My response to the House of Bishops' "Pastoral" Guidance

On 15 February, the House of Bishops released their "Pastoral" Guidance on Same Sex Marriage (text here).  That they would draw up the document on Valentine's Day is a kick in the teeth, that they would embargo it until the next day is less than honest.

Following on from an article in the Church Times, where I offered my view on the House of Bishops' "Pastoral" Guidance (see a copy here), I'd like to add to what I expressed there, and give some context.

Two sections are of particular interest to me:

Acts of worship following civil same sex weddings
21.  The same approach as commended in the 2005 statement should therefore apply to couples who enter same-sex marriage, on the assumption that any prayer will be accompanied by pastoral discussion of the church's teaching and their reasons for departing from it. Services of blessing should not be provided. Clergy should respond pastorally and sensitively in other ways.Clergy and ordinands
27.  The House is not, therefore, willing for those who are in a same sex marriage to be ordained to any of the three orders of ministry. In addition it considers that it would not be appropriate conduct for someone in holy orders to enter into a same sex marriage, given the need for clergy to model the Church's teaching in their lives.

When it comes to equality, unless we are capable of preaching a positive message, we are - in fact - preaching a negative one.  If you produce something that mentions that the LGBT community and/or their relationships are a deviation from the norm, it will be used to oppress people.

As a Church, surely we have to be sending out a message that affirms, includes & CELEBRATES our LGBT community - their gifts, talents, hopes & dreams & their desire to commit to loving same-sex partners that will benefit their local community & our faith communities.

Currently, the message being given out is that we endure or tolerate our LGBT members ... which is a negative message, not a positive one.  You tolerate or endure an illness or a mouth ulcer, not a human being.

What's more, if you send out a message of tolerating or enduring someone, you're encouraging them to see themselves as a burden, as somehow less worthy than other members of the community, thereby adding to issues of self-worth and mental health. I believe the Church should be affirming and blessing people, not making them feel inferior or imperfect.

Sadly, though, once again, we are being asked to create an "Us and them" mindset. We are being asked to make the LGBT people in our congregations feel inferior by discussing with them how they've departed from Church teaching.  There are those that can, by their nature, live within Church teaching, and those who now, simply because of who they are, can never comply with it.

There is no way that church can be a welcoming place, while the institution aims to highlight the reasons why you are departing from Church teaching, rather than celebrate your presence & your gifts.  In addition, this difference which we are being asked to highlight will, in effect, enable others to discriminate against LGBT church members.
_________________________________________________________________________

To illustrate, I'll share some of my experiences under "Issues in Human Sexuality".  "Issues" was a guide to facilitate discussion in the Church on sexuality.

In reality, many Diocesan bishops, Diocesan Directors of Ordination and clergy used it as ratification to enforce their own bigoted views, and discipline anyone who didn't comply.  It was treated as Canon Law, rather than a discussion document. 

           I came to faith at the age of 17, and - at the age of 18 - entered into full-time ministry as a Pioneer Youth Worker & missionary in disadvantaged rural communities in South Africa.  From there, I entered into employment as a full-time Youth Pastor in my home diocese, where I worked for 6 years, developing a ministry across the city and across the diocese; training youth pastors, and running regional youth camps and mission and evangelism initiatives in several local schools, and - together with non-denominational groups - ran programmes that ministered to thousands of young people across the city over the summer holiday period.  I ran teen groups, junior groups, toddler groups, young adult groups and student groups, ran training events for youth groups and youth pastors.

            At the same time, I was struggling with my own sexual identity, but was aware of the wretched “Issues in Human Sexuality” document, and so remained celibate and desperately lonely, and even subjected myself to 3 years of reparative therapy and support groups aimed at making me straight.  They were the 3 single most miserable years of my life, where I began to believe that I either didn’t have enough faith to change who I was, or didn’t matter enough to God to be granted a change.  I lost contact with my family (the group & counsellor’s advice was that I was gay by nurture, and that I needed to distance myself from those that had caused me to have this “broken identity”), and I remember sharing with a friend that the only reason I did not commit suicide, was because I believed the hell I found myself in was somehow better than the hell I would go to for being gay.

            By this stage, I was also juggling a Theology degree by distance learning, and the Diocese had ordained me to the diaconate, and I was serving my curacy.  At my lowest point, my training rector asked me to confide in him what was going on in my private life, and I shared what I was feeling, grateful to get it out in the open.

            What followed was a systematic breakdown of my private and professional life; I was subjected to him spreading rumours about me around the parish, trying to force me into a relationship with the parish youth worker and - when we both refused - he tried to force us to cohabit in the parish house, he had public notices about me pinned to external noticeboards, stating that I had strayed and needed to be disciplined.

            When I approached the Diocese for help, I was reminded that rank mattered more than integrity, & was told that - as the junior priest - I would need to be disciplined.  I was removed from post and given 3 weeks to vacate the parish house, with no post to go to.

            Thankfully, I had the opportunity to leave there, and move to the UK.  After 9 years of ministry in that Diocese, the only sentence in my reference stated that, “it has come to our attention that this priest is gay, but this has not proven a problem yet.”

            That, thankfully is behind me, and I’m at peace with myself, and my identity, and am able to see that I am exactly as God intended me to be.  However, I offer all of that, as evidence of how misused “Issues in Human Sexuality” could be.  My superiors in that Diocese saw no incongruence between scripture and the way that they were acting, and “Issues in Human Sexuality” gave them the permission they needed to act in that way, and do so boldly.
 _________________________________________________________________________

I think the House of Bishops forgets how diverse the Church is, and how very differently authority, hierarchy, theology, exegesis and practical application are treated around the world.  I sincerely hope this is not the case, but there will probably be places where the new guidance is going to be used for a witch-hunt of LGBT clergy & parishioners.

In the same way that "Issues" gave bullies and bigots the permission they needed to oppress & punish people within their churches, the new "Pastoral" guidance will give them the permission they need to discipline and shame clergy.

LGBT Clergy often cannot safely engage in the debate about this matter, because being outspoken comes at a price to your career.  If you're not sidelined by your colleagues, you're overlooked for senior posts.  How can free and fair debate take place, when one side is allowed to be as outspoken as they wish, and the other fears for their careers, their families and their lives?

These are dangerous times for young LGBT Christians in many of our churches ... having been discredited and banned by professional psychotherapy & counselling bodies in the West, we're seeing an increase in courses in Reparative Therapy (and even Aversion therapy) being offered in churches across the world, where these harmful (& sometimes fatal) treatments can operate without regulation.

This is not a time where the Church can afford to be anything less than welcoming and affirming to the LGBT community.

If you have a voice, please do use it ... write to the Editor of the Church Times, or your faith / denomination newsletter.  For too long, people have been making decisions about the LGBT community without considering or consulting us.  That needs to stop for true communication and change to happen.

San Fran, a city on the edge ...

Before arriving in San Francisco, I was a bit concerned that living here for a month would leave me a little bit like a fish out of water, as it's very different to visiting a place, to immerse yourself in the culture.  But I've had a lovely time, and all being told, it seems to be a city that's used to embracing strangers.

I suppose the city has a history of embracing people who had fled as far away from government authority as they could, and San Fran is as far West as they could get, without actually donning some swimming trunks.  The city has a history of picking people up, welcoming them, and including them.

Most people here are friendly, which is interesting to a cynic like me. I was originally worried that I would find people's enthusiasm and friendliness a bit much, and didn't want to be a killjoy, but that hasn't been the case, either.  It's felt perfectly natural to be responding to people's friendliness and warmth with the same.

The city's attitude to inclusion is astounding, and you can see elements of it everywhere ... in the 'LGBT Safe Zone' poster in the Mission SFPD station window, to the 'End the hate' posters in people's windows, the rainbow flags displayed in all sorts of public establishments, big brand stores and private residences, and the "Equality for all" messages displayed on the LED screens on the outside of Muni buses.  It seems to be a city that acknowledges all citizens as equals, with rights and as part of the community.

It seems even the resident's attitude to the homeless is friendly, and reciprocal. Time and again, when I've not had any change to give to a homeless person, this is met by a courteous, "Thank you, and God bless you."  The only aggression I've seen so far is in arguments between homeless people on the street, which have appeared to be alcohol-fuelled (or some other substance).

I know there is a hard edge to the city ... the degree of homelessness, the drug culture and the strong odour in certain parts gives testimony to that.  But, there's a hard edge to just about every city.  But it feels like what San Fran is doing right, is it's regard for all it's citizens, even those who would fall through the cracks, and in many cases, have already fallen through the cracks.  The challenge in what I have seen is that being friendly and welcoming, although so much better than in other cities, still leaves room for improvement.  True inclusion should extend to affirming the humanity in each person, and in giving them the opportunities for self-improvement, so that they can regain and retain a sense of pride in themselves.  This may be very well be happening, and I wouldn't want to offend anyone by suggesting that it isn't ... it's merely an observation.  I wouldn't want it to detract from the fact that I've been blown away by the level of inclusion in this city that is on the edge in more ways than one ... On the edge of the USA, on the edge of social thinking, on the edge of current policy, on the edge of both poverty and wealth, and more.

I've already made mention here of how the Church here has blown me away in terms of how active they are in seeking inclusion, and can certainly give churches in the UK a run for their money. In particular, my observations refer to the Episcopalian Church, and I've seen how they don't just operate an open-doors policy here, but they actively go out to recruit from minority groups, and then include and affirm them. The local Bishop has also been quite instrumental in fighting to get the government to repeal DOMA and to bring back Equal Marriage.  So, it was quite something to march in Pride with a group of Episcopalians who could genuinely show Pride in their ministry, themselves, and their LGBT brothers & sisters.  In my visit so far, I've visited Grace Cathedral (which there's more about in previous posts ... here, and - in particular, my impressions about their current art installation - here) and St. Gregory of Nyssa, both a vibrant ministry to the whole community, including the homeless, the LGBT community, and others (St Gregory's even hosts a weekly food pantry, which offers fresh produce and groceries to over 1,000 families). Grace Cathedral have released a public statement, rejoicing in the decision to allow Equal Marriage in California, and inviting couples to book their same-sex marriages in the Cathedral.  These are good examples of how church should defend the minorities, support equality, be a voice for the voiceless, and affirm the humanity of all!

I should add that there have been other churches ... The Sierra Pacific Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America shared in our Eucharist at Pride and have a very important ministry around issues of social justice & minority groups. There was even a group of Catholic worshippers, marching in support of Equal Marriage (although, sadly, by all accounts, this does not extend to their senior clergy or diocese, which seems to be quite active in opposing equal marriage ... here and here ).  However, it seems the call for Marriage Equality amongst Catholic worshippers is growing, and hopefully their leadership heed it sooner or later!)

I hope to attend worship at St Gregory's this Sunday, and may even stop by afterwards at a Bring & Share picnic in Dolores Park.  I've even spotted that there's an open photo shoot for the NOH8 campaign next weekend, which I'll go to and try and join in!

That's about as much as I can manage in terms of an update today.  San Francisco is turning out to be quite an exciting city to get to grips with ministry and inclusivity ... what felt like a long month in the city is rapidly turning out to be a rather short space of time to fit everything in.  I'll just have to visit regularly. ;)