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 “SynodBlogging – 10 Mission and Ministry”

vicky

08/06/2007

Reading this makes for light relief at work. Experiencing it, I suspect, might be like having one’s teeth pulled without anaesthesia.

Reply
Shelley

08/06/2007

I am snugly in my wee office meant to be writing a sermon and thought instead to catch up with the goings on accross the country. I discovered rightly that yours truly would keep me up to date in unique style, so, many thanks for the blogs.

Reply
GadgetVicar

08/06/2007

You’ve done a fantastic job, K. I’ve particularly enjoyed your commentary! I can see you fulfilling the same role at Synod that Terry Wogan does at Eurovision. Well done and thank you!

I really do think that we need to find somewhere that offers a wireless connection for next year. It’s essential in this day and age that the rest of the church gets good communication on what’s happening at Synod, and not just the potted version that comes out in minutes or ‘Inspires’.

And you? A ‘fairy’? I’m shocked – I had no idea!

Reply
David Campbell

08/06/2007

Just to totally echo Fr GadgetVicar’s praise Kelvin – a fantastic series of wee reports for those of us not fortunate (?) enough to be there this year. We definitely need more of this kind of thing.

Reply
Miriam

09/06/2007

Have you tried playing the “add the word to the end of the sentence” game yet? This is something which works very well in lectures.

Pass a piece of paper along the row, each person adds a word to the end of the sentence. It provides intermittent bouts of light relief in dificult situations without compromising your ability to pay attention for the majority of the time. Also. when played discreetly it isn’t obvious to whoever is speaking at the time therefore not causing any offence.

Reply
Elizabeth

11/06/2007

So, what is the difference between something passing unanimously or passing nem con?

Reply
Kimberly

11/06/2007

The difference is whose in the chair.

Reply
kelvin

11/06/2007

If something is passed nem con, it means that there is no objection from anyone. (There may be abstentions). If it is passed unanimously, then it means that everyone present votes in favour.

Reply
David

13/01/2008

In refrence to having ones teeth being pulled out, I fear I have to agree. I spend most of that week there soing the sound and AV stuff for synod and the OSCR seminar preceeding it. For a 16 year old it is not a exciting experiance. But I did find out one thing, there is something, there is something more boring then diosician synod.

Reply