A limited survey by the LGB&T Anglican Coalition of which LGCM is a member has already revealed that almost 100 Church of England churches would want to explore registering their buildings to offer Civil Partnerships if the Church of England would allow it.
 
This comes as registration forms for religious buildings become available for the first time this month following the end of the Government ban in December.
 
The news that so many Anglican Churches would want to explore registration shows the disparity between the official stance of the Church of England and that of ordinary parishes.
 
Canon Giles Goddard, a member of the Coalition and Chair of Inclusive Church said, “The 95 churches we have identified are the tip of the iceberg.  Patience with the Church of England is wearing thin among lesbian and gay Anglicans and their friends and families.  The church needs to learn to become inclusive and welcoming to all. We hope that measures will soon be taken so that individual parishes can opt into offering blessings and legal ceremonies.”
 
At present any such application would be rejected by Registrars because applications require the consent of the Church’s governing body, the General Synod, and there are no plans to ask General Synod whether it would give consent or not.
 
The House of Bishops has begun a review of Church policy on Civil Partnerships however, under the leadership of The Bishop of Sodor and Man, The Rt Rev Robert Paterson. Alongside considering whether clergy in Civil Partnerships can be appointed as Bishops, it is also expected to update church policy in the light of recent changes in legislation.
 
The Revd Colin Coward, Director of Changing Attitude England and member of the Coalition, said: “Congregations which are welcoming and open to LGB&T people, are impatient in their desire to model the infinite love of God for all creation and provide spiritual and pastoral care for lesbian and gay people who wish to celebrate their love and fidelity with their partner in church.”
 
Since Civil Partnerships began in 2005, over 47,000 have been registered, and there is growing evidence that many couples want to register their partnerships in a church or other religious context.

Tweet

Adrian Smith, a Christian working as a housing manager with Trafford Housing Trust, recently expressed views on his personal Facebook page which stated among other things that in his opinion gay marriage is “an equality too far”. He wrote that “the Bible is quite specific that marriage is for…men and women if the state wants to offer civil marriage to same sex then that is up to the state; but they shouldn’t impose its rules on places of faith and conscience.”

As a result of expressing these views Trafford Housing Trust demoted Adrian Smith and cut his salary by £14,000.

The Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement (LGCM) has been consistent in its support for marriage equality and believes that institution of marriage can embrace couples regardless of sexuality and gender. LGCM takes the view that this is consistent with a respect for Biblical principles, and would therefore disagree with Adrian Smith on the matter. However LGCM strongly disagrees with the decision by Trafford Housing Trust to demote Mr Smith.

Rev Sharon Ferguson, Chief Executive of LGCM said: “There are a number of issues here. Mr Smith is in fact mistaken to think that marriage equality legislation would force religious groups to conduct same-sex marriages. Most campaigners are opposed to this. What we are asking for is the freedom for those religious organisations who wish to offer such ceremonies to be able to do so and for these to be fully recognised in law. To force a church or other faith community to provide such a service would clearly suggest a level of state interference which would have a questionable effect upon all citizens’ freedom.

“Adrian Smith was foolish to state his views on his Facebook profile which indicated that he was employed by Trafford Housing. However, the views themselves were not inciting hatred and, as far as we understand, Adrian Smith has never been accused of discriminating against clients whatever their sexuality. It would not be unusual for an employer to reprimand an employee for publishing these remarks on a social networking site, when they so clearly contradict that organisation’s clear commitment to equality. So Trafford Housing may have acted with the best of intentions here but we believe they have overreacted and very much hope that they will reinstate Adrian Smith.

Rev Ferguson added:

“Sadly actions of this nature serve only to reinforce the view that Christians are persecuted under equalities legislation whereas in fact it is designed to protect and support us all.

“LGCM does not wish to see the development of a suppression of dissenting opinion. We endorse freedom of speech and healthy debate. This is something which LGBT people are not permitted in many parts of the world. It would be strange for us to wish this freedom denied to others in our own society who in good conscience don’t agree with us.”

Tweet

In the light of the controversy caused it has announced a very short consultation period for stakeholder organisations to comment about the issues raised. Some have reacted with understandable cynicism but the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement (LGCM) urges organisations who might be affected to take part in the consultation.

LGCM recognises that there is a clear distinction between the four cases where Christians are bringing legal action against the United Kingdom because they believe their right to freedom of religion has been compromised.

In the cases of Nadia Eweida, and Shirley Chaplin the issue is one of wearing religious symbols at work.

The Rev Sharon Ferguson, Chief Executive of LGCM said: “The decisions taken in these cases were too harsh and made a mockery of the intention of the law. All people should be allowed to wear the symbols of their faith as long as they are not using them to proselytise or they cause a safety or health risk.”

The cases of Lillian Ladele and Gary McFarlane are however entirely different. Lilian Ladele was a registrar who lost her job after saying her beliefs meant she could not officiate at civil partnership ceremonies. Gary McFarlane was fired for refusing to give sex therapy counselling to gay couples.

Rev Ferguson said of these cases: “These decisions were correct as the people involved were working in the public domain and cannot be allowed to choose to whom they will offer a public service. However, some discretion may be needed when a job role has changed after a person has taken up employment. This was the situation with Lilian Ladele – civil partnerships were introduced after she began her work as a registrar in Islington. The employer could have tried to be more sensitive and made adjustments if possible without affecting the service or the work of other employees. If reasonable adjustments could not be made then the employee would have to accept the situation and perform the duties. In Gary McFarlane’s case, he was aware from the beginning that Relate offered counselling to all couples regardless of gender or sexual orientation and that by taking up the role of counsellor he would be required to offer the same service to all people. It would seem therefore that a combination of sensitivity and common sense must prevail.”

However Rev Ferguson added: “The issue of reasonable accommodation which the EHRC are consulting about is however a complex one. Reasonable adjustments are there for people with a disability to provide opportunities for disabled people to perform different job functions or to not lose their job if they become disabled during a time of employment. This allows the employer to assess if the job can be done adequately by a person and can benefit both parties. So far, the only adjustments that have been called for based on religion or belief have been to refuse to perform certain functions and consequently discriminating against others. There is no discrimination against others caused by the reasonable adjustments made for a person with a disability.”

Tweet

Now the Commission appears to agree that it has indeed been potentially discriminatory in its approach to religion and belief – one of the protected characteristics safeguarded by the Equality Act 2010.

The Commission has stated that judges have interpreted equality law too harshly against Christians. As a result the Commission is now intervening in four cases before the European Court of Human Rights where Christian workers have been disciplined or lost their jobs due to clashes between their religious convictions and the requirements of their job or workplace. Lawyers representing the Commission have called for more “compromise” and “accommodation” in such cases.

The Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement (LGCM) is concerned about the tone and direction of this change of position. The Rev Sharon Ferguson, Chief Executive of LGCM said:

“As a faith-based organisation we certainly understand and respect religious conviction and can see the conflicts which can sometimes occur when the rights of one group appear to trump the rights of another. But the EHRC must be careful. It is one thing to allow a more generous approach to people wearing crosses at work for example, or for a Jewish person to be able not to work on the Sabbath, which can be sorted by efficient organisation of a work rota. Neither of these restrict the rights and freedoms of others. But the Commission is going further and potentially lending support to those who refuse to provide public services to others who are lesbian or gay. This is contrary to the requirements of the Equality Act 2010 and contrary to the work with which the EHRC have been tasked. We note their assurances that this is not their intention but are concerned to see quite how this new approach can avoid such a result.”

It appears to us that the biggest source of confusion in the latest actions of the EHRC are due to them combining instances of harmless personal religious expression with situations of blatant discrimination which are then justified on the grounds of religion. These must be assessed separately as the implications are clearly dramatically different.

The Rev Ferguson added:

“It is obviously tremendously important to us that all people are free to live according to their beliefs in all areas of their lives, which includes the workplace, but this can never include the oppression or discrimination of others. The freedom to wear a religious symbol at work and refusal to perform a public service that is part of your job description are two very different issues.”

Symon Hill embarked upon this pilgrimage to publicly show support for LGBT people in marked contrast to his own strongly homophobic position which 14 years ago led him to say that his opposition to gay relationships was a matter of God’s opinion, not his.

The Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement is one of a number of Christian organisations which have expressed support for this walk culminating in London today, 1 July.

The Rev Sharon Ferguson, Chief Executive of LGCM said:

“We have been delighted to lend support to Symon’s pilgrimage which has been both a personal journey yet a very public one. LGCM has been campaigning for 35 years for the full inclusion of LGBT people in the life of the church and in wider society. We are thrilled to see increasing numbers of Christians, both individuals and groups, embrace LGBT people as people of worth and dignity in God’s eyes.

“Symon’s pilgrimage reminds us of the steady march of progress towards true acceptance of all God’s children. However as well as indicating the changes that are occurring among Christians, the fact that Symon’s walk is still needed is a sober reminder that we still have a long way to go.”

Tomorrow LGCM will be joining with other Christians in London marching as part of the annual Pride celebrations under the banner of Christians Together at Pride. We shall then be gathering at 6.00 pm at St Martin-in-the-Fields for our service of celebration for Pride.

All are welcome.

The Rev Sharon Ferguson, Chief Executive of LGCM, said: “In the light of our call recently that the Church of England should at least honour its own position in Issues in Human Sexuality LGCM recognises an attempt to achieve that in these guidelines. Whilst they do at least attempt to address the requirements of the law and help prevent the ongoing cycle of deception and dishonesty about which we have expressed concern, they are still setting a standard for bishops whose orientation is homosexual which is not required of bishops who are heterosexual. It is particularly concerning that gay candidates for the bishopric must repent of relationships they had in the past when no such requirement is placed on heterosexual candidates who may have engaged in extramarital relationships.”

LGCM is concerned that the guidelines would still exclude people like Canon Dr Jeffrey John who while now in a celibate relationship has been open that this relationship was not always so. Furthermore the guidelines, in keeping with rights contained within the Equality Act, would allow promotion to be blocked where the appointment of even a celibate gay bishop would be seen as divisive.

Rev Sharon Ferguson added: “The additional provision is so general it would effectively allow many of the same dioceses who currently block the appointment of gay bishops to continue to do so. Also, as the provisions only apply to those clergy who are either known or suspected to be gay it is likely to continue to encourage an atmosphere of denial and lying since the honesty and integrity of people like Jeffrey John could still prohibit promotion to the the bishopric.”

Further concerns for LGCM arise from how such guidelines could be implemented and enforced without considerable intrusion on a person’s private life. Again, something that would not even be considered for a heterosexual candidate.

A statement by the United Nations said that the Council requested the High Commissioner initiate a study to be completed by December “to document discriminatory laws and practices and acts of violence against individuals based on their sexual orientation and gender identity, in all regions of the world, and how international human rights law could be used to end violence and related human rights violations based on sexual orientation and gender identity.”

The resolution was passed narrowly by 23 states to 19 with 3 abstentions. The motion expressed “grave concern at acts of violence and discrimination, in all regions of the world, committed against individuals because of their sexual orientation and gender identity.”

Rev Sharon Ferguson, Chief Executive of LGCM, said: “This is very good news indeed for people around the world whose sexual orientation in itself is enough to put their lives at risk. Obviously it won’t end discrimination and the very real threat of death that many LGBT people face but it draws a clear line for the first time and says that the world is watching.”

LGCM notes with deep concern and sadness however that the nations that voted against the resolution did so very largely from religious convictions about homosexuality, whether these be Christian or Muslim beliefs.

Rev Sharon Ferguson added: “We cannot deny the deeply worrying, though entirely expected, rejection of the resolution by nations whose attitudes to LGBT people are based on religious understandings of human sexuality and relationships. We continue to work and pray with other LGBT faith-based organisations to challenge such hatred and bigotry which is not in accord with the deepest principles of either Christianity or Islam.”

The Very Rev Colin Slee (1945-2010)

The recently leaked letter written by the late Very Rev Colin Slee, former dean of Southwark Cathedral, exposed the turmoil in which the Church of England leadership found itself in trying to block the appointment of openly gay priest Jeffrey John to the post of Bishop of Southwark. Slee, as well as writing a devastating account of the behaviour of Archbishops Williams and Sentamu, revealed in his letter that there are a number of gay bishops who have been “less than honest” about their personal relationships, “who, in a conspiracy of silence, have been appointed to senior positions”.

Rev Sharon Ferguson, Chief Executive of LGCM said: “This latest revelation about the Church of England causes me grave concern and confirms the hypocrisy and institutional homophobia that led to the blocking of Jeffrey John to the bishopric. Furthermore it encourages a ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ situation which will lead to a seriously compromised leadership and moral example.”

Since the leak of this memorandum Colin Coward of Changing Attitude has written that to his knowledge there are 13 bishops who are gay, including 5 in the House of Bishops.

LGCM remains consistent in its conviction that loving, faithful and stable relationships among the clergy and laity are entirely consistent with Christian conviction and witness. As an organisation LGCM supports the full acceptance of openly gay bishops and believes that sexual orientation should not be a bar to appointment to the bishopric.

While this is far from being the situation in the Church of England at present, LGCM urges that the Church is at least consistent with Issues in Human Sexuality and that it does not allow sexual orientation per se to be a reason to block promotion to the role of bishop.

Rev Sharon Ferguson added: “The situation is one of sheer hypocrisy. The decision to block Canon John was not based upon the Church’s own position, but was simply one of bigotry and discrimination. Indeed the church’s own lawyers have implied that barring a candidate on the basis of being open about sexual orientation is illegal. The proposed interrogation of candidates who are suspected of being gay not only further extends this blatant discrimination but will likely also encourage some of those being considered for promotion to compromise their integrity thus doing immense damage to such candidates, and those to whom they minister.”

Tweet

The European Forum represents 44 Christian LGBT member groups from 23 European countries. The Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement is a member of the Forum and Rev Sharon Ferguson, Chief Executive, helped compose the final version of the letter originally drafted by the Polish group Faith and Rainbow. It was approved by the Forum’s Annual General Meeting in early May, and marks a new era of courage and open dialogue which is emerging among LGBT Catholics and their supporters.

The Cutting Edge Consortium, a grouping of both faith-based and non-religious organisations in the UK, has also lent its support to the letter. LGCM is a member of CEC.

Martin Pendergast of CEC and LGCM said: “Rather than defining LGBT Catholics, their parents and families, as persons with problems to be solved, we hope that the Church will recognise the contributions and gifts they bring to the building up of the Body of Christ, the rich catholicity of the People of God.”

Rev Sharon Ferguson added, “As a member organisation of both the European Forum and the Cutting Edge Consortium LGCM is proud to add its voice in support of this call to Pope Benedict to end the discrimination and fear that pervades the Catholic Church and which impacts negatively and often in life-threatening ways upon the life of LGBT people around the world. This impact is most dangerous where governments and politicians use traditional Catholic attitudes against LGBT people as a defence of their unacceptable hate.”

The letter is being presented today at the conference LGBT people and Christian churches in Europe: fears and opportunities for a full acceptance and inclusion, which is part of a programme of events on Faith and Homosexuality that for the first time is included in the Europride 2011 that will take place in Rome from 1 – 12 June.

Tweet

While it would appear that key people behind the proposed legislation such as MP David Bahati and Pastor Martin Ssempa, have moved away from a call for the death penalty, if passed the new law would still mean imprisonment under appalling conditions for those ‘convicted’ of homosexuality – for life in some cases.

And in a deeply conservative society with deeply entrenched homophobia such draconian worsening of the law (homosexuality is already illegal in Uganda) will send out the worst possible message.

Rev Sharon Ferguson Chief Executive of LGCM said:

“There is nothing Christian, ethical, or just about this Bill. It is the mirror opposite of everything Christ taught. We appeal to Prime Minister David Cameron and the United Kingdom Government to join with others in a clear condemnation of this potential move. We urge the Prime Minister to remind the Ugandan Government that their determined programme of denying human rights to their own citizens will make them a pariah state.”

Rev Ferguson added:

“It is to be remembered that many LGBT people in Uganda are themselves Christians and Christianity is not restricted just to hateful expressions which diminish human life. David Kato, the gay activist who was murdered recently, was just one such Christian believer. We applaud all Christians and others who have stood up and continue to do so against this evil and injustice. We honour especially the courage of the Anglican Bishop Christopher Senyonjo, a very vocal opponent of the Bill.”