Talk:LGBT clergy in Christianity

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Celibate and non-celibate LGBTs[edit]

The title ordination of homosexuals was selected because it refers to sexually active homosexuals, as opposed to people who would have mild same-sex attractions. The Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, as well as the various Protestant denominations, have historically made a distinction between the concepts of homosexuals and LGBT people, because they have argued that in many cases, it is possible for chaste people with same-sex attractions to become priests if their homosexuality is not deeply rooted. Nevertheless, the real debate that is shaking the Anglican Church today is whether to ordain sexually active LGBT people, who are often called homosexuals, as opposed to the historic practice of tolerating chaste LGBTs. ADM (talk) 11:47, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The term that should be used is what is acceptable to the subject - lesbian and gay people refer to themselves as lesbian and gay people, usually homosexual is used by other people to refer to lesbian and gay people - nothing to do with homophobia, but what people call themselves. We refer to Roman Catholics as Catholics, because they prefer that to Papists. It is simply a matter of ensuring that coverage reflects the subject, i.e., lesbian and gay people and issues around their ordination. The current title implies a bias, because it uses a term that is objectionable to many lesbian and gay people. Homosexual is still used as an adjective (homosexual attraction), derived from the adverb homosexuality (originally a medical term), but its use as a noun is contentious. A bit like the term negro. Describing historic texts, where people would have been referred to as homosexuals (noun), I see not only as justified, but important; but in discussing contemporary issues of people who are homosexual (adjective), such as areas where they are afforded different status to people who are heterosexual. Mish (talk) 17:56, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
One way round this could be to use homosexual as an adjective - Ordination of homosexual clergy - or people. Mish (talk) 18:57, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mind the title ordination of homosexual clergy, it probably carries a more neutral sense. I would add that the debate is not about non-sexual LGBT clergy, which has been legally tolerated for a long time now, but about a clergy that is sexually active, either a heterosexual clergy or a homosexual clergy. The Catholic Church also bans heterosexual clergy by the way, it is really question of being sexually active or not, and this includes men who are attracted to women. ADM (talk) 00:39, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The article does discuss celibate LGBT, even in its present state. And you are mistaken about the Catholic church, which now bans men based on homosexual orientation, not behavior. And "homosexual" doesn't mean "sexually active homosexual" it means "homosexual". Dybryd (talk) 01:58, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Catholic position is officially summarized in the document Instruction Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations with regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies in view of their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders, which should probably be mentioned in the page. It bans several things : homosexual behavior, deep-rooted homosexual orientation and support for the LGBT culture. Certain bishops such as Timothy Dolan have nevertheless argued that it is not a no-gays policy because there could still be a minority of LGBT people that are highly closeted and that show very little interest for homosexual culture or homosexual activity. ADM (talk) 03:19, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think we need to better clarify that the document does not "ban" homosexual behaviour - rather in practice it is intended to exclude individuals that openly (or identifiably) engage in genital same-sex sexual activity from enrolling in Catholic seminaries. Nor could it possible ban deep-rooted homosexual orientation - as such an orientation can always be concealed (and indeed has been done so for centuries by many both within and outside the Church). However, Dolan's argument of being non-discriminatory against LGBTs is spurious - as effectively he's saying that it's fine to be gay (as God made you that way), but an individual must completely suppress that "gayness" if they are to be accepted (that in my mind is pretty discriminatory). Nor has it ever been clear to me what defines participation in "homosexual culture" - listening to Judy Garland records?
In summary, however, I think we should change the title of the article to "ordination of openly homosexual clergy" as that is the issue at hand. Men and women are homosexual whether they form relationships and have sex or they don't - there is no 'mild' homosexuality as if it's like catching a cold I'm afraid. Contaldo80 (talk) 15:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Policy[edit]

Is there an agreed policy against using the word homosexual in several Wikipedia article titles ? I have been looking at other entries and it seems like there is such an agreement. ADM (talk) 02:28, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is an agreed policy against the use of slurs. Dybryd (talk) 02:57, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ordination of lesbians and transgendered people[edit]

Anyways, I think that the title ordination of LGBT clergy is a better title than ordination of gays and lesbians because it doesn't really conflate the disagreement about the ordaining gay clergy with the one about the ordination of women. Many women who originally wanted to be ordained were not homosexual and were in fact heterosexual. So, if the article does end up talking about women that are ordained in the Episcopal Church, it should only describe those that have same-sex attractions or that are in same-sex relations. ADM (talk) 02:15, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The current title is much better, as this now includes transgender people - I know of three people who are ordained and transgender, and one who is intersex. At least two of these people have been covered in national newspapers. Mish (talk) 08:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What church is this. Can we reference in the article as I think transgendered is overlooked at the moment. Contaldo80 (talk) 16:21, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Catholic ordination vs. Anglican blessing[edit]

The Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Churches have a specific theology of ordination which apparently distinguishes between ordinations and blessings. Whereas ordination confers a specific cultural belonging, making baptized laymen members of a priesthood, a blessing is just an expression of Christian charity that does not necessarily have this integrating function. Also, it should be noted that the Catholic Church does not regard Anglican or Episcopal ministers in general as having been validly ordained. This view is based on Leo XIII's encyclical Apostolicae Curae, which essentially equates Anglican clergy with Catholic laypeople. ADM (talk) 02:44, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And if Catholics don't think Episcopalians really ordain, but Episcopalians do think so, won't the article necessarily be taking sides with one of these POVs however it uses the term?
I'm honestly not sure. However, if a narrower usage for "ordination" is more correct, then (1) the article needs to include that definition clearly and precisely, rather than taking it as given, and (2) another article on the notable general phenomenon of LGBT clergy is needed. Dybryd (talk) 02:54, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Anglicans consider they ordain clergy, as they are an apostolic reformed church which broke away from the Catholic Church. It is not POV to reflect the usage of the church. There are things that the Catholic Church does that have been considered by some people anti-Christian, but we do not assume a position that takes that to be the case. If this article is meant to apply only to Catholic clergy, then that needs to be reflected in the name - and ought to contain details about those LGBT people who have been ordained and how they have been managed by that church. Mish (talk) 08:14, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The claim of the Catholic Church is not that Anglicans don't ordain clergy, but whether they are able to ordain a clergy that is equally valid for the Catholic Church, a Catholic clergy if you will. It comes from a dispute within anglo-Catholicism, a sub-section of Anglicans that are attached to ritualism. Anyways, the whole point is that an Anglican minister is not automatically recognized as Catholic. He is seen as a minister, but not certainly not a priest. There is actually one school of thought that says that all Anglicans perpetually remain Catholic laypeople because they have a valid trinitarian baptism but are not priests in the Catholic sense. An ordained Anglican gay person would be perceived as a kind of homosexual altar server, something which is in some ways ironic, since the Catholic Church already has plenty of homosexual altar servers, many of which were featured in the recent abuse scandal. ADM (talk) 10:37, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How is this relevant to an article called the Ordination of LGBT Christian clergy? That would be relevant to an article called the Ordination of LGBT Catholic clergy, or to Catholic ordination. Anyhow - I understood that a number of Anglican priests in the UK have been absorbed into Catholicism as priests, even though some are married, and they have not had to be re-ordained or get divorced. Mish (talk) 15:37, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A valid point. I suspect the reason is political expediency on the part of the Vatican (as with the Uniates in the East). The sense of "ordination" in this article should apply generally across the board to all faiths that believe that their ministers are ordained. We must not assume that any one particular 'ordination' is valid or invalid based on the assessment of others - that risks bringing bias into the article. Contaldo80 (talk) 16:00, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Non-Christian ordination[edit]

The main article ordination discusses ordiantion in many non-Christian churches. However, this article treats ordination solely in the context of Christianity. That's fine if the article's scope is explicitly limited, but at the moment it isn't.

I also agree that the use of "homosexual" in the title is inappropriate, and ADM's argument above in its favor is subjective and vague -- the term "homosexual" is not normally used to exclude the celibate, nor is ordination of celibate LGBT by any means a settled question in every Christian church: the Catholic church has recently decided that homosexual desires are enough to bar men from ordination as priests.

Dybryd (talk) 19:11, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, then you should add it for non-Christian groups like Wicca or Buddhism. When the article began, it was only talking about Christians, which is why it didn't mention the word churches. And yet, I can see that the debate may also exist in other religions. I think it would be better to add them instead of finding a more specific title. ADM (talk) 00:28, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To what extent is "ordination" is a religion-specific idea? The main article ordination treats the word as a general concept applicable to any religion; however, there is no reason to assume that article is correct in doing this. Is it as mistaken to call the consectration of an Islamic holy man "Islamic ordination" as it would be to refer to Islamic ritual ablutions as "Islamic baptism"? Dybryd (talk) 02:54, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The original context of the word ordination was for levitical priests or monks only, at least in the Judeo-Christian tradition. There are of course many religions who reject the entire concept of priests or clergy and who claim to merely have ministers or spiritual guides. Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, Buddhism, Orthodox Judaism and Shia Islam each have what are called priests or monks, whereas Protestantism, Liberal Judaism and Sunni Islam are more focused on the foundations of their sacred texts and believe that ordaining clergy is religiously illicit. So, they would probably not accept that what they are doing is an ordination, even if it is in a purely sociological sense. And yet, to the extent that most social scientists agree with and commonly use the term ordination, I think we should keep it within the current article. ADM (talk) 03:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent) If the article is intended to cover all religions, it should have its large christianity only navbox removed. Otherwise, i think it should be renamed (again!) to match its contents, so adding the word "christian" in there somewhere. I would think with the dozens (hundreds?) of Christian denominations, a whole article could be written just on that.YobMod 14:04, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I put ordination of LGBT Christian clergy in the meantime. ADM (talk) 14:33, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have expanded the article to include Judaism's relationship with the isuse and as a result moved it back to it's previous title. - Epson291 (talk) 22:45, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There was no consensus for this. Mish (talk) 00:15, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The creator (ADM) of the page said non-Christian ordination should or could be added, along with Dybryd and Yobmod (who also said it could be seperate). And then ADM was the one who moved it to its current title 'in the meantime' while it had only Christian information. It no longer does (did - you reverted the addtions). This was the basis of the consensus before I moved it back to "Ordination of LGBT clergy." I would like to readd this material. Jewish and Christian ordination of LGBT clergy largely follow one another, there's no reason not to include it. Epson291 (talk) 02:25, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Then the name was changed to specify Christian clergy. If you want an article on the ordination (or whatever) of LGBT priests and priestesses in religions - fine, create that article - but this has already worked to remove a similar article from having any connection with the LGBT and Christianity theme, and I can see no benefit in removing more. This is an important debate within the church, and I see no benefit to either the topic or the encyclopedia in changing its scope in a way that it becomes detached from Christianity. There are two relevant themes at issue in this (and there may be more, but in connection with this article) - LGBT and religion, and LGBT and Christianity - there is no reason why you should not have two articles to reflect ordination (or whatever) and both. I am sure that this move was intended in good faith - but I am not sure it is a good idea, but inserting material and then 'claiming' that this widening of the scope means the name should be changed all in one set of actions does not establish a consensus for that - why would we be adding information that was not relevant to this article in the first place? Mish (talk) 09:16, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Mish. There is more than enough material under the christian theme to warrant an article in its own right. By all means start a separate article on LGBT ordination across religions more generally - but don't change the focus of this, otherwise we would have to create again. Contaldo80 (talk) 09:44, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have stated to MishMich before that I would not be opposed to seperate articles, though I point out I doubt any other religions but Christianity and Judaism have even considered the ordination of GLBT people. If that's the case it would ruin the benefit of a central article with all the different religions, but like I said before I'm not opposed to it, I don't want to open the gates of fury here. - Epson291 (talk) 19:57, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've seperated them and disambiguated the parent. Anyone should feel free to turn that article to one on LGBT ordination across religions more generally. - Epson291 (talk) 02:07, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks - I'm not against working together on these issues in principle, but what I am concerned about is that the connection with other LGBT & Christianity pages gets lost. Perhaps the way to do this, eventually, would be a top-level article which links to specialised articles beneath. I am aware that some parts of Judaism are very progressive, having developed liturgies, blessings of unions and ordained male and female clergy, in an LGBT inclusive and affirming way long before most Christian churches. My concern is that some of these debates are so conflict-ridden in any one Christian denomination, incorporating Judaism as well will make things much more complex in terms of disputes. Whatever is decided - even whether to merge these articles in the future, needs to be discussed and agreed with first. I am not averse to the idea - but we need to do it in a way that doesn't end up with another LGBT and Christianity article becoming and LGBT and religion article, and orphaned from the others. Mish (talk) 20:21, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, I think the recognition and acceptance of the LGBT community specifically has progressed in parallel between the liberal churches and synagogues in the Western world and that it would be quite encyclopedic and interesting to read about them together. In my personal opinion for the talk page, it's actually quite notable from a sociological point of view to see how religion has transformed in accordance to changing societal norms of the modern world, and there are some very interesting texts on it. And, the point about losing Christian focus and debate within Christianity of the page are legitimate as well, and I have not disputed that. So perhaps a parent article should eventually be created. - Epson291 (talk) 03:08, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Europe[edit]

In european countries (Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Norway,...) most of the lutheran, reformed and united churches ordain openly LGBT clergy. GLGermann (talk) 20:30, 13 August 2009 (UTC) The german lutheran, united and reformed churches in the organisation Evangelical Church in Germany ordain openly LGBT christian clergy. The Protestant Church in the Netherlands ordains openly LGBT christian clergy. The lutheran national churches Danish National Church in Denmark and the Church of Norway in Norway ordain openly LGBT christian clergy. GLGermann (talk) 20:40, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

September 2002 (german)]90.187.31.228 (talk) 22:33, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ELCA accepts openly homosexual clergy and allows blessings[edit]

The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America currently decided in August 2009 in Minneapolis to accept gay clergy in sexually active monogamous relationships.

Anglican bishop Mary Douglas Glasspool in Los Angeles[edit]

After bishop Gene Robinson in New Hampshire now Mary Douglas Glasspool was elected as bishop in Los Angeles. 92.252.58.29 (talk) 20:22, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Presbyterian church allows open LGBT clergy in partnerships[edit]

Delegates at the general assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) voted in Minneapolis to advance a proposal to allow gay clergy. 92.252.90.32 (talk) 18:52, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

also here a good link for it. 92.252.70.220 (talk) 06:40, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Presbyterian Church allows gay clergy in partnerships.
Advocate:Presbyterians approve gay clergy 92.252.64.13 (talk) 19:46, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Switzerland[edit]

Open LGBT clergy is also in Switzerland in Swiss Reformed Churches allowed.92.252.90.32 (talk) 19:13, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Church of England[edit]

In anglican Church of England open homosexual bishops are allowed.

already in 1999, open anglican gay Bishop of Edmonton Peter Wheatley was ordained 188.118.134.206 (talk) 20:29, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anglican Church of England allows open gay celibacy priests and bishops 85.8.119.218 (talk) 23:47, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Church of Scotland[edit]

Also Church of Scotland allows open gay ministers. In 2009, already british Quakers openend church for LGBT ordination and said "yes" to same-sex marriages.

Canada: Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada[edit]

In July 2011 Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada allows open homosexual clergy and blessings for same-sex unions. 188.118.140.75 (talk) 07:55, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Moravian Church[edit]

Moravian Church discussed in 2010 at synode ordination of homosexual people in committed relationships. 92.252.89.195 (talk) 19:44, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

LDS Church[edit]

There is no reason to include the LDS church in this article, because it is intended to discuss churches which ordain LGBT clergy. The LDS church does not do this, so any content referencing them is irrelevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.23.88.214 (talk) 13:49, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't jump to that conclusion. It depends very much on whether we consider that this article is about the position of churches in relation to LGBT clergy or whether it only deals with examples of LGBT clergy. If the former (which I think is the intention of th argument) then reference to the LDS is sensible. Not least because it could be the case that the LDS does decide to ordain openly LGBT clergy at some stage in the future. Contaldo80 (talk) 15:00, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Church in Wales and Church of England[edit]

In 2011, Church in Wales gives pensions for gay partners of anglican clergy. The Church of England General Synod approved the change in 2010.

German Lutheran, reformed and united churches in Evangelical Church in Germany[edit]

In Germany all lutheran, reformed and united churches in Evangelical Church in Germany ordain LGBT people. In Germany in these churches homosexual ministers can live together with their partners in civil unions together, for example

Germantv11 (talk) 23:17, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also in German Evangelical-Lutheran Church of Saxony homosexual lutheran ministers can live in civil union together. 188.118.150.155 (talk) 09:14, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

178.3.20.153 (talk) 14:35, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Synthesis[edit]

I added the synthesis tag due to "most moderate and liberal Protestant churches either already ordain...". That's a pretty bold statement. By population, most of the Protestant churches at one end and in the middle of the scale ordain openly gay priests? Or are moderate and liberal churches being defined as the ones that ordain gay priests? Citations. And other issues. Openverse (talk) 10:43, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Ordination of LGBT Christian clergy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:29, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Ordination of LGBT Christian clergy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:55, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 2 June 2016[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move. No objections after over a week. Cúchullain t/c 14:17, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Ordination of LGBT Christian clergy → LGBT clergy in Christianity – More convenient per WP:Consistency. Chicbyaccident (talk) 20:46, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on LGBT clergy in Christianity. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:06, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on LGBT clergy in Christianity. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:18, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lead section is American-centric[edit]

Dear editors, perhaps we could rephraze the lead section to be less American-centric, for example by modifying the sentence that starts with "Internationally" and names churches around the World.--Jetam2 (talk) 12:29, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:LGBT_clergy_in_Christianity&oldid=1203578245"