And he said yes

Nearly two years is rather long for an update.  Suffused with energy from the initial Pitlochry Cascade conversation (discussed here), my intention to continue blogging was sincere but the next steps in the process took longer then I anticipated, other things got in the way, energy flagged and so on and so on.  Two events though, linked as you'll see in due course have, finally, inspired this second post.

Firstly though, a short update on the Cascade process and ensuing events in the Scottish Episcopal Church (SEC).  As envisaged, the conversations did cascade into the SEC Dioceses. It is fair to acknowledge there were different experiences overall of the process and strong divisions about its efficacy and appropriateness.  I only comment on my experience which was - almost wholly - positive.

Ultimately, I was involved in four further conversations. At their best, there was a breath-taking and, in language I'm not prone to using, Spirit-inspired willingness to be open, honest and vulnerable. Many conversations were extremely emotionally charged underpinned by a deeply sincere listening - whatever the perspective being articulated - allied to a genuine desire truly to understand what that meant for the individual speaking and discern what it might mean for the SEC in Scotland at this stage of the 21st Century. That doesn't mean that challenging, uncomfortable - even painful - things weren't said, they were. Some contributions were difficult to hear and, I daresay, to articulate. The process left me with three observations:

• Prior to engaging in the conversations, somewhere deep down, I probably thought the division was between a group with an inherent characteristic (LGBTI people) and a group who thought in a particular way that excluded them. Conversation would help 'them' understand better and, in the spirit of rational discourse, their 'thinking' would, hopefully, change. Post conversation, I sense something much more complex.  The strong identity I feel, informed by my history, my sexual orientation, my spirituality – in other words, all that makes me, me – I absolutely saw reflected in those who perceive this issue differently. In short, their perspective was as intrinsic, as important and as emotional a part of who they are as mine is of who I am. And however difficult it might have been at times to hear that perspective, I am truly grateful to everyone who was willing to share it with me.
   
• That however much I listened, the chances I would hear a perspective, however sensitively articulated, that would make me review my sexual orientation or change my perspective on same sex marriage were slim to the point of non-existence. This troubled me as if I couldn't offer that openness to the possibility of change, how could I genuinely expect it of someone who saw the issue differently? I can't say I ever resolved that although interestingly, during one conversation, someone who – as I understand it – does perceive this issue differently to me, was the person who clarified something I had struggled to articulate about what it was that I valued so much about getting married in church. It is, of course, that God will be there.
   
• I was very interested by the number of conversations that quickly moved from issues of sexual orientation to issues of gender identity.  My strong sense was, whatever the Church's view, many of those I spoke with have resolved the issue of sexual orientation for themselves and moved on.

So, what of the Church's view? At the SEC's General Synod (in effect, its legislative body) in 2015, there was discussion of a number of options which resulted in agreement to remove an explicit reference within the SEC canons (the rules of the Church) to marriage being between a man and a woman (a record of the discussion is contained in this document  (pdf) starting at page 45). As I understand it, the aim is to achieve a situation where SEC churches and ministers who wish to offer same-sex marriages may but none must. If this change is endorsed at the next two Synod meetings (this year and next) then from later 2017, churches within the SEC will be able to offer same-sex marriage in Church.

Perhaps not surprisingly, talking about marriage in the abstract led me to thinking about it practically. This year, my partner and I have been together for ten years which seemed an auspicious time to think about such things and when I realised this year's St John's Choir annual party was scheduled for ten years to the day since we got together, a plan began to form. The party centres around a cabaret where choir members perform pieces which over the years have ranged between music and spoken word, vocal and instrumental, the sacred and the extremely profane. So with the aid of a certain Mr Sondheim and this piece in particular, I wove my proposal into the evening.  And he said yes.

It was lovely to be able to share this with a group of people who mean a great deal to both of us. Their and many others' subsequent affirmation both within the Church and outwith has been been humbling and heart-warming in equal measure. If all goes well with the Canonical process, I hope the scene I described in my first post will be a real possibility for September 2017 where another fortuitous date alignment (a significant birthday in this instance) suggests a possible date. There *might* already be a provisional booking in the Church diary.

And there has been a second, and germane, yes. A few months ago, completely out of the blue, I was asked if I would represent the Scottish Episcopal Church at this year's meeting of the Anglican Consultative Council. Every three years or so, the ACC brings together representatives from all of the provinces that make up the world-wide Anglican Communion and is formally one of its four 'instruments of communion' (the other three being the Lambeth Conference, the Primates' meeting and the Archbishop of Canterbury).

I felt - and still feel - very honoured to be asked all the more so since being commissioned at a service today at the Cathedral of the Isles on Cumbrae. Nonetheless, as with involvement in the Cascade process, I found I needed to think before agreeing. The theme for this year's ACC which takes place in Lusaka, Zambia is Intentional Discipleship in a world of difference. Issues of human sexuality are not formally on the agenda but they will, at the very least, provide a backdrop.

As a result of the most recent Primates' meeting, the Episcopal Church in the US (TEC), which has changed its Canons to permit same-sex marriage, has had its participation in the Anglican Communion restricted (point 7 of this statement). Some are construing this as precluding TEC's attendance at the ACC and three provinces have indicated so far that they will not attend if TEC does. If the Scottish Episcopal Church continues on its current trajectory, it's reasonable to assume it will be subject to similar restrictions in time.

There is also the not insignificant factor that in Zambia, 'homosexual acts' are illegal and reported government attitudes are hostile. I find myself reflecting on some of the dynamics referenced in my first post and also superbly articulated in this blog by Kieran Fenby-Hulse who both I and my partner follow on Twitter. However, apprehensions aside, after some deliberation, prayer and discussion with valued colleagues, I ultimately concluded yes and head to Lusaka with the following hopes; that:

• through my participation in the ACC I can do full justice to the SEC which though small, is a province blessed with great richness and diversity
• I listen, learn and make new friends, both in ways I might expect and ways I don't
• where there are points of disagreement or tension I can approach these with honesty, courage, integrity and love
• the meeting as a whole brings people together more than it divides them and that proves true for the Anglican Communion as a whole.

Dependent on whatever social media policy is adopted, I hope to report on the meeting as it progresses and look forward to a memorable, life-enhancing new experience.