• Proud Christian

    I’ll be heading off to join in with Pride Scotia this weekend. It is the Pride march that takes place in Edinburgh.

    Whilst looking for some pics of Pride to illustrate the facebook event invitation for Episcopalians at Pride, I came upon this picture.

    Pride bus

    It is a picture of me standing in the rain addressing the Pride Scotia crowd. I remember how wet I was and I remember very clearly what I was saying. I’d been invited to speak about the idea of campaigning in favour of equal marriage though in fact at the time, we didn’t use the term equal marriage.

    In the course of my speech, I said something like this:

    The passing of the hate crimes legislation is a huge milestone. It is great news.

    But what I want to say today is that we want more.

    The hate crimes legislation means that people will be dealt with more severely if their crimes are motivated by homophobia. That will make Scotland safer for us all. It is great news. But it isn’t enough yet. We must not rest until every street in Scotland is safe for every member of our community. We will not have achieved what we want until every street is a safe place. And we need every workplace to be a safe place for gay people. And we need every school to be a safe place for gay kids and gay teachers. And we need every church and faith community to be a safe place for gay people too. Those are the things that we need to make homophobia unthinkable.

    This afternoon, the LGBT Network and the Equality network are urging people to sign a petition to the Scottish Parliament to change the law even more. Before you go today, make sure you sign the petition calling on the Scottish Parliament to allow gay and lesbian couples to get married. It is one of the next steps we are campaigning for.

    I want every gay couple to be able to walk down the street holding hands if they want to do so.

    And I want every gay couple to be able to walk down the aisle holding hands if they want to too.

    We can make that happen. We can get our parliamentarians to change the law.

    When you go past the parliament today, make as much noise as you can. Whistle and yell and cheer for all that has been accomplished in making Scotland a better place for LGBT people. And whistle and yell and shout for more. It is time to say, Separate is not Equal. Our relationships are as passionate and loving as anyone else’s. We have the same potential for commitment as anyone else does. We deserve the same rights as anyone else has.

    There are two things which strike me today as I think back to that speech.

    Firstly it is the memory of people heckling. Secondly it is the date on which that photograph was taken.

    Those few of us who were campaigning for equal marriage in those days didn’t really have a clue whether the people who might benefit from the change in the law that we hoped for would actually back us. No-one knew.

    As I stood on top of that bus, there were some people in the crowd making mischief and heckling. (Not that I always mind a good-natured but slightly grumpy crowd – in some ways that is my natural habitat). But the thing I realised as I shouted away into an inadequate loudspeaker system was that most people were not making fun at all. Most people were thinking about it. Most people who heard me speak that day had not really given the idea much thought and it was clear that people were making up their minds.

    As I often have to remind people, I used to be against the change that I’ve argued for. As someone who was once an evangelical Christian I had once been against the idea of gay people coupling up at all. Then after coming out myself I thought that gay people simply didn’t need marriage and might be better to be free from the conventions and expectations of marriage. On both counts I was wrong and I only found that out by listening to the expectations and hopes of gay couples who were celebrating their relationships alongside listening to the expectations and hopes of straight couples planning weddings and realising that they were pretty much the same. And the point is, if I can change my mind, anyone can change their mind. One of the reasons that gay equality is taking a long time to achieve in churches is that many leaders simply cut themselves off from providing pastoral care to gay members of their flocks and didn’t hear their stories. Such cruel and ignorant behaviour has diminished the ability of the churches to proclaim God’s love in the UK and in other countries. The churches’ proclamation of the great message of Love has been harmed and diminished in the process.

    What I saw the day I spoke at Pride Scotia was that though some people were not interested, the bulk of the crowd were very interested. They believed their loves were as good as anyone else’s loves. In theological terms, I realised that I believed they were as blessed as anyone else.

    I went to Pride that day trying to change the minds of the marchers as much as changing the mind of anyone else.

    I’d become fed up with the lack of progress in the church over gay rights. Rather than battling on it seemed right to put my energies into bringing about change in society rather than just turning people off from the message of justice and joy that I was hoping they would receive.

    I rather think that was a good call.

    It is obvious to me this year that we are getting there. Oh, I still want all streets to be safe and all churches to be safe for LGBT folk. We’re still a long way off achieving either of those aims but we are much further along the road than we were.

    I was proud of my church last week – at every stage of a long, tortuously complex decision-making process, we voted by convincing majorities in favour of equality.

    But the real shocker is not to think about how much has changed since the photograph above was taken. It is to think about its date. It was taken only in 2009 – just six years ago.

    My world has changed in those six years. Every gay person in the UK has seen the world change before their eyes in those six years.

    My ambition is neither satisfied nor static. I don’t just want gay couples to be safe walking down the Royal Mile – I want such couples to be safe walking down the street in Kampala. I want gay couples to be safe in Lagos as much as I want them to be safe in Linlithgow or Livingston.

    But I’m proud of what we’ve achieved.

    And by me, I don’t just mean the usual suspects. I don’t just mean the few souls who believed marriage had to changed before they could imagine how to get that change to happen. And I certainly don’t just mean the LGBT folk who can now benefit from the change in the law.

    I mean everyone straight, gay, powerful or apparently powerless who helped make change come about.

    And I ask everyone who has been a part of this to ask just one question as I set off to Pride this year…

    If we can do that in six years – what shall we do next?

7 responses to “Ask! Tell!”

  1. Eamonn Avatar

    Count me in as a straight supporter of gay people, clergy or lay. But count me in, too, as one who respects people’s right to privacy. As a hetersexual male, I would not expect to be asked about my sexuality, or to be pressurised into being explicit about it, had I chosen to remain unmarried.

  2. kelvin Avatar

    I think that issues of privacy are a long way away from issues of whether one’s life should suffer for chosing to be open.

    Both important issues but they are very different issues one from another.

  3. Steven Avatar
    Steven

    I am about to “out” myself as a straight supporter of gay clergy in the Church of Ireland by getting a letter published in my local paper!

    It is one thing to have a personal (private) opinion and whole different thing to go public with that view. Feels quite liberating actually!

    I sort of wonder how I got to this point given that I used to be a fairly moderately against full inclusion in the life of the Church…

    I suppose it is the natural result of the way my thinking has been developing over some time, especially by engagement with liberal/progressive anglican thought and seeing that there IS another way to be Christian (as opposed to the dominant conservative evangelical ethos that prevails in my part of Ireland).

    1. kelvin Avatar

      Good for you, Steven.

      My guess is that the repercussions of the Very Rev Tom Gordon and his partner coming out about their partnership are shining little rays of light all over the Church of Ireland at the moment, occassionally illuminating things which some would prefer to be kept in darkness.

      > I sort of wonder how I got to this point given that I used to be a fairly moderately against full inclusion in the life of the Church…

      Don’t be surprised – so was I. So were most of the people I know who now advocate on behalf of progressive causes in the church. One of the things that is happening at the moment is that the really hard line anti-gay voices are being undermined by the people they thought they could rely on. It makes loud, cross voices crosser and louder. The sound of those shrill voices is the sound of people who are being squeezed from every direction.

  4. william Avatar
    william

    What’s in Kelvin’s Head?
    Confusion? Compassion?
    Wisdom? Folly?
    Light?Darkness?[in the Johannine sense]
    Humility? Arrogance?
    Obedience?Disobedience?
    Hopefully there’s a “next bishop” somewhere near!!

  5. Steven Avatar
    Steven

    I agree with you. One of the points I make in the letter to the Portadown Times (the original clergy statement was published in that paper on 16th Sept – see Thinking Anglicans) is that it seems that evangelical clergy in Ireland were happy with a “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy and it is the publicity that is causing the problem now – after all it must have been well known that Tom Gordon was living with his partner over the last 20 years!

    It is also ironic that three of the signatories of the clergy statement were women – i.e., those previously ordained following the development of a generous and inclusive theology of Christian leadership (in spite of Saint Paul’s issues). They now seek to use their authority to prevent others from benefiting from the very development that they benefited from…

    The only issue, I suppose, is that this development did take the Church of Ireland by surprise and the silence from the Bishops has been unhelpful.

    I would be interested to know your views on the tension between acting innovatively (perhaps, unilaterally) and the need to respect the whole body of Christ etc…

    The situation in TEC in respect of the ordination of Gene Robinson as Bishop, by contrast, involved an open and transparent development that went through the standard procedures of the Church. I know that in this case the issue is in respect of a civil partnership – which it was Dean Gordon’s “right” to enter under the law of the RoI but the significance of this move for the wider Church of Ireland would not have been lost in either himself or his Bishop.

    I still think he did the right thing but I am sympathetic to the criticism that these issues should not, in general, be dealt with an ad hoc manner… Although in fairness to Dean Gordon I am not sure if the debate would have ever got on the table if he had not acted as he has done.

  6. kelvin Avatar

    I think that there is a difference between electing a bishop and who a person choses to make a committment to.

    One is very clearly a public office that needs the consent of the people. The other falls within someone’s personal life.

    I wouldn’t say that is irrelevant and nor would I be so stupid as the recent Church of Scotland statement that said of a Church of Scotland minister entering a Civil Partnership that it was entirely a personal matter. It very clearly isn’t.

    However, I would say that it requires a very different level of consent to being a bishop.

    Clergy living arrangements get complicated very much more quickly than those of other people because very often they are living in housing provided by the congregation. That, if anywhere is where issues of public consent come in.

    Generally speaking, I think that the provision of housing infantilises the clergy and is undesirable.

    Once civil partnerships were introduced, people had the choice of either liking them or lumping them really. Clergy entering into them were an inevitable consequence of their existence.

    Most people I know think that the demands of the Church of England that clergy in civil partnerships promise to be celibate demonstrate a quite disgusting pruriance on the part of bishops making such demands.

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • Nuptials Review

    Well, they are wed. What to say? Congratulations to the Dean and Chapter of Westminster, to start with. These big occasions in the Abbey are being done extremely well these days. The visit of the Pope last year and then this Royal Wedding are enormous set piece liturgies and they do come off very well.…

  • Nuptials

    The day of the Royal Nuptials has arrived and I must admit to being staggered at the claim on the BBC that they expect two billion people to watch it. What’s that, a third of the people on earth? It seems an extraordinary number. Indeed they were describing it as the biggest television event ever.…

  • Top 10 Best Personal Moments of Holy Week 2011

    Going to the Stations of the Cross and having it done to me. (Made me cry). Coming home from the Maundy Thursday vigil after midnight and remembering that I’d had the good sense to change the sheets before going out. The goodwill and good turnout of the Spring Clean and Polish. Being greeted with many…