7 responses to “Well-meaning but homophobic”
-
Seems to me “well-meaning but homophobic” in these days and times implies vincible ignorance and is no longer useful as an excuse for homophobic language. The leaders of the C of E seem paralyzed, unable to articulate policies to move forward on equality for LGTB persons that are other than laughable. Think “deer in the headlights”.
-
I suppose @RevArun might say that women are welcome for the same reason, eh?
-
Exactly what I thought.
-
-
I’ve removed a previous comment. I’d prefer to retain the focus on the institutional elements of this rather than speculating about an individual.
-
As society changes many people are not sure of the new, and therefore condemn it, without thought. I am safe, with the Devil l know. It’s a way of life, not dealing with changes. If we think about how much has changed; homosexuality was illegal until 1969 in England; Scotland caught up in 1983; women have a right to equal pay; the only job that is still excluded from them is working down a mine:
There are men who are prepared to wait to see a male doctor, especially if it is the genitals.
Racism is not tolerated by most, but it is still used by people who want a reaction. There was, when the world and I were young, a shoe polish, called nigger brown. This wasn’t considered at the time as being wrong. -
I take your point, and I don’t disagree. If we look at another person and only see the gay part as ‘broken’, then that’s homophobic, no matter how well intentioned. Plus I always find something disturbingly patronising when people say ‘We’re all broken’, as if the speaker doesn’t quite believe it of him/herself, while seeing it very clearly in the other.
However, there’s another way of looking at it. The very fact that we are human means that we are broken. If being gay is part of that humanity, then it’s part also of that brokenness. It’s all part of the messy mixture that we struggle with, and build our rickety lives with, but for which we also should praise and thank God.
-
‘Thinking Anglicans’ has a post up about Vicky Beeching’s coming out but does not link to the discussion here. I asked why but they did not reply let alone publish my question.
Previous Posts
-
Ash Wednesday
Ash Wednesday Services at 1230 and at 1930. Allegri Miserere and some Palestrina in the evening. Ashes at both. As usual, everyone who turns up, belongs. All Welcome. [Ruth notes that she has the lemon ready. This is directly related to me saying to the servers on Sunday – “Mind and bring the salmon sandwiches…
-
Overheard
“When it comes to brocade Kelvin, I know you are completely shameless”.
-
The cradle of the numinous
I’m going to meet with a liturgy honours class this week to discuss yesterday’s 1030 service, which most of them were at. Inevitably, I find myself thinking a bit about what it is I’m hoping to do when I give birth to a liturgical service. Primarily, I think, my aim is evangelical. I do subscribe…
-
Sermon – Candlemas 2007
We think of time in a different way to the way that the Jewish people thought of it. For them, as sure as night follows day, you can be sure that if you have a big religious festival, then forty days later, you will have another one. And so, here we are, just about 40…
Leave a Reply