay people. However, put in a public position to explain a proposal to apologise for discrimination he gets it very wrong.

I have no doubt that there are huge institutional pressures on him over this issue and that is why he speaks as he does.

However, this looks to me like a very clear example of what institutional homophobia looks like. Institutional homophobia seems to come most often from people who are personally supportive of those of us who are gay.

Ironically, this is the kind of thing that needs to be apologised for.

We have it in our church too.

I find that people don’t like me pointing it out.

9 responses to “More on the election”

fr dougal

20/01/2010

What arrant rot these people peddle. Can we excommunicate their adherents on grounds of un-Christian stupidity? Would “You are too stupid to be an Episcopalian” be acceptable in Canon Law?

Reply
ryan

20/01/2010

A timely and usefully corrective post, kelvin. I’ve had run ins with CI fans who merely think that *asserting* that the ‘Christian’ Institute is honest and displays integrity is some sort of compelling argument. If you search their site for “Scottish Episcopal Church” you’ll find an equally (and characteristically) dishonest story on +David and the SEC’s purported ‘split’ on gay clergy

At the risk of running afoul of Godwin’s law, the ‘Christian’ Institute pretending like their ugly ideological team didn’t *lose* the Section 28 debate reminds me, not in a good way, of Neo-Nazis petitioning the UN to refight the Battle of Stalingrad.

Reply
Tim

20/01/2010

That’ll be the SEC *two* steps ahead of the CoE and assorted story-fabricating journalists, then: “not only CAN we have women bishops, we don’t actually HAVE to!”, which is at least a balanced attitude.

Reply
David | Dah•veed

20/01/2010

Perhaps Father D, that would be insulting to stupid folks!

Reply
MurielD

20/01/2010

The national press and television channels should be ashamed of themselves. They preferred to “headline” the fact that a woman priest failed to become the UK’s first woman bishop rather than straightaway honour the man who was duly elected.
It was only on reading further down the news item that we learned that the Very Rev. Dr. Gregor Duncan had been duly elected.
That was not fair to either of them.

Reply
Jackie

20/01/2010

The Radio 4 news headline on the day was similar, and the first 3 linked articles on your link (from the Telegraph, Reuters and the Scotsman) are also similar. I must confess to having words with the radio at the time.

Reply
Martin Ritchie

21/01/2010

Something I find irritating about press coverage is the way that it has portrayed Alison Peden as “bidding” or campaigning to become bishop of Glasgow. That seems to misrepresent the process and what leadership in the church is all about. I guess it’s probably impossible to convey the subtleties of episcopal leadership in a wider culture dominated by careerist politics? Any thoughts?

Reply
Roddy

21/01/2010

The Christian (sic) Institute are a bunch of tw*ts. Treat them with the indifference and disdain they deserve.

Reply
David | Dah•veed

22/01/2010

It is very disconcerting to come here and see an ad for Sarah Palin running down the lefthand side of the page!

Reply