Could Stonewall be Wrong?

It's worth stating at the outset of this blog that I am not the biggest fan of Catholicism - in common with most old institutions, its done its fair bit of evil to the world, and is still struggling to respond to the Child Abuse scandal that has rocked the Church recently. Regular readers of this blog will know I am essentially reformed in my thinking - and my outlook - but I do have a great deal of respect for the Roman Catholic Church in terms of maintaining a consistent witness and firm views on many issues.

link for image

As the discussion about Gay Marriage rumbles on in the UK, the Catholic Church took the relatively unprecedented decision to send a pastoral letter to the as many as 2.5 million Catholics in the UK. Archbishop Vincent Nichols and Archbishop Peter Smith have written and sent out the letter, and it was read out at every parish/mass in the country yesterday, the 11th of March. In it, Catholics were told that they have a duty to stand up for marriage.


The BBC carried this article last week, in the buildup to the reading of the letter. It notes - in contrast to much of the debate from both sides thus far - that the letter is intended to be in 'measured language'. This should help to galvanise intelligent debate, and challenge the Government to rethink its plans and its consultation. The article noted the opposition of senior Church of England Clerics as well - including from Rowan Williams, who is personally for (and has historically been vocal about) gay rights, but against the idea of so-called 'Gay Marriage'. The Anglican Archbishop of York, Dr John Sentamu, is quoted with a vitally important point in this article;

"There's a difference - and people don't these days want to talk about difference - there's a difference between a civil partnership and marriage, and that difference doesn't mean one is better than another, but they're different"

This is a crucial point - and flies in the face of much of current alleged opinion - the basic truth that not everything and everyone is the same, per se.

And it is on this opposition that I wish to make my point. Ben Summerskill, of the Homosexual Rights/Lobbyist Group Stonewall, is quoted in a way that is essentially naive'

"We're sure most churchgoers will be as opposed to their leaders on this issue as they are on birth control"

The article goes on to to reference an LGBT Catholic movement, again over-egging the pudding by comparing the Archbishop to King Canute. Why have I blogged this, being neither a Catholic or a Gay Rights Campaigner? Well, in some sense I am both, insofar as a real understanding goes. I am 'catholic' with a small 'c', and I believe - in contrast to some in the church (or at least the impression that they give off) that Homosexual people are definitely human, and deserve legal recognition and protection. For me, though, I don't think that includes the 'right' to marriage - which I believe is firmly between a man and a woman. The second reason is this video:

link to video on Youtube

This video makes for interesting watching. The summary is this - a man wishes to protest the reading of the Pastoral letter in a Catholic Church - and so disrupts the service to record it. The Priest - demonstrating a bemused but intelligent humility - decides not to read it and states calmly to his congregation that there are copies of it available to collect at the back of the Church. Our mystery cameraman then launches into a calm but emotional appeal - which I don't want to analyse - and walks out of the church. Interestingly, his challenge and accusation of judgement (ironic, in some ways!) leads to exactly no-one leaving the church with him, after he invites/challenges them to leave with him. Given that Ben Summerskill, and Stonewall in general, think that 'most churchgoers' will take issue with the letter, this did not exactly show that alleged opposition from the laity.

In my mind, this is a very interesting video. It shows clearly that some people have as little respect for the traditions and beliefs of others, as they accuse others of having of them. I'm of the opinion that this Priest made a good decision - he (And I hope all intelligent Christians) did not want this letter to come across as a judgement on a segment of the population, but rather an upholding of a long-established (especially for the religious) institution in this country. I thought that the congregation and Priest here are models of calm and peace - though I'm sure many felt uncomfortable at this intrusion. As several commenters on YouTube pointed out, no-one asks people to come to events where they will not feel at home - and I feel that most people don't show up to Pride parades, etc, because they do not want to offend, and feel it best left well alone. A British response, perhaps, but not an unreasonable one.

This article and video demonstrate the possibility that Stonewall might be wrong. The Coalition For Marriage petition - for its faults - demonstrates that there IS significant dissent with the Governments intent. None of this PROVES anything - but it should cause both Policy-Makers and lobbyists to pause and think of the implications of redefining marriage in the UK. For more on this, see my "Marriage Roundup", my initial post "Having Opinions About Marriage", the central "Marriage: Constant Core", and a great Guest Post from a friend about how this debate could be the tipping point for the C of E in terms of the dissonance of Church and State.

I'd welcome comments, criticism, questions and links that relate to this post, as I do for all my posts. 

Thanks for reading.