The Lead

Diarmaid MacCulloch calls for an end to the imposition of mandatory celibacy on gay and lesbian clergy in the Church of England arguing from historical precedent that such requirements have never worked for the health of the Church.

Professor MacCulloch's magisterial history of Christianity has become a must read. He's widely recognized as the leading authority in field. And because that recognition, his latest pronouncement about the sexuality issues dividing the Anglican Communion are a big deal.

MacCulloch writes of the issue that though there's been a revolution in acceptance of LGBT people in the United Kingdom, "the church has just stuck its fingers in its ears and chanted la-la-la".

In terms of how the Church of England should respond to this change:

Set up social mechanisms within which two people of the same gender can openly pledge to love and honour each other, let them get on with it and give them the social acceptance which heterosexual marriage has long enjoyed, and you find that their partnerships are no different, no better or worse, than heterosexual marriages. They laugh, argue, sulk and make up and go to the supermarket just like everyone else.

In terms of specifics:

[…]The Anglican communion has itself imposed compulsory celibacy on a large section of its clergy: those who recognise they are predominantly gay in sexual orientation. And surprise, surprise, many of the malign effects detectable in the celibate Catholic priesthood are equally detectable in this clergy group, plus often an equally malign problem: many gay clergy have conformed to peer pressure and entered a heterosexual marriage, thus endangering the happiness of not just one but at least two people and living out all sorts of lies alongside a ministry which is supposed to be characterised by truthfulness and integrity.
Others just organise their emotional life in various degrees of concealment. A very significant part of their personality is an embarrassment to their superiors, who seem to find promiscuous gay clergy who are furtive about their promiscuity easier to cope with than gay clergy living happily and faithfully with their partners. There's a grave danger that those observing such a partnership may think it works rather well; and then where would Anglican bishops be? Particularly those who are gay themselves. Actually, it's got worse in recent years. The selection process for ordination training is now obsessed with the sexuality of prospective ordinands, and devotes an inordinate amount of time to quizzing them about it.

All this activity is justified in the officially published "Criteria for selection for ordained ministry in the Church of England" by reference to a deeply flawed 20-year-old document entitled Issues in Human Sexuality which has no real official status in the church, but which bishops today treat with more reverence than they do the Thirty-Nine Articles.

There's additional coverage of MacCulloch's call for acceptance elsewhere in the Guardian. In an interview MacCulloch says that the Church of England has behaved "disgracefully" toward Jeffrey Johns and points out that the difference between the Church of England's concern between gay clergy and lesbian clergy is instructive regarding the root causes of the ban.

Comments (7)

Excellent words from MacCullough. I've admired his writing and scholarship since I read his book The Reformation. I am now two thirds through his masterful History of Christianity, and I'm pleased he speaks out about the unjust policies and hypocrisy in the Church of England in its treatment of gays and lesbians.

June Butler

Posted by GrandmèreMimi | January 21, 2012 3:06 PM

A perfect example of "the church has just stuck its fingers in its ears and chanted la-la-la":

Reverend Rod Thomas, chair of the conservative group Reform, said ... "The question is, at the end of the day, is the Church of England willing to stick ... to the Bible's teaching," he said.

Because clearly, the Bible teaches hypocrisy: "Screw all you want to, gay priests, as long as you do so In The Closet!"

{sarcasm/Off}

No, the double-standard is NOT Biblical, and I think a Biblcal ethos of "Let there be Light!" isn't going to stand for it anymore.

The Bible (esp the Gospel) teaches ***Christian Love***, not homophobia.

JC Fisher

Posted by tgflux | January 21, 2012 11:30 PM

"The question is, at the end of the day, is the Church of England willing to stick ... to the Bible's teaching. . . . There are people who argue that we need to be alongside or ahead of trends in society, but actually that is simply an argument for fitting in and sanctifying what society decides it wants to do. It means the church has lost any kind of distinctive voice." --the Rev'd Rod Thomas, chair of the conservative group Reform

This sort of response is invited by pleas for the church to catch up with society, or to move into the modern world. It's not a matter of fashion or changing attitudes. The church must accept sexual orientation and its expressions because they fit the facts, like a round earth and a heliocentric solar system, not because it is trendy or modern. The tradition is silent on sexual orientation, and has maintained this silence by treating evidence for it as reflecting merely individual aberrations. Now gays and lesbians are living openly and constructively -- for themselves and for society -- and can no longer plausibly be told to keep it in the confessional.

Posted by Murdoch Matthew | January 22, 2012 3:02 PM

Mr Fisher,

The Bible teaches that loving God is obeying his commandments. It also teaches that gays do not enter heaven. Additionally, the guidelines for clergy clearly state that only monogamous, heterosexual persons are qualified IAW First Timothy 3. We simply cannot pick and choose what parts of Scripture we like and denigrade that parts we do not. All of it comes from God...

Respectfully,

James Pirrung-Mikolajczyk

Posted by James Pirrung-Mikolajczyk | January 22, 2012 5:25 PM

"Mr Fisher, The Bible teaches..."

Mr Pirrung-Mikolajczyk, could you please not patronize me?

I read (learn, mark, inwardly-digest) Scripture, faithfully and prayerfully. I'm capable of discerning what "the Bible teaches" for myself---and together w/ my TEC faith community.

We just disagree, is all.

"It also teaches that gays do not enter heaven."

I disagree most strenuously!

Posted by tgflux | January 22, 2012 6:50 PM

"Let no man upon a weak conceit of sobriety or an ill-applied moderation think or maintain that a man can search too far, or be too well studied in the book of God's word, or the book of God's works; but rather let men endeavor an endless progress or proficience in both; only let men beware that they apply both to charity, and not to swelling; to use, and not to ostentation; and again, that they do not unwisely mingle or confound these learnings together.” ― Francis Bacon, The Advancement of Learning

Posted by Murdoch Matthew | January 22, 2012 6:55 PM

It teaches a good many things that we have, thank God, set aside. A flat earth (held up by pillars). a geocentric solar system, the loathsomeness of shrimp and pork, the dishonesty of Cretans, and killing disobedient children as a sound parenting technique are all taught by the Good Book.

Posted by Bill Dilworth | January 23, 2012 10:42 AM

Add your comments

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

Reminder: At Episcopal Café, we hope to establish an ethic of transparency by requiring all contributors and commentators to make submissions under their real names. For more details see our Feedback Policy.

Name:

Email Address:

URL:

Remember personal info?

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

CATEGORIES

Organizations