Throughout the past year, I've been increasingly appalled by the extent to which some within the Anglican church has lost touch with any awareness of the basic human dignity of one another. This Dave Walker cartoon sums up all that's been taking place around questions of sexuality, schism and female bishops better than I could.
At least, though, one could never accuse the Anglicans of doing what usually happens in the rest of the church, which is the silencing of discussion and debate. That's something. Go into your average non-episcopal prostestant church and ask whether the union/circuit/presbytery/denomination could convene a nationwide/international debate on the role of gay, lesbian and transgender people within its ranks, and you'll not only be laughed out the door, you'll be forbidden from even disclosing that the discussion took place because "we don't have gay people here" (entirely untrue) or "sometimes we have to agree to disagree" (cop out) or "it'd be a bad Christian witness for dissent on these issues to emerge into the public domain". Certainly it would be a dismal "Christian witness" for "dissent on these issues" to filter into the media, but it's also utterly unacceptable Christian practice for anyone to be marginalised or silences on account of their sexuality, gender or anything else.
So, how does one promote honest theological debate within Christianity whilst insisting dignity, respect andfair representation for all?
14 comments:
I suppose by showing the kind of respect to everyone that you're showing. I can't imagine that you'd ever get more than the occasional dismissive commenter.
Doorman Priest seems to manage very well, correspondence on his blog occasionally descends into anti-intellectual "it's true because I say so" mode, but he somehow always manages to pull it out of there again and lift it into a constructive sphere with correspondents who largely respect each other.
I think you're trying to do the same and I agree with the commenter on your previous thread that this is definitely NOT a blog where cats get stuck in the cat flaps (what a brilliant image!).
Keep doing what you're doing!
Fr Joe Kennedy, the principle of The College of the Resurrection summed it up thus in conversation:
It is not the theological position you hold, it is how you hold it.
The defining characteristic of Anglicanism is that we are an and/both church. We are coming into difficulty when people forget what it means to be an Anglican and instead insist that their theology should be the theology of the church. We do theology publicly and corporatly through scripture, tradition and reason. Our defining characteristic is how we continue to hold one another in dialogue. That is the basis of our faith. If it isn't, we are not Anglican.
Hi BTW, I would have been a reader if I'd found you before. Good thought provoking stuff.
Robb
at least debating hot issues gets us lots of press coverage, though would be nice to feel the endless columns reflected the real views of the faithful!
having read so much about it recently, i've started to feel a kind of dazed nausea for the endless different ways people seem to berate others, an article that on first reading appears kind, loving, forward looking ect, has often left me with a feeling of having just been properly done over.
so i have decided to watch how people behave, as well as read what they say, to work out if they are trying to add to the overflowing of love that characterises the church, or if they're trying to catch someone else out, or boot them (nicely) out of office.
in the end, standing back and letting the bullies have free reign, is as destructive as joining in. oh, la, there are so many forms and modes of bullying!
Hi.
The current church climate consequence is that people are total buggers to each other.
Don't know how but it's an end result of the way we allow ourselves to be treated/ the crap we allow ourselves to swallow.
Good blog. Re your previous day's comment, don't change a thing.
Hi Grace. Just had a look at your blog. Your honesty and openness are inspirational.
I am fortunate enough not to have experienced most of what you talk about with reference to the Church myself - but maybe I just need to get out more and be a bit more prepared to 'get my hands dirty' with the difficult stuff.
As someone who is currently still looking for permanent work, having been made redundant in March, your interview struggles struck a chord. Fortunately, I've been able to do a bit of temp work in the meantime, but it's still hard work applying and everything.
On "how to get Christians to talk nicely to one another", I agree with Robb (if you take a look at ASBOJesus, you'll see that happens quite a bit! :) ), but in my experience, it's not just confined to the Anglican part of the Church. At the moment, I'm part of a Congregational community that really does seek to follow the model of Jesus in the way it relates to the wider world. That said, I do occasionally wonder how we would fare in the kind of social environment your Previous Place of Employment is engaged in.
J
Good luck with the new job - hope it works out well for you.
"in the end, standing back and letting the bullies have free reign, is as destructive as joining in. oh, la, there are so many forms and modes of bullying!"
True. And I'm probably at the moment fairly guilty of standing back. But maybe also, by standing back, one can sometimes gain the perspective to see the bullies for the sad characters they are. The more I re-play the YouTube clips of that man trying to heckle Gene Robinson, the more I think... couldn't he at least washed or at least brushed his hair. I mean, I think I've given myself hassles in job-hunting... that many will have his face known and will be vilified as a notorious and dim bigot forever. I just feel so sorry for him.
"this is definitely NOT a blog where cats get stuck in the cat flaps (what a brilliant image!)"
Thanks...
Grace
the more I look at the still picture of that man on Doorman-Priest's blog the more I am appalled by the anger and hatred in his face. The anger in his voice was obvious to all of us the moment he started speaking, but of course we didn't see his face.
Did you read Gene's own post on this? How he wondered whether the man might be armed, and I expect he must have wondered whether there were more of them....
I'm trying to feel sorry for that man, and certainly, he is trapped in a prison of fear. But I do struggle to feel genuine sorrow and my sympathies are all with Gene.
You are a much better person than I am!
I love that cartoon.
And I love the question you pose in this post. I truly wish there were more civility in many conversations, principally these days in the Anglican Communion and in U.S. politics.
I linked here from Eileen's and I'm glad I did.
Hi Robb, Ruth and anonymouses. Have linked you :-)
About the heckler, though, what will happen if/when he wakes up in a pool of sweat horrified by what an idiot of himself and/or deeply repentant. I'm sure Gene and all those who truly love God will forgive him.. but the media won't, and his daft rant will be splattered across the internet together.
It's not that I don't have sympathy for Gene Robinson - he's being treated appallingly, I accept. But he has also managed to retain his dignity and the moral high ground throughout....
"It's not that I don't have sympathy for Gene Robinson - he's being treated appallingly, I accept. But he has also managed to retain his dignity and the moral high ground throughout...."
That almost sounds as though he deserves less sympathy because he is unlikely to wake up in an embarrassed cold sweat one day.
A little embarrassed cold sweat is not much of a price to pay for the awareness that your presence made a man momentarily fear for his life. And if you know yourself forgiven at that very same moment of awareness.... then my sympathies still lie more with the man who has to wear a bullet proof vest and whose every step out into the public in the next few weeks is an immense act of personal faith and courage.
"That almost sounds as though he deserves less sympathy because he is unlikely to wake up in an embarrassed cold sweat one day."
Yes, but that doesn't mean that I don't care. Rather, I think we've been meaning several, perhaps different, different things by the word "sympathy" here. For me, the word can carry too many pejorative connotations for me to want to apply it too heavily to anyone I respect and admire.
I sympathise with the heckler in that I pity him, patronise him, look down on him. I do feel very sorry that Gene Robinson is being so appallingly treated by the church, am horrified that he has to wear a stab vest to protect himself... but that I admire and respect him for carrying on regardless. So when I say that I feel less sympathy for Gene Robinson, I'm meaning that I respect him too much more.
Does that make sense? I domn't want to fall out with you... as well as being sad, it'd be ironic, given where this post began...
Grace,
fall out? Whatever gives you that idea! I hope I don't give the impression that every time I get stuck into a conversation I'm hostile against the poster of whatever it is I'm replying to!
In this instance, I had not understood your definition of sympathy. And actually, I had thought you to be much more compassionate than I am.
But maybe this is not the right forum for that kind of conversation. In the current climate it's too easy to mistake different opinions or a search for someone else's opinion for critical dissent, and passion for aggression. I'll be a little more quiet from now on.
Erika.... please, don't go quiet! You don't give that impression at all. I'm just terrified of offending anyone and (in terms of discussing something you obviously know a lot more about than me) utterly clueless. You're great...
Post a Comment