• Herald Article: Pride and Frustration

    This article appeared in the Herald newspaper today.

    I will be joining the Pride Glasgow march this weekend with mixed feelings – pride at how much has been achieved and concern at how much that needs to be done.

    I’ll be marching with hopes high that before Pride comes around next year, the Scottish Parliament will have passed new laws to allow same-sex couples to marry. Marriage law is one of the greatest barriers to equality for gay people in Scotland. Access to marriage isn’t the only big change gay people need. However, it remains such a big prize for gay campaigners because those marching through Glasgow all know how much social attitudes have softened since civil partnerships came in and all hope for even more once same-sex marriage is part of our common life.

    Changes to the law are hugely welcome, but still don’t represent equality – just ask any gay couple wanting to get married in church on the same basis as the straight couple sitting in the pew next to them. The overly cautious legislation that will be passed next year is a consequence of politicians still giving credence to religious voices of intolerance.

    Another issue that still needs a lot of work is access to education free from prejudice. It means education authorities and individual schools working on homophobic bullying. Part of the means of achieving that is to ensure that gay teachers in schools are able to be the role models that both gay and straight kids need. Those teachers need to know that they can live outside school time without fear of what might happen in school if their relationships are known about.

    Notwithstanding the high spirits that are a feature of every Pride march, I’ll be marching to express a good dose of anger and frustration. Every Pride is a celebration but every Pride is a protest too. This time the most immediate part of the world which is causing concern is Russia. President Putin’s sudden recent crackdown against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people has been brutal, unexpected and frightening and greatly under-reported in the mainstream media in the UK. Glasgow’s Lord Provost’s letter to her opposite number in twinned Rostov-on-Don this week is welcome but far too weak. She has invited a delegation from Russia to “share more of our good experience of working to include LGBT citizens as a valued part of our city”. Meanwhile, Glasgow’s actual LGBT citizens might be rather puzzled, given the history and demise of the LGBT centre in the city, as to how that support is being expressed.

    This weekend at Pride, I’ll be marching, as usual, with thousands of others. This time, though, I’ll be marching with members of my own congregation. There will be several older members coming along to march in support of their gay and lesbian children and grandchildren. I’ll be marching alongside a couple whose civil partnership I’ll be blessing in a couple of weeks as they make their journey towards legal marriage. Alongside me there will be clergy from my own Scottish Episcopal Church and ecumenical friends in the crowd in clerical-collars answering all the usual questions that arise about how to find a church that is open, inclusive and welcoming to all. I’ll also be walking alongside a young straight couple who have told me they want to bring their toddler, a member of the Young Church at St Mary’s Cathedral. They want to be able to tell him he was at Pride the year of the legislation allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry. My earliest memory is of being woken by my parents to see the moon landings. These days, for some parents bringing up children, equalizing the law on marriage is the equivalent kind of life defining moment.

    And I’ll be marching with LGBT folk from my congregation too; people who work and struggle and pray for justice in the church and beyond. I march this year because I’m immensely proud of them all.

10 responses to “The Tim Farron Question and the Archbishop of Canterbury”

  1. Bro David Avatar
    Bro David

    This brings up an interesting memory with the long-time leader of Changing Attitude England (CA). This leader was taken in by Andrew Marin, founder of the Marin Foundation (MF) when he visited the UK in conjunction with some big outdoor Christian festival you lot hold anually. Marin and his followers were attending Pride Marches/Parades around the US and getting their photos taken hunging GLBTQ folks in the marches. His foundation claims to be attempting to build a bridge between the LGBTQ community and conservative Christian communities.
    Marin was invited to comment on the CA blog. He spouted his pablum message of love for LGBTQ folks. Then, in a comment, I point blank asked Marin if he believed that we LGBTQ folks were sinners and needed to repent and become straight. He refused to answer the question. He said that I was asking the “wrong” question. Then he gave this answer verbatim from the Marin Foundation website;
    “We call these the “Big 5.” They are:
    Do you think that gays and lesbians are born that way?
    Do you think homosexuality is a sin?
    Can a LGBTQ person “change?”
    Do you think that someone can be gay and Christian?
    Are LGBTQ people going to hell?
    “The one common theme of these “Big 5” is that they are all close-ended, yes-or-no questions. Each of them must be answered with one word and they are all meant to end conversation. Based solely on one’s close-ended answers, it is easy to label, judge and dismiss the other community entirely. Thus we dehumanize a community based off of a word rather than create a productive conversation. In essence, by close-ended answers either the conservative or the LGBTQ community judges who you are, what you believe, whose team you’re on and how you should be treated.
    “Rather than answering close-ended questions, The Marin Foundation seeks to elevate the conversation and continual fruitful dialogue, as tense as that may be. This is a model taken from Jesus throughout the Gospels. Of the 25 times Jesus was asked close-ended questions, only three times did he respond with a yes or no. These three times were only after he was arrested and admitting he was the Messiah. Prior to this, Jesus never answered close-ended questions with a yes or a no. Instead, he elevated the conversation.”
    I spent the next three days searching the MF website and reading through articles and white papers. I realized that it was a ministry to the LGBTQ of wolves in sheep’s clothing. These people were trying to love vulnerable LGBTQ folks into their embrace, to slowly chip away at them until they had brought them to realize that their sexual/gender orientation was false, acting upon it was a sin and they needed to seek the help of Jesus to beome heterosexual and accept their gender assigned by birth.
    I posted my findings on the CA blog and was promply chastized and barred from further posts. In a personal email from the leader of CA I was ripped a new arsehole and declared anathema. Sadly, even LGBTQ folks in prominent positions are taken in by these folks. I think that we need to continually ask the Big 5, of everyone, epsecially those non-LGBTQ folks who profess to be our allies and supporters, secular or religious.

  2. Peter Davison Avatar

    Good column.
    So who is entitled to express opinions on ethical issues? I’ve long understood it’s the duty of all of us to have INFORMED consciences and to obey them. We may wish to consult people we believe to be more informed than we are, such as our presumed leaders, but in the end, when asked, we should at least be ready to state, however firmly or tentatively, where we stand. As for our leaders, they may or may not be better informed than we are; but we also know that ‘experts’ may be people who know more and more about less and less – and that politics often intrude into our public morality. Much of ethics is situational. That said, Jesus seems to have had much more compassion for alleged ‘sinners’ than for those who chose to label them as such. And much of our present troubles seem to stem from our desire to label and scapegoat people who appear to be different. What would happen if we simply accepted people for who they are and learned to accept that love is indeed ‘a many splendoured thing’?

  3. Graham Evans Avatar
    Graham Evans

    A very interesting new perspective and certainly a question that should be put to all the Anglican bishops who sit in the house of Lords.

  4. The Rev Sr Helena Barrett, OSB Avatar
    The Rev Sr Helena Barrett, OSB

    Absolutely spot on, Kelvin. The ABC should be asked The Question until he is sufficiently exhausted to give a clear and honest answer (whatever it may turn out to be) instead of the usual yards of ecclesiastical flannel.

    1. June B Butler Avatar
      June B Butler

      “The ABC should be asked The Question until he is sufficiently exhausted to give a clear and honest answer…”

      Justin Welby wails piteously: “I’m not the pope.”

  5. the Rev. Grant Barber Avatar
    the Rev. Grant Barber

    I always wondered how the preachers in Pepys’ diary could preach such long sermons. I think I understand better now. So glad we’ve already settled the matter in the Episcopal Church. (Oh, the answer can be a succinct “no, not sin just by its nature).

  6. Bernard Silverman Avatar
    Bernard Silverman

    if I asked an archbishop whether deliberately stamping on someone’s toe is a sin they would give a direct answer. So they should be asked the Farron question over and over again until they do similarly. If the Prime Minister can do that so can they. Indeed the question should be “the PM thinks that gay sex is not a sin. Was she right?”

  7. Kate Odling Avatar
    Kate Odling

    Very interesting. I always think that if someone does not give a clear answer to a question that they have something to hide or that their true belief/thought would be unpopular. I think the ABC has looked very uncomfortable when any direct questioning about LGBT issues are raised. So someone should ask & not accept anything but a straightforward answer. My final thought is that we are all qualified to have an opinion – what’s wrong with that?

  8. Bruce Gulland Avatar

    Whatever I think about the answer to the question, I did rather enjoy the style of your post – you had me on the edge of my seat!

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • Health bulletin etc

    Or perhaps “lack of health” bulletin. Life with a sick and rather sickly cat is challenging at the moment. Madam has two modes of operation – rather pathetic and grumpy as per usual. She has never been an entirely easy individual to cope with at the best of times. (Yes, rather like the person she…

  • Swimming

    Just back from yet another nifty 20 lengths of the pool, the third, or perhaps the fourth swim this week. Those who scoffed at the purchase of the flip-flops, scoff ye not. Swimming is holy too, of course.

  • Office Dogs

    Was it because it is the Feast of St Francis today that two dogs were to be found in the office this afternoon? I’ve never known any dogs visit before, so two at once was rather an event.

  • What people are looking for

    Here’s a list of things that people have been searching google for which have resulted in them arriving at this page recently, in order of popularity: pancake receipt kelvin’s head tim bennison apaisyl how to baptise midge bites how to baptise mp3 music easter vigil exsultet what is kelvin jo mallone