On Huffpost I saw a story about an interview with the Archbishop of Canterbury [
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/...] in which he said gay people had to change their sexual ethics and should be welcomed but not included in the church. I'm not Anglican, or even Episcopal, but Williams' earlier writings had made me hope that he understood something about homosexuality. I sent a response to the website of the Anglican Communion but I expect that there were many other emails and they will probably be discarded without being read. So I thought I would use my diary privilege to report what is said.
I know that the Archbishop is trying to prevent a schism of the Anglican communion but does he have to sacrifice the gay members of his flock to do so? If the outcasts are to be cast out to assuage the fear of biologically given sexual diversity in some quarters of the church, who will be next? Surely the mere idea of woman priests is scandalous in much of the world. Will he rediscover the wisdom of banning women from the clergy?
As a 53 year old gay Lutheran, firmly planted in a welcoming and inclusive congregation, I suppose that it shouldn't matter what the Archbishop says. But to my surprise, his words hit me very hard. I wonder if he gave a thought to young people who allowed themselves to hope that the church was beginning to acknowledge not only their existence but also their need for a committed, loving relationship. For them, the betrayal must hurt that much more. How many will leave the church? How many will try to hide their identity? And how many will take their lives in despair?
What is it about my sexual ethics that the Archbishop would have me change? Should I have abandoned my first partner when he got sick rather than staying with him until death did us part? Should I leave my current partner of 14 years? How about the 96 year old mother of my partner's late partner? Should I deny that she is now a part of my family? Or should my partner and I live together in some sort of celibate partnership? How many marriages does he think could survive under that condition? I thought that sexual ethics were about taking biological attraction and using it as the occasion for unconditional loving commitment. But then I'm only a middle-aged Lutheran.