Pride, progressive sectarianism, and TEC on Facebook
On previous occasions, I have rather robustly called for TEC to be much more aware and respectful of the social conservatism of the Red states and regions in which it ministers. A failure to do so risks TEC declining yet further into the irrelevance of progressive sectarianism.
At the same time, TEC also obviously ministers in deep Blue states and metropolitan areas - and is the only Mainline Protestant tradition in which a majority of its members vote Democrat.* With Pride now an established civic commemoration, particularly in such contexts, there is a case for TEC affirming those aspects of Pride - the dignity of gay men and lesbian women, their contribution to civic life, and their place in the church's life - which cohere with a Christian moral vision. (I will note in passing, in the UK context, that Pride's ideological opposition to the protection offered to children by the Cass Review and the recent Supreme Court judgement protecting the rights of women is deeply, profoundly wrong, and should be the object of sustained criticism.)
My assumption, therefore, is that observing Pride is an understandable aspect of the public ministry of TEC.
This, however, does not in any way justify the absurdly ridiculous focus on Pride recently seen on The Episcopal Church's Facebook page. Pride has been the subject of posts on 15th May, 28th May (2 times), 1st June (3 times), 2nd June, and 3rd June. The objective observer would surely understand this as quite clearly indicating that TEC regards Pride as a liturgical season.
Contrast this with references to a very significant civic observance in the United States, Memorial Day (26th May this year). The social media accounts of many individual Episcopal churches made moving reference to Memorial Day. What of TEC on Facebook? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Not a single reference to Memorial Day.
In the Pride-related posts, there was an emphasis on the role of the new Presiding Bishop, Sean Rowe, at the Pride Eucharist, blessing and commissioning "Episcopalians who will share God's love at Pride events across the church". On Memorial Day, there was no reference to Episcopal chaplains or Episcopal laity serving in the military. No words addressed to those Episcopalians who have served and who carry the burdens and scars of recent conflicts. No photographs of Episcopal churches marking their military graves with the Stars and Stripes.
It would be difficult to find a better example of TEC's progressive sectarianism than this contrast between a focus on Pride and the abject failure to mention Memorial Day. That said, a very close second is how the Episcopal News Service marked Independence Day 2020 by publishing a letter from "three influential leaders in The Episcopal Church", calling for TEC to "free ourselves institutionally and individually of that which stands between us and the dream of God: Whiteness itself".
Shortly after Memorial Day was a quite difference observance, the feast of Ascension Day (29th May). According to BCP 1979, it is one of the "Principal Feasts observed in this Church". The Church on England on Facebook had 4 posts referring to Ascension Day, including a streamed service and the collect of the day. What of TEC on Facebook? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Not a single reference to this principal feast.
Why did TEC not demonstrate at least the same enthusiasm on Facebook for Ascension Day as for Pride? Is the point of maintaining a social media presence not for the purposes of evangelism and teaching? Does this not involve promoting and explaining the principal feasts of the Christian faith? Why does TEC's observance of Pride receive such significant focus while the Ascension Day - a creedal truth, for us and for our salvation - receives no reference whatsoever?
There is a point at which TEC appears to want to confirm the worst allegations of its harshest critics. Judging from its Facebook presence, TEC does indeed regard Pride to be of greater significance than Our Lord's Ascension. What is the purposes of TEC's presence on Facebook? If it is to promote the Christian faith as understood by the Episcopal tradition, this necessarily should include reference to the principal feasts, with prayers and teaching on the meaning of these feasts. At present, however, it appears that TEC's presence on Facebook is solely about enhancing its stance amongst progressives.
As for the contrast with Memorial Day, it cannot but be noted that TEC's Facebook presence entirely overlooks an observance rooted in the virtues of patriotism and military service, while a civic observance primarily associated with progressive opinion receives an absurd level of attention. What message this - I can only assume, intentionally - sends to the 31% of Episcopalians who identify as political conservatives (37% moderate, 29% liberal) is not at all difficult to imagine.
To be frank, TEC's Facebook presence in recent weeks has looked like a absurd caricature designed by TEC's harshest GAFCON critics. It portrays TEC as a progressive pressure group, with little - if any - meaningful interest in the defining events and beliefs of the Christian faith. It also suggests that TEC has little - if any - interest in those communities and regions of the United States which are more socially conservative.
I fully admit that in view of the catastrophic decline experienced by TEC, what appears on its Facebook page is not a priority. It certainly does not, however, help. Reversing decline will take much more than a Facebook presence with a meaningful presentation of the central truths of the Christian faith and a more inclusive approach to the political divisions in US society. But at least it would be a start.
_________
* It is worth noting that, according to figures presented by Ryan Burge, more Episcopalians voted Republican in 2024 (40%) than in the previous 4 presidential elections (2020, 2016, 2012, 2008). This further emphasises the destructive nature of the partisanship of TEC's central institutions.
This is sadly true, and while visible solidarity with the LGBT community is important, this solidarity flows from the faith and not the other way around. Likewise, be present and affirming at Pride events hosted by the LGBT community, rather than hosting Pride events of our own and expecting the community to show up for them. A banner or sign or whatever out during Pride month - and other times - and a voluntary presence at Pride events are adequate expressions of solidarity, and have borne good fruit when coupled with a warm welcome into a real, vibrant Christian faith and practice. I know plenty of people both LGBT and allies who have given the church a second chance (or even a first chance!) and are now active members because of this. But the social media presence of TEC during Pride month is over the top and alienating to so many. I say all this as partnered gay man deeply involved in lay ministry. Please do not use symbols and observances born of the struggles of our community for dignity in the face of violent oppression for progressive political points.
ReplyDeleteClint, many thanks for your comment. I think we are in agreement. It is entirely possible to understand and respect the place of Pride in the context of the legal sanctions and prejudice gay people in our respective countries have experienced within living memory, while also believing that TEC's social media approach has been ridiculously excessive.
DeleteBrian.
It's hard to say that the decline of TEC is completely due to embracing values any particular group prefers or dislikes. As you suggest, Pride is a step in the direction of expressing current-day civic values. That would accord with the historic function of the major US denominations as expressing the values that enable the community to function. As you say, the reasons for embracing Pride are understandable.
ReplyDeleteThere are two points that might extend what you are offering here.
One is that Pride in the church context is a profoundly conservative project. Honouring all marriages equally is a reflection of the most conservative strands of LGBTIQ+ activism of the past century. Most LGBTIQ+ people in churches embrace a fairly conservative worldview because they want the freedom that comes with being able to live honestly. TEC has been in the vanguard of offering the space in which that hope can be made a reality.
The other is a question. Why is a steady trickle of ACNA and GAFCON affiliated parishes seeking to come into TEC? Many of these began life as church plants in the schismatic denominations and have discerned a better future in TEC. Often their leaders and the majority of the congregations are of younger generations. What is it about this borderline heretical and declining denomination that draws such congregations towards it?
To begin with, I have nowhere stated that the (catastrophic) decline of TEC is "completely" due to the embrace of progressive values. Indeed, both in this post and previously, I have said that, in view of the nature of American society, TEC must have a place for progressive values. The problem is when it is only progressive values one sees being promoted by TEC - and the contrast with Memorial Day is very instructive.
DeleteI do agree that a recognition of Pride does fall into the category of Anglicanism traditionally affirming common grace by recognising the institutions and virtues which allow society to flourish. Again, however, this is contradicted by the failure to mention Memorial Day on TEC's social media presence.
My experience - within congregations, pastorally, and with gay friends - does accord with your point that most gay people in churches tend to be quite conservative, valuing a traditional manner of life in their partnerships. I have noted, however, that this in many cases is also combined with a critique of an ideological, radical approach to their lives and relationships.
As for those former ACNA churches joining TEC, I have watched this with interest. It does not, of course, equate to the numbers who left TEC, but it is still interesting. If I was pushed for an analysis, I would tentatively suggest that this equates to 'Blue' congregations finding a home in TEC, with many 'Red' congregations having previously left TEC. I do not regard this at all as healthy for either TEC or ACNA: both need to be considerably more inclusive than they presently are.