{"id":177095,"date":"2017-02-13T09:16:21","date_gmt":"2017-02-13T14:16:21","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/bishops-fumble-with-same-sex-marriage-means-the-church-of-england-is-about-to-lose-a-generation-the-conversation-uk\/"},"modified":"2017-02-13T09:16:21","modified_gmt":"2017-02-13T14:16:21","slug":"bishops-fumble-with-same-sex-marriage-means-the-church-of-england-is-about-to-lose-a-generation-the-conversation-uk","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/zeitgeist-movement\/bishops-fumble-with-same-sex-marriage-means-the-church-of-england-is-about-to-lose-a-generation-the-conversation-uk\/","title":{"rendered":"Bishops&#8217; fumble with same-sex marriage means the Church of England is about to lose a generation &#8211; The Conversation UK"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    After months of discussing the Church of Englands position on    same-sex marriage, its bishops will deliver their summary to    the     General Synod in London on February 15. As events take    place around the country celebrating LGBT History Month, this    could have been a good opportunity to explore a rich and    positive dialogue around faith and sexuality. But the bishops    have blown it. In a     document published before the meeting, they reaffirmed the    traditional belief that marriage is a sacred bond between a man    and a woman, for life, for the procreation of children.  <\/p>\n<p>    The so-called     Shared Conversations, the name of the discussion process,    offered a chance for the church to jive with a sexuality-savvy    generation. The bishops could have made a step further towards    institutional equality and shown that they mean it when they    say we are all wonderfully made.  <\/p>\n<p>    But they could not be more culturally tone deaf. What should    have been a moment to bridge generations is shaping up to be a    lesson in alienation par excellence. When it comes to    sexuality, the bishops discussion document is not just a beat    behind the cultural zeitgeist, it is an entire hymn sheet    behind.  <\/p>\n<p>    What will appear on the synod     agenda on February 15 is a fumbling discussion on sexuality    that never achieves eye-contact. Synod is being asked to have a    take note debate  which means no vote will actually take    place for or against the document about same-sex marriage     though no doubt campaigners on either side will seek to get    their point across. A group of 14 retired bishops published    an open    letter ahead of the meeting, concerned that the church was    not listening to gay Christians.  <\/p>\n<p>    Todays gender and sexual parlance is conspicuously missing    from these debates. The millennial and post-millennial    generations are embracing a whole new, non-binary, sexual    vocabulary and they are free to be     genderfluid,     polyamorous and     pansexual.  <\/p>\n<p>    There is more silence than discussion in the bishops document    and I suspect the heavy-handed editing was required to present    a reassuring unity, something which the bishops are keen not to    disrupt under any circumstances. There is little sense in the    report of just what was actually discussed among the bishops.    They attempt to generate a sense of moving forward in thinking    about diverse sexualities, but it is overstated. In fact, you    could stub your toe on the inertia  the church has moved not    an inch.  <\/p>\n<p>    The synod will be presented with a heavy dose of church law,    mainly to restate the traditional belief that marriage is a    sacred bond between a man and a woman, for life, for the    procreation of children. The nuclear family is spiritually and    morally privileged. This may generate the rolling of eyes from    much of the public, since the     spiritual home for all the people of England is    megaphoning its belief that swathes of the population are    slip-sliding along a continuum of deviancy and sin, having sex    outside the sanctity of lifelong heterosexual marriage.  <\/p>\n<p>    But at the same time, a rather oxymoronic suggestion in the    report argues that the church should really work on its welcome    to lesbian, gay and bisexual people, while re-affirming its    moral stance against same-sex marriage at the same time.  <\/p>\n<p>    The bishops base their deliberations on the rickety and    equivocal three-legged stool of tradition, reason and    scripture. My ongoing research with women clergy, however,    suggests there is elasticity in belief within the church. Aware    of their own journey from the margins, many of these women want    the church to be far more open to diverse sexualities.  <\/p>\n<p>    The Lesbian and    Gay Christian Movement and     clergy blogs are expressing disappointment in the bishops    homage to heteronormativity. These weather vanes may indicate a    shift in direction within the church and a growing resistance    to its narrow doctrine.  <\/p>\n<p>    To me, the act of relying on tradition to legitimise outmoded    thinking is myopic. Lesbian, gay and bisexual clergy and lay    people (trans people are invisible in the bishops discussion)    are being cast as others in their own church.  <\/p>\n<p>    What especially vexes the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement    and their allies is the reinforcement of the expectation that    gay and lesbian clergy should remain celibate, since they have    an exemplary position, binding by church law, and are held to    a higher standard of sexual conduct than churchgoers. In the    movements letter to the    bishops, they wrote:  <\/p>\n<p>      It is now clear that the process has almost entirely failed      to hear the cries of faithful LGBTI+ people. You are      proposing to formalise Dont Ask, Dont Tell among clergy      in same-sex relationships far from equalising the situation      between straight and gay clergy it pushes LGBTI+ clergy back      into the closet.    <\/p>\n<p>    This letter clearly borrows from the language used during the    struggle for womens ordination. The church hierarchy has    resistance and protest on its hands once again.  <\/p>\n<p>    The bishops might be able to publicly maintain collegiate    unity, but it risks built-in obsolescence for the church. I    would like to think that there are bishops who would distance    themselves from this report if they could. Against the    fast-paced change in social attitudes to sexuality,    particularly among the young, the bishops Shared    Conversation is just cultural white noise.  <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>Link:<\/p>\n<p><a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow\" href=\"http:\/\/theconversation.com\/bishops-fumble-with-same-sex-marriage-means-the-church-of-england-is-about-to-lose-a-generation-72539\" title=\"Bishops' fumble with same-sex marriage means the Church of England is about to lose a generation - The Conversation UK\">Bishops' fumble with same-sex marriage means the Church of England is about to lose a generation - The Conversation UK<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> After months of discussing the Church of Englands position on same-sex marriage, its bishops will deliver their summary to the General Synod in London on February 15. As events take place around the country celebrating LGBT History Month, this could have been a good opportunity to explore a rich and positive dialogue around faith and sexuality <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/zeitgeist-movement\/bishops-fumble-with-same-sex-marriage-means-the-church-of-england-is-about-to-lose-a-generation-the-conversation-uk\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":7,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[187735],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-177095","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-zeitgeist-movement"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/177095"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/7"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=177095"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/177095\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=177095"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=177095"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=177095"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}