Elton John faces 'gay church ban'

First it was the liberal Bishop of Chelmsford, John Gladwin. Now Sir Elton John is the latest to be hit by trouble over plans to visit the Caribbean island of Tobago. As we reported, Gladwin had to cancel a diocesan visit to Trinidad and Tobago after opposition from conservative Anglicans. Church leaders are now trying to ban Sir Elton from visiting in April, when he is due to play in the Plymouth music festival. According to reports running on agency wires today, it is feared that if the musician, pictured here with his partner David Furnish, even sets foot on the island his presence there might tempt local people to become gay. The Jamaican Gleaner is reporting however that the singer will be allowed to take to the stage. Apparently, a clause in Tobago's immigration laws bans self-confessed gays from entering the country, although it is thought that none has actually been turned away.

The Archdeacon for Trinidad and Tobago, the Ven Philip Isaac, said the star’s openly gay lifestyle and the fact he had a partner did not conform to ’biblical teachings’. He said Christian principles dictated that a 'man should not lie with a man'. The Anglican Archdeacon said: 'The artist is one of God’s children and while his lifestyle is questionable he needs to be ministered unto.  His visit to the island can open the country to be tempted towards pursuing his lifestyle.'

According to Karen Grattage of Barcroft Media, members of the public have been flooding local radio stations with calls following the announcement of the singer’s visit. Some said Sir Elton should be barred from performing on moral and spiritual grounds and called for him to be banned from entering Tobago because of his sexual orientation. Tobagan attorney Anand Ramlogan was consulted over the issue but confirmed there was no law criminalising sexual orientation in Trinidad and Tobago.

Comments

[Marilou Perry]

As far as, I am concerned I've never heard that being gay rubs off on other people.

[Christopher]

Well, look on the bright side, Alan. It proves the Cathedral administrators are not Jehovah's Witnesses!

[Alan Marsh]

Stranger still, that the Cathedral Church of St John the Divine in New York can be hired for birthday parties!

[Mac]

Not so strange, Chris, churches make super dance clubs. Haven't you been to the Welsh Chapel in Tottenham Court Road, London, now a club venue?

[Chris Gillibrand]

"Last November, Sir Elton declared that he wanted to ban all organised religion. It seems that the feeling has become mutual in some parts of God's vineyard.", as I said above.

Strange then that for his 60th Birthday Party, Sir Elton hired the Cathedral Church of St John the Divine in New York.

[Heredal]

"Beleive it or not some people are still offended by homosexuals- famous or otherwise."

Believe it or not, some people are offended just as much by religion, especially when the religion's believers demand the right to be prejudiced against you, when demanding immunity from persecution for oneself. But does that mean believers should be banned from travelling the world?

[Dr. Irene Lancaster FRSA]

I think the comment from Mike Homfray says it all.

When you start ridiculing parts of the Hebrew Bible, written in English, from a state of ignorance, you end up usually with Mike and not with Kate. Kate, I will ask Ruth to give you my e-mail details. Please feel free to contact me privately.

However, this is how I would answer Mike:

Thank you very much for taking an interest into how I am settling into my new home in Haifa.

These are the 10 main reasons I really like living here:

1) the beautiful view of the sea and Syria, where I try to send positive thoughts from my balcony out to our friends with the rockets up north

2) Haifans are so polite. They get up for older people on the bus. They do not get drunk.

3) The Christian Arabs are particularly delightful and are prominent in all walks of life, as well as often speaking very good English

4) The Muslim Head of the Arab-Jewish Centre at Haifa University has courteously invited me over coffee to try and obtain funding for putting on interfaith initiatives of my choice. Any suggestions for raising funds for such a worthy enterprise?

5) Unlike at Leeds and Manchester Universities, there is no censorship in operation at Haifa University.

6) I am doing all the things that I love, i.e. translating, editing, swimming, accompanying choirs, singing and blogging.

7) I am advising various religious and political bodies on matters relating to my areas of expertise

8) Although I miss my husband, the UK's first Professor of Transpersonal Psychology, he comes out as often as possible and at least I get to see my daughter here. She lives in Tel Aviv.

9) I am starting some new, exciting adult education initiatives after Pesach

10) When I arrived, the Head of the BBC Middle East Bureau here, Simon Wilson, sent me an e-mail wishing me 'Mazel Tov' on my aliyah.

And if we want an 11th reason, the Deputy British Ambassador has posted on my blog, which she said she found very informative.

[Alan Marsh]

I can't see any basic human rights being denied by anyone in this country. I do see a great deal of wildly exaggerated claims about "gay victimhood". Perhaps if they stopped attempting to coerce religious people to change their faith, religious people might have less to say about it.

[nick h]

just because elton's open gayness is supposedly accepted in various parts of the world, shouldn't give him a licence to travel anywhere without some people taking exception to it. beleive it or not some people are still offended by homosexuals- famous or otherwise.

[Heredal]

"There seems to be no need for those identifying themselves as "gay" to wear pink stars. The shouting of homosexuality from the rooftops seems sufficiently commonplace these days."

Indeed, as is the case with those shouting their religion from the rooftops these days. Too commonplace, in fact. In both cases it's a private matter, but in the case of the gay community, they are only trying to secure basic human rights being denied by religious zealots. Take the religious zealotry away, and there would be no more gay pride marches.

[Mike Homfray]

Usual pro-Zionist nonsense from Lancaster - hope you are enjoying 'Israel' and trust it will in time no longer exist outside its legitimate borders.

As for the substantive point, you couldn't make it up, could you?

[Kate]

Irene: "religious prejudice ... the fact that you don't even realize it is of more concern than your response."

Dear Irene

Forgive me if I lay out my table: I have taught for 27 years - literature and philosophy - at both grammar and third level; 'changed' to psychology and continued teaching and practice.

I have long established Jewish friendships; am an implacable, life-time 'friend' of Israel and quite widely read in Jewish history, fact and fiction.

I am also the mother of six sons, one of whom is a gay man, ergo my admiration for the inclusive and loving stance demonstrated by Orthodox, Conservative and Reform Jews on homosexuality.

All that said, I cannot, having read Heredal's first post concerning a literal Christian interpretation of the OT - at least six times - understand the nature or logic of your complaint.

Indeed the explanation you offer: "Jews do not take the Bible literally in the same way as certain Christian groups" and "the NT was written in a specific time and context and for a certain audience"; would seem to confirm, rather than disagree with, a criticism of anachronistic literalism?

I have not to date, come across your husband's book but have to hand: 'Judaism: The Basics' by Jacob Neusner, 'Gateway to Judaism' by Mordechai Becher and 'What Is a Jew? by Morris Kertzer - no help there.

PLEASE explain more fully. I ask because I have always loved the anti-PC directness of Jewish friends. I would not wish to presume 'like minds' so far as to inadvertently offend.

Finally, it is not a question of equating "vile anti-semitism and censorship of the truth with the pampering of spoilt play-boys".

It is entirely to do with the intrusion of said Christian literalism into civil law, and the basic civil rights of all law-abiding citizens to parity of respect under that law.

[Martin]

I find it deliciously ironic that after "Sir Elton" (what is it with people being knighted under their Equity names?) called for the banning of religion on the most tenuous of grounds, that there is a cleric returning the compliment. Perhaps he will be a little less quick to grace us with his "opinions" in future.

[Alan Marsh]

There seems to be no need for those identifying themselves as "gay" to wear pink stars. The shouting of homosexuality from the rooftops seems sufficiently commonplace these days.

[James Kennett]

"He said Christian principles dictated that a 'man should not lie with a man'."

In contrast, the Old Testament does not state 'a man should not lie with a child' - something that really is an 'abomination'.

Perhaps those who are trying to take the "moral high ground" would care to explain whether the Old Testament rules on sexual conduct are

(a) a message for all places and all times; or
(b) Iron Age values

[Heredal]

Dr Lancaster, should the pampered spoilt playboy sow a pink star on the sleeve of his shirt to make identification and discrimination easier, as Jean mooted in an earlier post?

Actually I have read your husband's book, some time ago. As for the rest:

1. Jews do not take the Bible literally in the same way as certain Christian groups

Well, duh!

the NT was written in a specific time and context and for a certain audience;

Well, duh! Actually it was written in many different times, but you are right about context and audience. Written by people with a specific agenda to fulfil, is what I think you are saying

Jewish views towards their Sabbath (Saturday) are far more complex, mature and sophisticated than detractors of Judaism imagine and take account of many factors;

Agreed.

Judaism believes that the Sabbath was made for 'man' and not 'man' for the Sabbath.

Fine.

But what any of that has to do with Christians banning the free movement of fellow human beings in T&Tpurely on grounds of their sexual orientation, and regardless of whether they are spoilt playboys or not, is anybody's guess.

I suspect you are sensitive about the OT as it's a Jewish book, yet Christians are inextricably bound to it, even though they only at best know 10 out of some 600+ of you mitzvod.

I recall Giles Fraser saying in the Guardian a few weeks ago during the SORs debate that the bible is equally tough on gluttony and sloth as it is on homosexuality. Will the Ven Isaac be banning fat people (especially if they are pampered playboys) from entering T&T in case they encourage locals to pig out?

No, I thought not!

[Alan Summerfield]

Tolerance for all points of view whether religious, political or sexual should be practised but those proposing opposite views to myself should accept that I also do not have to agree with them and that I should also be tolerated

[Dr. Irene Lancaster FRSA]

Actually Heredal, you're the one that was practising religious prejudice in your entire statement. And the fact that you don't even realize it is of more concern than your response.

Luckily I used to teach people like you back in the UK and dealt with them in the following way:

Jews do not take the Bible literally in the same way as certain Christian groups;

the NT was written in a specific time and context and for a certain audience;

Jewish views towards their Sabbath (Saturday) are far more complex, mature and sophisticated than detractors of Judaism imagine and take account of many factors;

Judaism believes that the Sabbath was made for 'man' and not 'man' for the Sabbath.

And no, I certainly do not equate vile anti-semitism and censorship of the truth with the pampering of spoilt play-boys.

I would like to recommend to you if you are really interested my husband's book 'The Elements of Judaism' (B.L. Lancaster). That will tell you a great deal about why the assumptions made by your posting were incorrect and well as potentially defamatory.

[Heredal]

"This could be of interest to, lets say a billion believers"

Yes, Jim, the Vatican's latest document would be of interest to millions of Catholics, so they can check on the full range of behaviours they will cheerfully ignore in their daily lives.

[Tuck Leong]

Hello. Not sure if this bit a news interest you from another part of the globe. The National Council of Churches of Singapore, representing most of the protestant churches here has called on the government to criminalize lesbians.

Primary source:
http://www.methodistmessage.com/mar2007/penalcode.html

Secondary source:
http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2007/yax-719.htm

and the following press release from the Free Community Church

for immediate release

FREE COMMUNITY CHURCH (FCC)’S RESPONSE TO
THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF CHURCHES IN SINGAPORE (NCCS)’S
FEEDBACK ON THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE PENAL CODE
_____________________________________________________________


The Free Community Church expresses shock and dismay over the National Council of Churches in Singapore’s feedback to the Ministry of Home Affairs, published in the March 2007 issue of The Methodist Message, commending the retention of S377A of the Penal Code, and further calling for a similar criminalisation of lesbians.


In particular we strongly object to the NCCS feedback in the following respects:


1. It is outrageous that an organisation, purportedly representing members of the Christian faith, is calling for the criminalisation of an entire group of people – the lesbian and gay community. The reality is that the gay and lesbian communities contribute significantly to the well-being and development of Singapore and we should allow them to live their lives in peace.


2. While as Christians we can preach our moral values, we should not seek to impose our point of view by advocating our view be made law that governs a secular state that includes non-Christians in a pluralistic society. This is tantamount to trying to impose Christian values onto non-Christians, not to mention that there is, in reality, no consensus regarding homosexuality even among Christians ourselves.


3. By its statement the NCCS undermines the very love commandments of Jesus who, at every point of his life, fought against the marginalisation, condemnation and oppression of minorities. It is amazing that similar pronouncements have not been made of divorce or adultery, against which Jesus had much more to say.


4. The NCCS view not only undermines the Singapore Constitution Article 12(1), which states “All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law”, it also undermines the Christian belief that all human beings are equally persons of self-worth created by God in God’s image.


5. The reality is that societally and globally, homosexuality is no longer viewed as unnatural by most legislatures except those that (i) have carried over the Christian ethos of the British Empire or (ii) are theocracies. Almost every secular legislature in the world no longer criminalizes homosexual acts between consenting adults. Today, homosexuality has been accepted by sociologists as a sub-culture.

In its 8 Nov 2006 press release, the Ministry of Home Affairs revealed that the approach to amending the Penal Code is, amongst others, “to update its provisions so that they remain relevant and effective in view of societal and global changes”. With this aim, the government has made the initial step in proposing to repeal S377, abolishing the crime of anal and oral sex when carried out by heterosexuals in private. NCCS’ call to further criminalise lesbians (never before included in this section of the penal code) is a retrograde step and a regressive move backwards.

To deny this, the Church neglects to take seriously its task of doing theology, being critical, constructive and contextual, re-thinking God anew in the ever-changing contexts of every generation that leads to justice for all God’s people.



16 March 2007
Free Community Church, Singapore


Contact person
Ms Susan Tang
Chairperson, FCC Council
yapsiusen@yahoo.com

[Jean]

Isn't this the sort of thing the Anglican Church signed up for when it made common cause with Akinola and his support for legislation in Nigeria making even discussion of Homosexuality illegal? To be "Windsor compliant" now means criminalising gays or even those heterosexuals who wish to retain an open mind on homosexuality.

Refusing hospitality to gays was also advocated on this blog during the SORs debate. Perhaps gays should be made to wear a pink star to make identification and discrimination easier?

[Heredal]

Dear Dr Lancaster

What a pathetic comment.

I referred to Sunday due to the take on Sabbath and Sunday in the Catholic catechism, and since the majority of Christians in any case would recognise Sunday as their Sabbath.

Let's assume I had just said "sabbath", then, and given you no grounds for a cheap shot. What would your response be to those in T&T who wish to restrict the human rights of people to freedom of movement purely on the grounds of their sexual orientation? Is there a difference between denying Elton John freedom of movement and denying Dr Köntzel being denied freedom of speech at Leeds University? Is it acceptable to practise religious prejudice on the grounds of a person's sexual orientation, but not on the grounds of their religion?

[Jim]

Ruth

Didn't you spot a major document issued by the Pope yesterday?

You could make an interesting article out of the various Catholic blog reactions to it.

This could be of interest to, lets say a billion believers?

Rather than some nonsense about a hugely wealthy and strangely rather sad homosexual and his rich superstar holiday choices.

Jim

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_ben-xvi_exh_20070222_sacramentum-caritatis_en.html

ruth replies: yes I did spot it. I reported it http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article1511305.ece
and blogged it
http://timescolumns.typepad.com/gledhill/2007/03/cherie_blair_za.html

In fact it was the last blog before this one...

[Dr. Irene Lancaster FRSA]

Your first respondant doesn't seem to know that Jesus was Jewish and therefore kept the Jewish Sabbath.

I think that we can safely take the rest of his/her comments with a pinch of salt as well, then.

[Chris Gillibrand]

PS
He further added that he wanted all the leaders of the world religions to solve their differences in a "great conclave". This would be technically difficult if he had managed to get them banned and it is not altogether clear that he would listen to them if they did, but he would want others to.

[Chris Gillibrand]

Last November, Sir Elton declared that he wanted to ban all organised religion. It seems that the feeling has become mutual in some parts of God's vineyard.

[Heredal]

What other 'biblical teachings' would the Ven Isaac require to be upheld before entering his country? Do you suppose you get checked at the airport there to see if your garments are made of two different kinds of cloth? Is he checking newly married women to see if they are virgins before their wedding night, and arranging to have them stoned to death if they aren't? Presumably no-one there goes out on a Sunday to pick up sticks either.

Good grief. What a sad world we live in.