Rosalind Hughes The Episcopal Café A Song of Anna
Alice Goodman Prospect Magazine Clerical life: Curing clergy burnout
“After Christmas, the things I’d been holding together in the parish had all come loose”
Church of England press release Statement from the Archbishops of Canterbury and York for LGBT+ History Month
Stephen Parsons Surviving Church Departure of Tim Dakin from Winchester. Some thoughts
Ozanne Foundation Safeguarding survey shows only a third of UK adult LGBT+ Christians say they feel ‘safe to be out’ in their local church
Jayne Ozanne ViaMedia.News Collateral Damage – Do Church Leaders Care?
Archdruid Eileen The Beaker Folk of Husborne Crawley Lament for the Filling-in of Statistics for Mission
The biggest reason to support gender transition (at least in my case) was that it freed me to do much more for others. I suspect the same can be said of marriage (same sex or otherwise) for many Christians. I think the same is probably true of clergy holidays – they are healthy and thoroughly beneficial. (And as a lay person I can’t be accused of self-interest in the matter.) I am pleased Alice Goodman eventually enjoyed hers.
It is good to see the Archbishops emphasise the “unconditional love of God in Christ Jesus” ( on condition clergy in same-sex relationships remain celibate. And LGBT people don’t knock on the Vicarage door asking to be married). Their statement should make clear that *conditions apply.
The pair of them are certainly lacking self awareness. Thankfully 98% of the population of England won’t have a clue who they are, much less care about their inconsistency and lack of congruity.
Actually, good on them for making this statement. Its a good statement out of an imperfect context, but to me shows that this is not just PR, but a genuine movement in the right direction. Small steps……
Their baby steps are not good enough in the 21st century. Babies regularly bump down on their well padded derrières and wail – your trope is perhaps apposite after all.
You have taken my “small” and turned it into “baby”. I didn’t say that. Therefore your analogy is flawed. I would expect better self-awareness and congruity from you. They are steps in the right direction – however small.
Fr. David,
Well said, sir!
As far as I’m concerned, too many churches want GLBT people on their knees in abject recognition of their sinful state, and with their hand stretched upward — holding on to their wallet so that their cash can be collected.
Good article by Jayne Ozanne. Her newly published report should be a wake up call to the church. She is right, the evidence of harm is there, but the people with the power to make changes are just passing by on the other side of the road. It is time we recognised that church should be for all, not just a few.
Previous surveys from the Ozanne foundation have been criticized due to poor methodology. Given the sample collection methods, this appears to be similar. It may make for an emotive headline but it is not reliable evidence.
All the data has been made available. The methodology has been done by professionals and is available for scrutiny. Just because some people criticize something doesn’t mean anything.
Reliable evidence and serious findings are a lot more than ‘an emotive headline’. But people can read the evidence and make up their own minds. In the meantime far too many LGBT+ people are not safe in our churches.
I think it would be more appropriate if criticisms like those of “Andy” were made by people who didn’t feel it necessary to shelter behind the anonymity of not giving their full names. The Ozanne research is completely transparent about the way that its sample has been collected. To quote “The survey was conducted online using SurveyMonkey software and was promoted on social media by nine LGBT+ Christian organisations, who also encouraged their members to participate via email. It was therefore a self-selecting survey and open to all LGBT+ Christians living in the UK aged 18 or over who attend… Read more »
Perhaps the difficulty here is the headline: the self-selecting nature of the survey means that the claim that two thirds of a particular group think or experience anything is unsound. It may be that those who felt unsafe in church were particularly drawn to complete the survey, and the voices of those who feel safe are under-represented. Had the headline indicated that some evidence had been found that some people feel unsafe in church that would have been more accurate, if less attention-grabbing.
It might well equally be that many who feel unsafe have been driven so far from the church by the homophobic abuse they’ve encountered that they’re unlikely to be sampled by any “Christian” organisation and so the survey under-represents the scale of the problem.
If that is so, then the headline is still inaccurate. My point stands.
Almost all participants in social science research of any kind are ‘self-selecting’. It’s difficult to see how it can be any other way. It’s no more or less the case here than anywhere else. It’s not really the killer criticism it appears to be.
And let’s imagine that as you say, reasonably enough, “those who felt unsafe in church were particularly drawn to complete the survey”. There’s still more than enough of them responding to point to there being a real problem, regardless of whether they represent 1 percent of LGBT churchgoers or 100 per cent. Any number of people feeling unsafe is too many.
I think you’re missing my point. A self-selecting body of people responding to a survey cannot be the basis for a headline claiming that x% think or experience something. It’s an attention grabbing headline, but can’t be supported by the limited nature of the evidence. That doesn’t mean that an issue doesn’t exist, but it does mean that any claim to quantify it must be treated with caution.
As a social scientist in a previous life, I can say research into LGBT issues is notoriously difficult because of the nature of stigma attached (still) to being non cis-heterosexual which makes sampling difficult. This doesn’t mean that results are unreliable, they simply come with caveats that everyone researching in the area has to deal with. I’d be fascinated if anyone could suggest a better sample collection method than that used by the Ozanne Foundation. If it’s not possible to say precisely the scale of the problem from this research it would be wilfully perverse to say that the methodological… Read more »
As an aside, this has just been posted and touches on similar issues of assessing the validity of research. https://www.psephizo.com/sexuality-2/do-efforts-to-change-sexual-orientation-conversion-therapy-cause-harm