What is in Kelvin's Head?

  • What institutional homophobia looks like

    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.

7 responses to “10 Discussion Points about the Church and Virtual Reality”

  1. Tim Avatar
    Tim

    Hear here. (Especially the evolutionary point.)

    Reply
  2. chris Avatar
    chris

    …or even “hear hear”! Very pertinent in my neck of the woods, where the cyber-poor and the cyber-dinosaurs have their abode (and the second category is not necessarily related to the first other than in outcome).

    Reply
  3. Pam Smith Avatar
    Pam Smith

    Excellent points.

    I’ve been working in online Christian communities quite a while, and I’ve observed a couple of things that I think replicate mistakes in offline evangelism:

    1) ‘Success’ is equated with numbers of followers not the quality of the interactions. So a lot of energy can be put into building up a following regardless of who the followers are. This often means attracting Christians who aren’t normally very interested in being online to your online project, rather than trying to make your online Christian project appealing to people who spend a lot of time online.

    2) Events that are geared towards using the online media for evangelism and outreach almost always end up being evangelistic about online media not about Christianity

    Reply
  4. Steve Murray Avatar
    Steve Murray

    I can’t access the blog to post comments – does this mean cyberpoverty may also stem from corporate repression? [These comments posted by Kelvin by request via email]

    My ‘cyberpoverty’ is a deliberate choice – I sit in front of a computer all day so have deliberately chosen not to be online at home. Is this really a societal evil … ?

    The web is already beset by megaphones and proverbial empty vessels can make the most noise – how do we distinguish between volume and quality – I can follow thousands of religious twitterings but who filters out the distortion? – c.f. The Guardian which is in the process of shedding journalists and filling its pages with ‘comment is free’ – aye, and you get what you pay for . . .

    You do already provide ministries for the cyberpoor – they’re called churches – they have gravitas, space for quiet reflection, sanctuary from information overload, and a community – long may they continue.

    Will there be a paywall to fund the virtual church – or will it be forced to rely on commercial sponsorship? A reading from the book of Numbers, brought to you in association with Lehman Brothers.

    Reply
  5. Kimberly

    […] Kelvin is asking good questions again about the theology and praxis of The Church and Virtual Reality.  He sets out questions enough for several doctoral thesis, but it was this that caught my eye.  […]

    Reply
  6. Eric Stoddart Avatar
    Eric Stoddart

    Two important aspects that I suggest need to be added to your list, Kelvin.
    (a) the monetarisation of cyberspace, especially of social networking (making money out of ‘friendship’ is a big business), and
    (b) the effects of social networking as a means of surveillance (that’s lateral, between friends, as well as by mega-corporations); how is our behaviour being modified by the collection of, and categorisation by, our personal data?

    Reply
  7. kelvin Avatar
    kelvin

    Thanks, Eric, yes.

    And important to recognise that the church is in the business of calling on people in relationship with it to cough up money too. It isn’t just big business.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • The 10 Commandments of Using Images on Church Websites

    1 – Thou shalt remember that a burning candle is not the only image of all that is holy and all that is true. 2 – Thou shalt not put the vulnerable at risk by revealing their identity and location. 3 – Thou shalt remember when using pictures of people that the Lord thy God…

  • Pancakes a-coming

    My most successful blog post of all time is just about to get its annual boost. Always gets readers in the week running up to pancake day. Yes – it is the Provost’s Famous Pancake Recipe. Full instructions here: http://thurible.net/20040224/pancake_receipt/

  • From Criminality to Equality

    I think this is one of the moments in the debates on marriage where there’s more wisdom to be heard in one speech made well than in acres of newsprint trying to analyse the vote in the House of Commons last night. Here’s David Lammy giving it his all. Let me speak frankly. “Separate but…

  • Go! England and Wales! Go! Go! Go!

    It is a big day for those working towards more equal marriage law in the UK today. The second reading of the Bill which would allow gay couples to wed in England and Wales. I’ve been in touch with Ann McKechin my local MP to check she is supporting it and am delighted to report…