I dislike the choice of name. Changing Attitude was a loose name that focussed on individual or institutional outlooks. LGCM allowed any definition of 'Christian'. This OneBodyOneFaith, with the somewhat irritating modern trend for removing spaces, has a sort of 'Anglicanese' about it, assuming one Body when there are many bodies, and one Faith when faiths vary, or even varieties of Christianity. It carries an assumption of comprehension, rather than assumption of active toleration.
Terrible, terrible name. This is a disaster for both great organisations. Please re-think.
How sad that a specifically Christian organisation has given up its name. There are so few places where Christian homosexual men and women can make their voices heard collectively. Organisations already exist for non-Christian gay men and women. I too would ask for a re-think.
I'm not at all sure about this name, Jeremy.
I'd suggest a review.
'One Body One Faith' could be adopted by almost any Christian group - for example, the advocates of the Anglican Covenant could propose that if you want to be one Body you need ONE faith, therefore uniformity must be insisted on.
There doesn't really seem to be anything in the name that points to gay or lesbian or trans or bi- or intersex people. It just seems a bit bland to me. I'm not sure it's a good hook for the media to latch on to and get behind.
But of course, the organisation still deserves support. I just agree with the people who feel unsure about this rather nondescript name.
Sorry! You know I respect you hugely as a person.
In its favor it positions CA/LGCM well for debates with conservative schismatics.
The TEC experience shows that as majority opinion swings, threats of schism will follow.
I would have preferred 'Unity in Diversity'.
Or just 'Christian Diversity'.
It's like a misprint from a bad hymn
I take the point about the problems with alternatives, but much as I want to be enthusiastic, can't agree with the name: it doesn't make clear what the organization is; it's long and complicated; and unlike "Stonewall," has no clear link with LGBT history. The basic purpose of a name is, surely, instant description and recognition.
Something like Equality Now!, or any of the many excellent suggestions above, would help describe what the organization is, and give its mission.
Given the critical juncture the Church of England finds itself at currently, I believe it's expedient to postpone the relaunch and name change; a few months is all that's required.
At the moment, LGCM and Changing Attitude need to be speaking up about the issues, not talking about themselves.
"Given the critical juncture the Church of England finds itself at currently, I believe it's expedient to postpone the relaunch and name change; a few months is all that's required.
At the moment, LGCM and Changing Attitude need to be speaking up about the issues, not talking about themselves."
Very, very much agree. The merger should be postponed.
I feel it is spot on -- and even more so with its focussed 'strapline'.
The name positions the organisation in a theologically secure place, while the 'strapline' does the same for sexual orientation and gender.
When first belonged to lgcm it was then called GCM -- times change, names change, but the commitment , the truth, the love goes on.
Then I was an ordinand - and now I am a pensioner. Then I was totally at the of the Church of England and now I am a little wiser (I hope), and much happier, living with my husband, Michael, who in those days was my partner of just two years....and had to live in the town, and I in the walled Close, which was locked at 10pm - was it ?
It's like the NAACP becoming..the Civility and good manners society...ambiguous title, does not help their cause
Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.
Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to
the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill
the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select
'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No
third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical,
advertising, or other purposes.