• “Issues” is no more

    Earlier today, the General Synod of the Church of England took a hugely significant step. It removed a document called “Issues in Human Sexuality” from the discernment process for people being assessed for clerical vocations in the Church of England.

    Oh, I can hear you yawning from here. But it really is important and this is a significant step forward.

    “Issues” as it has come to be known became a touchstone for the Church of England. It was originally a statement from the Church of England Bishops about what they thought about sex and sexuality. It was never intended to become something that people had to agree with before they could be considered for ordination but it became so. Of course being the Church of England, people tried to make a distinction between agreeing with the document and agreeing to live in compliance with the document. Such corrosive thinking simply led people to tell lies and I’ve always thought that all Christians were agreed that telling lies was a bad thing that none of us should do.

    Issues was horrendous back in the 1990s when it was introduced. It set different sexual standards for clergy and laity, it referred to gay people as homophiles, it stated that bisexual people were inherently unfaithful to partners, it seemed to condone conversion therapy and much more. It didn’t just use language that we now find outdated, it used language that was prejudicial at the time and deeply harmful to huge numbers of people. I was trying to become an ordinand when it was published. It was devastating.

    It affected other parts of the Anglican Communion too. I know people who trained for ministry in Scotland who were told that living within the no-sex-for-the-homophiles boundaries of Issues was expected of them too. And many of us went to Selection Conferences for ministry that took place in the Church of England where the selectors were trained to expect potential ordinands to indicate that they would live within the boundaries of this document. For a while, we sent clergy from Scotland on Selection Conferences in England with a letter stating that this document didn’t apply in Scotland. But we were still using a system that was based entirely around discrimination against lesbian, gay and bisexual people. (I don’t think transgender people were addressed in the document).

    My thoughts today are with those whose vocations were crushed by Issues. And those who managed to have vocations upheld but whose personal lives were damaged by it. Some people lived unhappy lives that might have been completely different. My particular thoughts tonight are of a wonderful priest I once worked with whose love never spoke its name. He loved another priest and remained closeted – living or seeming to be living within Issues because that is what his church expected of him. When he died, his obituary in the Church Times did not mention the love of his life. He was presumed to be living within the boundaries of Issues and he died being presumed to be living within it. It is a simple reality that some people were expected to lie in life and could not have truths told when they died. (And that meant others who were beloved by clergy sometimes went unacknowledged and were ignored at funerals). 

    For the sake of him and hundreds of others whose lives have been harmed by this document both within and beyond the Church of England, I welcome the fact that Issues is now gone.

    And now the next questions.

    Will the Church of England stop selling Issues and presumably making money from the wretched document? It is still on sale on Amazon after all.

    And more importantly for everyone.

    • When will we hear apologies from church leaders for the harms that churches have done in relation to policies on human sexuality?
    • How will UK churches communicate their repentance for previous harms done, to churches in other parts of the world which have enthusiastically endorsed such policies in response to their adoption here – particularly those churches which think of the Church of England as their mother church?
    • What will compensation for the anti-gay policies of churches eventually look like?

10 responses to “Blessings abounding”

  1. Dianne Pallett Avatar
    Dianne Pallett

    There really isn’t any argument left – discriminatory practice is not acceptable anywhere, least of all in our churches. There should not be any such thing as “gay marriage” as if it is something different, just “marriage” is fine – marriage for any who want to make that commitment regardless of their orientation.
    Can we turn our attentions to the awful things happening in the world now instead of making an issue out of something that shouldn’t be?

    1. kelvin Avatar

      The trouble is, I don’t think we can move on until those pesky laws (church and state alike) have actually been changed.

  2. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    I think the reason we can’t move on until it is sorted is that real people actually get hurt. The message that ‘gay is second best’ is a deeply damaging one – and we should not put up with it, not while we are still having to produce videos which say ‘It gets better’. It should not have to get better, except in the usual way that being a teenager is a difficult thing anyhow. The clear message needs to be ‘There is nothing second-best about being gay for anybody.’

  3. Augur Pearce Avatar
    Augur Pearce

    The ‘Nigerian or Ugandan’ label is surely no worse than the ‘Catholic’ label. It gets laborious saying every time ‘the view of the Roman Catholic hierarchy’ rather than ‘the Catholic view’, even though we all know that plenty of good Christians in that tradition do not share all the beliefs of an elderly Bavarian sitting in a palace on the Italian peninsula. To my mind Andrew Brown’s punchline was trenchant and a jolt of encouragement.

    1. G Wright Avatar
      G Wright

      we all know that plenty of good Christians in that tradition do not share all the beliefs of an elderly Bavarian sitting in a palace on the Italian peninsula
      —-

      The Catholic opinion of homosexuality is that it is a disordered, (“confused / mixed up”), sexuality. Nothing more, nothing less. It is a 100% accurate statement. I appreciate that it is not an especially flattering term, but then the truth is not always an easy and cuddly thing.

      Homosexuality is not disordered simply because our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, says so.

      Rather, it is disordered – both physically and biologically – because biological science says so. That is not a bigoted statement, (references to bigotry are among the more desperate responses to the truth), but simply an acceptance of basic scientific knowledge, regarding human bodies, as taught in High School (usually 1st year) up and down the country.

      People can – of course – pretend to themselves that homosexuality isnt disordered, and that our understanding human biology is somehow wrong.

      But then, that is obviously an intellectually bankrupt position to take, isnt it?

      It is the truth that homosexuality is disordered. The role of the Pope is to have the courage to proclaim the truth, not to invent it. In contrast, both secular society and protestants dislike the truth; they prefer mental gymnastics and puerile pretence. For them, truth is a malleable concept, to be remade into whatever form suits them on this particular day.

      1. kelvin Avatar

        Can I suggest to regular commentators that we simply welcome Graham Wright to this blog but refrain from answering him point by point.

        He will learn much by reading along. We learn little here by getting involved in polemic debates and I think we’ve found previously that it is better to encourage people to have such debates on other sites.

  4. Mary Teresa Johnson-Symington Avatar
    Mary Teresa Johnson-Symington

    Hello Kelvin, just wanted to share with you the title of a novel I recently finished reading “Committed” by Elizabeth Gilbert. It’s an account of her journey to accepting marriage after going through a divorce some years before. It’s full of questions, historical info, research and different cultural approaches to marriage. It really helped me with my struggles in accepting being married (may sound a strange statement to make but for me it’s not and the book illustrates my thoughts very nicely – I just happened to do it the other way round – get married and then freak out!).
    Anyway she’s an American writer and it is very much a ladies book but I would recommend anyone read it and it be put on the reading list for schools. Yet to leave it by Neil’s side of the bed!! http://www.amazon.com/Committed-Skeptic-Makes-Peace-Marriage/dp/0670021652

  5. G Wright Avatar
    G Wright

    so as not to do things which make us, the gospel and Christ himself appear foolish
    —-

    What makes Christianity look more foolish?

    Option (1): Defending the natural, traditional and universal understanding of marriage, the fundamental building block upon which all societies depend.

    OR

    Option (2): Pretending that homosexual and heterosexual relationships are somehow comparable, and accomodating them despite Christ’s own view of marriage, which He personally described as a permanent bond between a man and a woman*.

    (*Is Jesus a bigot too?)

    Surely it takes a special kind of arrogance for ‘Christians’ to suggest that Christ got it wrong, gave erroneous teachings, or that the Episcopal Church somehow knows better than He?

    How does an Episcopalian reconcile their faith with the fact that they are essentially ignoring Jesus’ own words and simply making things up to suit themselves?

    Might this approach be somehow connected with the terminal decline facing the Episcopal/Anglican Churches globally?

    The demographics of Anglicanism in the US are particularly stark and prophetic. They are outnumbered by even Jews and, incredibly, Mormons these days.

    1. kelvin Avatar

      Ah yes, proof of theological concepts by numbers attending church. That isn’t foolish at all, is it?

      Just as well my own congregation is booming these days.

      1. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
        Rosemary Hannah

        Yes, it is a bit of a double-edged sword the numbers thing … I have always argued numbers tell one nothing important, but the fact is that both of the last two churches I was really able to call ‘home’ grew significantly in numbers. It is so sad that ones ideology prevents a little gentle boasting …

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • The Friends of St Eucalyptus

    Some years ago now, I introduced readers of this blog to the twin churches of St Eucalyptus on the Rocks and St Anaglypta by the Skerry. They were dreamt up by me in order to illustrate a point. I was trying to get people to think about whether bread and wine could be consecrated by…

  • If you meet a God who is racist. Call it out.

    Content Warning. This gospel reading contains scenes which some viewers might find disturbing. Content Warning. Viewer discretion is advised. Content Warning. This exegesis contains strong language which some listeners may find offensive. Content Warning. The language used in this interpretation of the gospel contains expressions which were in common use at the time which may…

  • Leah’s Sad Eyes

    I have a question for those of you who went to Sunday School when you were young. What’s the least appropriate thing you remember being taught there? As we’ve been going through the stories from Genesis over the last few weeks, I keep thinking to myself – gosh, I remember learning this story in Sunday…