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.

25 responses to “New Statement from College of Bishops”

Dennis

10/12/2014

If you want a good resource for changing things start with Moyer’s Movement Action Plan. It was the bible for social change training movements for twenty years in the US for local and organizational politics and informed some of the organizing.
https://www.indybay.org/olduploads/movement_action_plan.pdf

You might also look at the Midwest Academy’s Manual for Social Change
http://www.midwestacademy.com/manual/

And the granddaddy of them all: Saul Alinksy’s Rules for Radicals (1971) http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0679721134

and while you are waiting for it to arrive, start an invitation only discussion list going for those in your church who support change and organize those training sessions in more than one diocese.

Reply
Daniel Lamont

10/12/2014

Dennis makes helpful and pertinent suggestions. It may be inappropriate as an Anglican living in England (albeit hoping to move to Edinburgh when he sells his house) to ask if there is anything we can do anything now such as writing to bishops.

Reply
1. Kelvin
  
  10/12/2014
  
  Writing letters can do much good.
  
  Reply
Steven

11/12/2014

I am an outsider in two senses on this. Firstly, I don’t live in Scotland and am not Scottish. I am not a member of the SEC. Secondly, my faith (such as it is) varies between committed humanism to Quakerism (via Zen) to liberal Christian (all of which represent positions that I deeply admire). I am an honest doubter on the edges of Christianity (a noble calling I share with your own former Primus, Richard Holloway). However, I do love Scotland and visit Edinburgh and the Islands on a regular basis. When I visit I always try and go to church. I usually go to Old Saint Paul’s or St John’s in Edinburgh. I consider myself an Anglican in Scotland (much like the Queen becomes Presbyterian…). I do so because the Scottish Episcopal Church has always represented – to me at least – the most progressive, open minded Christian community on these islands and which retains, at the same time, the beauty and ritual of the Catholic tradition. I must have been mistaken. I would never have thought the Scottish Bishops (all intelligent and sensitive individuals as far as I can tell) could produce such a document – which completely misses the point. I know Bishop David a little bit because he used to be rector of Seagoe Parish in Northern Ireland and I went to school with his children. I served on the vestry in that Parish after his departure to Scotland. I have followed his blog since. While I have a huge amount of respect and admiration for Bishop David, I can’t help but wonder why he remains silent on this issue. Do Bishops ever reveal where they stand on any issue of controversy? The Bishops need to know that real people want change and that documents like the one released simply confound and mystify those of us who see that a prophetic church would be leading the way on inclusion rather than entrenching the old prejudices. Bishop David and all the Scottish Bishops, for the love of God, say what you mean and mean what you say! Do not be afraid.

Reply
1. Fr John E Harris-White
  
  11/12/2014
  
  Steven,thank you for your comment. Exactly my thoughts. Together with sadness, and hurt.
  
  Reply
Craig Nelson

11/12/2014

I wonder if the College of Bishops feel the need of a holding operation. In any case I hope change comes. It may come from the people rather than the Bishops. Still very disappointing.

Reply
Ritualist Robert

18/12/2014

Though I agree that the tone of this isn’t particularly helpful (but then, has a communique from a group of bishops ever been particularly helpful?) I read it more as guidance on how clergy can (indeed must) avoid breaking the law.

I don’t think it would do anybody a favour if a same-sex couple came an SEC priest, were purportedly ‘married’ by him/her when, in fact, that priest was unable to do so under the law.

I think the bishops’ letter was in large part an attempt to protect both clergy and same-sex couples. But, as I say, I agree that the tone of the communique isn’t particularly helpful, especially when it comes to ordinands, for example.

Reply
1. Kelvin
  
  19/12/2014
  
  I don’t think anyone at all has a problem with the bishops giving guidance on bit breaking the law. That really isn’t the issue at all. It is about the tone and the other aspects of the guidance and the fact that this was withheld until a week before the law changed. Oh, and making pronouncements about people without consultung them.
  
  Reply