Times: Transman minister reports fellow clergyman for hate crime as they said that a relationship between a woman and a Transman was a same sex relationship

I think this is the same Alex who was on Songs of Praise on 19th April.

Alex was asked to leave a church youth group aged 15 when Alex was seen kissing a girl.

Now in a different church.

The misuse of the word safeguarding is also in a letter that a number of bishops have signed about this dispute.

This is probably the start of the redefinition of the word until it is rendered meaningless and puts children and vulnerable adults at risk of more abuse.

Oh and I should add the state should not fund any religion or give relations special privileges. Then those are free to believe without the state endorsing the views of any particular theological school of thought. If you think something is bigoted or not for you then there’s lots of different religious groups out there

Aren’t Christians meant to forgive each other rather than run to the police ? Surely it’s a theological debate and whatever your view ends up you either are a conservative evangelical or go to a different church which interprets Christianity in a different way. The real issue for me is that there shouldn’t be a state church like the c of e at all. You are then free to have whatever views you like no one has to agree with you but you should not have any say so in laws or rules for others who aren’t part of your sect

The transman in question believes that safeguarding is another word for 'safe space' and 'feeling safe'.

This is abundantly clear from listening to the BBC Sounds link above, as well.

And theres lots and lots of conflation of feeling safe with being safe and the actual harm with having one's feelings hurt.

My favourite bit - Clare-Young claims to not want to silence anyone. Not sure how you square that with calling the police.

Either utterly clueless or deeply mendacious.

William Crawley then grills the Bishop of Coventry on how he's going to protect people from being (in effect) upset - I'm not sure how the poor Bishop is going to manage that!

In the Times article, Ben John is quoted as saying:

But the reality is that some views should not be accepted or tolerated.

It seems to me that on this, Alex Clare-Young is in 100% agreement with Ben John.

Hypocrisy

The transman in question believes that safeguarding is another word for 'safe space' and 'feeling safe'. There's a thread on facebook where this transman and many others with significant influence in the church (and thus schools and government) discuss what they think 'safeguarding should look like' in the context of the church discussing LGBTQ+ people and issues. Not one person on the thread has any idea what safeguarding is, they all define it as 'making sure I never or only rarely encounter something which upsets me, and ensuring punishment or re-education for the perpetrator when my feelings are hurt'.

Obviously, Ben John, like many conservative evangelicals, is very anti-homosexuality and that is shitty. But it can hardly be news to the transman that the Church has a strand of theology that disagrees with homosexuality, and exactly how is it progressive to criticize that, while saying that you're not homosexual yourself because you are claiming to be male. It's just exactly the same religious bigotry dressed in a pretty blue and pink flag.

The bit I like best is where whatshisname says

I’m not trying to exclude people who identify as conservative evangelicals

I think if I were a conservative evangelical, that’s where I’d blow my top.

I don’t know how the government is going to work out these issues.

Most churches do teach only heterosexual marriage is acceptable. Islam teaches the same. Is it going to become a hate crime to publish religious teaching on this?

It is not just evangelical christians who believe marriage is solely between a man and a woman: conservative Christians do too. As do many in ither religions.

The Church of England must eventually just dwindle out. They are a smaller and smaller group of people who have very few shared beliefs.

The funniest thing about this is how the C of E simultaneously thinks homosexual marriage is BAD and that it is fine for two women to be married as long as one of them claims to be a man.

I think that the comments were bigoted but also totally in line with what you’d expect from an evangelical Christian. They’re not generally big fans of gay clergy or women clergy so it’s not that surprising to find they’re not happy with transgender clergy.

’The evangelical describing the marriage of anyone other than two heterosexuals as the result of “evil and wickedness”

That’s blatant bigotry. I also wouldn’t rule out my (former) marriage being a direct result of evil and wickedness and it was heterosexual.

The stuff that really gets to me is this.

‘I felt that [his comments] were leading to personal harm to myself, my wife, and the others in the video.’
‘It made me feel very unsafe.’

Be angry, be upset, be disappointed, be unsurprised by the comments given the source. I’d say any or all of those reactions would be justified. Don’t treat words as actual violence or throw around ‘made me feel unsafe’ when what you mean is ‘made me feel upset.’

I’m just waiting for a catholic priest to get involved and damn them both (raised in Ireland. Not a fan of organized religions).

It also seems that these issues can’t be discussed at a theoretical level without real feelings getting hurt which is very difficult when it comes to loving thy neighbour.

Loving your neighbour does not mean not hurting their feelings, affirming them, or just agreeing with them. This is a conflict between two Christians rather than a Christian and a non-Christian and that makes an important difference. They are holding each other up to standards which they feel are important part of their beliefs and this is necessary to be loving. Afterall they will be judged by God. It is not a theoretical argument but a theological one.

Truly confusing story. Surely homophobic mans religious views are a protected characteristic though?

What does 'feeling unsafe' mean?

The church (well religion in general) has a long history of homophobia. It's surely not a surprise that there are some theologians who still believe that?

Great post, Canwecancel2020

Personal views on this aside, I have to question the wisdom in how the C of E has gone about tackling a controversial and divisive subject within the church. Publishing literature with associated videos, promoting a particular stance on the issue and featuring particular LGBTQ members of clergy without a counterbalance, was a bit naive. Whether they think they can gently hand wave away any controversy or counter argument (similar with the ordination of women 20-30 years ago, which still has pockets of resistance in parts of the church which the C of E presumably is hoping will die out when the fogeys go). Bearing in mind that although the comments of the evangelical pastor about homosexuality may sound shocking and offensive to many, it does have Biblical basis depending on interpretation and isn’t a view unique to him. In terms of the same-sex relationship, that all depends on whether someone believes TMAM and many people of faith and none struggle with that one.

To open up a theological debate then go running to the police when someone raises a contrary theological argument does open up a whole can of worms for freedom of speech and religious freedom in this country. If the C of E does want to pick a party line and exclude other arms of the church or interpretations of the Bible, then it must be prepared to do so, you can’t claim to be a broad church, then phone the police when someone doesn’t toe the line. It also seems that these issues can’t be discussed at a theoretical level without real feelings getting hurt which is very difficult when it comes to loving thy neighbour.

And I would agree that claiming to feel “unsafe” has become a shut down strategy which prevents any respectful debate on such matters.

But it's apparently us conflating sex/gender? Righto.