July 23, 2019
God created man in the image of himself,
In the image of God he created him,
Male and female he created them
So it is written in the opening chapter of the Scriptures
But as we know, this is not the full truth.
Down through the centuries, in all societies both ancient and new, there has been – and continues to be – a wider gender spread than male and female. If God created one person, he created all people.
Different societies in various ages responded in very different ways to this reality, both by ways of condemnation and ways of acceptance. Regardless of cultural and religious responses, the existence of people with differing gender realities is in fact a reality.
Alan Turing was one of these people. This Englishman was prosecuted in 1952 for his relationship with another man and under English law at that time, such relationship was illegal. Rather than go to prison, Alan accepted chemical castration. Turing was consequently cast into the darkness, shut out from his work in and for society.
Two years later Alan Turing died from cyanide poisoning. While an inquest into his death determined suicide as the cause, it was also strongly argued that his death was accidental. A third proposal put his death as a state security assassination.
During World War II Alan Turing had a pivotal role in cracking coded German military messages. This enabled the Allies to counter German strategies. It has been put forward that without the work of Alan Turing the war may have continued another 2 years with a further 14 million people dead.
Turing was a mathematician, computer scientist and cryptanalyst. He is considered the father of general-purpose computing and artificial intelligence. Yet he died an outcast.
Eventually in 2009 the British Prime Minister Gordon Brown issued a public apology for the way the state had treated Turing.
In 2013 – 61 years later – Elizabeth II issued a posthumous pardon. This pardon was the stepping stone to the proclamation in 2017 of Turing’s Law which saw pardons granted to some 75,000 Englishmen who had been prosecuted for gay relationships.
The forthcoming new English Fifty-pound note will feature his photo. Alan Turing has been finally recognised and honoured as a person, defined as a contributor to society, no longer defined by his sexuality. Surely he would have appreciated just a little of such respect during his lifetime.
It was not until I was 23 that I really woke to the reality of people with differing gender realities. This came about through 2 specific experiences while I was in Melbourne in the early seventies undertaking study for priesthood as a catholic seminarian.
Regarding the first experience, I took a phone call one day from a person seeking support for CAMP. I had no idea who or what CAMP was. It took considerable time for me to realize the caller was involved with the Campaign Against Moral Persecution. Founded in 1970, this was the first gay rights activist group in Australia. Following the confused and somewhat embarrassing phone call, two of us from the seminary chose to attend a meeting hosted by a local catholic priest and organized by people who were catholic and gay/lesbian. Their purpose was to seek support and acceptance within the Christian churches.
The fundamental learning for me from the meetings was the ordinariness of these people. This may sound gratuitously condescending, however I came from a religious and cultural background that was intrinsically biased against gays and lesbians; I had never had contact with such people and was unsure what to expect. The people we met with were not defined by their sexuality/gender identity, they were defined by who they were as people. They were not “Mardi Gras people” flaunting their gender difference, they were not seeking to prove anything about themselves and their relationships; they were there as Christians seeking understanding from their church community. This, in the context of the openly hostile official stance of the churches toward gay and lesbians.
Being committed Christians, they were descendants of Abraham and sons/daughters of God. This, regardless of the fact that the official church did not accept them.
The second experience was very different. One late Friday afternoon a couple of us from the seminary happened to be in the Melbourne CBD and opted to have a beer on our way back to the seminary. Unfamiliar as we were with the local bars in Melbourne, we walked into the Woolshed on Collins Street, unaware this was one of the prime gay bars in Melbourne. Being dressed in mufti we were not recognised as seminarians; I was wearing purple flared jeans, a loose woolly jumper and sported long hair and moustache, something I could not achieve now. To the hilarity of my companion – and my great consternation – I was approached by one guy who wished to hold my hand. This resulted in our rushed exit from the Woolshed.
On a serious note, the encounter was a further awakening to a reality in life that was previously off my radar. The bar was packed to the hilt. The people ranged from expensively dressed business men complete with bowler hats, brollies and briefcases – smashing the image of the stereotyped gay person – to the more obviously effeminate-type individuals complete with jewellery, handbags and hippie-type dress. As aspiring young seminarians what was our understanding and response to the reality of gay men?
Go forward ten years. I was assigned as a catholic missionary in a provincial city of the Philippines, working mostly in rural areas among disadvantaged and oppressed farming and fishing families. On this particular day two women came to our convento and asked to meet with me. They did not present themselves as a lesbian couple, seemingly assuming I would know. Our conversation was entirely in the local Filipino dialect which has no direct equivalent of the words “husband” and “wife”, only a generic word for “spouse”. Likewise there is no direct equivalent to “he” and “she”, only a generic “that person”. It took some time of close listening to realize they were referring to each other as spouse and their dispute was with each other.
They were a couple from a small town battling to earn a living, poor as they were and with only a basic education. They were also battling to be able to live out their Christian faith. The local priest told them they were living in sin and they could not fully participate in the church unless they stopped living together. Shades of the churches world-wide.
Their dispute with each other concerned their differing responses to the rebuttal by the local priest. One of them preferred to stand and fight. The other feared eternal damnation and considered ending their relationship. Instead of arguing with each other they chose to seek a ruling from the local bishop about their status in the church and their standing with God. The bishop referred them to me, one of a number of similar referrals he had made. He told them to follow my instructions and not to report back to him.
Here we have a picture of a dysfunctional and divided church: the local priest acts as judge and jury, demanding obedience to church law without consideration of the person’s situation. The Bishop passes the buck, knowing full well what my “instructions” would be, but unable to act as a true pastor for fear of consequences. He would bring a storm upon himself should he challenge the couple to take responsibility for their decisions by granting them freedom of conscience.
The Vatican Council of 57 years ago both promised and demanded much needed reform and renewal, a radical conversion into the mind of Christ. In the years following, that movement has been hijacked by radically conservative church hierarchy led by Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI. Instead of rejuvenating church mission, ministry and message they consolidated old forms and placed law above discipleship. Within such boundaries, the primacy of conscience was dead and buried. The enlivening and challenging Gospel of Jesus was encapsulated into the New Catechism and the potential of rejuvenated liturgy traded cheaply for a reissued Order of the Mass with its return to antiquated language.
The cry of two ordinary people seeking church community in a small barrio town of Albay drifted on the wind.
Jesus had harsh words for religious leaders of his times who placed harsh burdens upon people and judged people harshly. Jesus himself sided with those judged harshly thus earning the vitriol of the learned lawmakers.
In times now, Pope Francis seeks to lead the church not through law and theology-isolated-from-life but through a radical listening to and living out of the Story of Jesus.
