I have a most interesting conversation with another cleric at a funeral this morning. Interesting, surprising and just a little shocking and sad-making in fact!
Interesting because what I heard was something I'd suspected but not the way they'd put it.
Surprising because they were female and yet saw the recent synod decisions as negative.
Shocking because, well you don't expect that sort of thing on a Monday (do you?).
Sad-making because it seems we are looking at people with an agenda here - and it doesn't seem to have the Bible included (well, not the majority of it anyway)!
Then, to make it more interesting still I return and now (almost 16:00 and time for a brew) find myself challenged by the image below:
This image is something produced by Mark Regnerus (University of Texas, Austin) as he seeks to answer the question, "What exactly do pro-same-sex-marriage Christians think about sex and relationships in general?" (click here) So let's put all this in the mix and see whether the unfolding conspiracy theory holds water or is just the ramblings of a mad woman and a sociologist and a gullible (below-average) Vicar who is perhaps more than a little convinced by it all!
My colleague (whose name I never did get) told me that she'd realised that the tide was rising, something that had been confirmed by a friend who'd told her that, "Having accepted women bishops the only remaining barrier to see toppled was same-sex!"
One of the problems for those who consider themselves to hold with an orthodox (or some would say 'traditional') faith has been the situation whereby when the issue of homosexuality and the Church first came up it seems (to me anyway) that just as a line was about to be drawn in the sand some clever type realised that this would potentially cost the CofE money. And so the first fudge was born and we had the situation whereby homosexuality was definitely 'out' on the altar side of the rail and sort of, well you know, but not totally wrong so keep on coming to church and giving!
All that was needed was a straight (no pun intended) 'Yes' or 'No' and the matter would have been sorted one way or the other but it wasn't! Then women get ordained and this marks a step towards a lessening of opinion regarding the dread subject of homosexuality because women are apparently less inclined to be against it! Empirically I did have a female friend who told me that being part of a marginalised group (women) she could never vote against another (homosexuals) and so if this is consistent I guess the view holds some water.
Now I'm told by some that women in the house of bishops will add weight towards accepting homosexuality (struggle with 'same sex sex/marriage 'sss/ssm' as it all seems a little - off!) and that this now sets the signals to green for a move to remove the final obstacle for being a 'totally accepting and inclusive' Church. Seems to me that some regard the words 'permissive' and 'inclusive' to be as interchangeable as 'sex' and 'gender' - which makes them wrong on a couple of counts!
The scores on the doors from Prof Regnerus all indicate that those who support same-sex marriage are much more likely to be in favour of a lot of stuff that those Christians who aren't that keen on. Don't think that's a shock. Then again neither is it any surprise that non-Christian homosexuals are supportive of lots of stuff that Christians (of all complexions) aren't - even if they support same-sex marriage or are homosexual themselves. What I like about the man is that he's not screaming about slippery slopes or increasing trends - changing attitudes so same-sex marriage are not necessarily the cause of changes elsewhere. But each is discrete and also influenced, and influential, in the processing and adoption of attitudes.
So we should not demonise either - because that's merely a slippery slope in the other direction, innit?
Neither should we use our straightness, gayness or confusedness as a weapon because to do this reduces us to being nothing more than a pawn rather than the focus of God's amazing love - dunnit?
Seems to me that there's few surprises for me today - just confirmation that that which the Bible appears to consider right behaviour sure ain't popular among those who like to please themselves. No shock there either I guess because the whole point of sin is that it's a popular pastime.
The key is surely to find a via media and to be collaborative rather than combative and yet still maintain that which honours God, keeps the Christian living on the right track and is truly open and inclusive without compromising or becoming permissive - especially not in the mistaken belief that permissive means converts (unless we're looking to make them twice as fit for hell as we are ourselves that is).
What a very funny day indeed!
5 comments:
Not sure if you're aware how "controversial" Mark Regenerus is? His previous work has been subject to some very heavy criticism from a wide variety of sources. As for this one, there are some very good reasons to question how this data was derived and what it means. Much is being blogged in the US on this, so well worth reading around it. For my part, it simply doesn't ring true on this side of the pond - I'm not aware of ever meeting a single solitary Christian who supports polyamorous relationships, for example.
Never heard of him, hence the surprise at his item. I will look closer into him (not a lot of time left when posting). The fact I've not heard of him is no surprise but the area and the conviction with which some have taken his graphic up causes me to want to know more.
There are so many corners in the room in which so many are painting themselves.
ps. Like you, I've met none either!
Thanks for comments,
V
I think you'll find the tide is rising.
People are now looking to drive forward the gay agenda and what we see here in the States is coming across the pond to you as sure as eggs.
I agree with The Church Mouse that this may be more of a US thing. Rick Wakeman did a documentary a few years ago about Christianity which included a trip to America. He interviewed some people from a church that most traditional UK Christians would think were rather strange, I can't remember quite why, but he commented that, whatever their pecadillo, Americans probably have a church for it. If you will pardon the forthright language, he said something along the lines of that if an American is a Christian, but likes having sex with goats, they will join with other like minded people, form a church, ordain their own clergy, and call it the First State Church of the Goatshaggers. He wasn't being salacious, or even scandalised, more puzzled and saddened.
So I am not sure if the American experience is really applicable this side of the pond. Here, we are perhaps more likely to find former Communard the Rev Richard Coles, who reportedly lives in a celibate relationship, saying "It is not how I would have it, but then, it's not about Me, is it." There is someone I can respect even as I disagree with them.
PS - do feel free to pull me up for the language if you wish, and I shall take note for the future.
Jon (and anon) , thanks for the comments.
V
Post a Comment