Once again the CofE is in trouble concerning sexuality. A House of Bishops statement allows the possibility that male clergy living in a same-sex civil partnership may now be considered for appointment as bishops. Previously, a gay person living in such a partnership could be ordained a priest but not a bishop. However, the original condition (from the 1991 House of Bishops report Issues in Human Sexuality) still stands that "clergy cannot claim the liberty to enter into sexually active homophile relationships." In other words, a gay or lesbian priest or bishop may exercise their ministry if they are living in a civil partnership, provided their relationship is not sexual.
This seems strange to me. How can one make this demand? What does 'sexually active' mean in this context? If that commitment were given, how could it be relied upon? There clearly could be no policing of a couple's private life. Supposing a gay or lesbian priest or bishop was in a non-sexual civil partnership but on one occasion (shall we say) 'crossed the line' into a sexual one, would they have to admit it and resign? And what might be the consequences of that, not just for themselves but for their parish or diocese? You might as well say that a priest might live with a partner of the opposite sex so long as they didn't have sex. Imagine the gossip! And the possible temptation!
It is significant that the CofE appears to have done no new thinking on this - officially at least - since 1991. The world has moved on. The number of same-sex civil partnerships is increasing, and public opinion seems to be moving in their favour. It is difficult for a heterosexual person to understand the feelings of a gay or lesbian for a person of the same sex, but the fact is that a small minority of people are gay or lesbian - and some of them are Christian. So it seems to me that we have to find a Christian ethic and pastoral practice to address the situation, rather as the early (Jewish) Christians had to address the question of the uncircumcised becoming Christians.
The CofE demand is that a gay or lesbian person remain celibate. Whilst from a heterosexual perspective that might make sense, I guess from a gay one it does not. Celibacy, like marriage, is a gift (Matthew 19.12) and it is not for everyone. The proper discipline should surely be chastity - one of the three great monastic vows. This is a lifestyle choice, a personal discipline for the ordering of one's sexuality and relationships. It requires purity, faithfulness, single-mindedness - all appropriate characteristics for any Christian whether lay or ordained. I wonder whether this is the word that is missing in our debate about sexuality today.
No comments:
Post a Comment