Sexual bigotry

The Episcopal Church’s Presiding Bishop has announced that the Rev. Canon Mary Glasspool has received the consents necessary for consecration as a bishop. She will become the first openly lesbian bishop. A relative handful of voices have objected but the response, especially in the Episcopal Church, has been as muted as I would expect. Most of those who find the move objectionable have either exited the Episcopal Church or decided to accept the reality of diversity.

Meanwhile, the Archbishop of Canterbury’s response was equally predictable and sadly out of touch with the apparent status of conflict over this issue in the Anglican Communion. Archbishop Williams’ office termed the decision to consecrate Glasspool as a bishop “regrettable,” fearing the consequences that the move would have for Anglican unity. (Ruth Gledhill, “Dr Rowan Williams criticises election of lesbian bishop, Mary Glasspool,” Times Online, March 19, 2010) Anglican unity shattered when the Nigerian bishops and others declared themselves out of communion, refusing to attend Lambeth 2008. Unless the Archbishop has privileged information about ultimatums provinces have issued regarding their actions should another province consecrate an openly gay bishop, any additional strain this places on the bonds of Anglican unity seems likely to be small. Those who define this as a litmus test of Christianity can no more tolerate one openly gay bishop living in a same sex committed relationship than they can tolerate two such bishops.

Meanwhile, sexual bigotry continues to live on in secular organizations. A retired U.S. Marine Corps general, John Sheehan, blames the historic United Nations failure to protect the Bosnian “safe haven” of Srebrenica on the fact that the Dutch forces seconded to the U.N. included openly gay soldiers. The Dutch remained embarrassed by the fact that their 400 peacekeepers could not prevent the murder of 8000 Muslim men and boys. (Phillippe Naughton, “Dutch outrage as US general blames gay soldiers for Srebrenica,” Times Online, March 19, 2010)

Having served with Dutch Navy personnel after they unionized and allowed openly gay personnel to serve, I know that those changes in no way reduced their professionalism or fighting capacity. The situation in Bosnia was far more complex and the relative handful of peacekeepers was tragically not in a position to stop the slaughter. My perspective on the Dutch Navy includes several lengthy conversations with a Dutch Vice Admiral whose next posting was as the Chief of Naval Operations for the Royal Dutch Navy.

Sheehan’s argument implies that using the military as an instrument of social change undercuts warfighting effectiveness. One must therefore ask: Did racial integration reduce the fighting effectiveness of the U.S. military? I suspect that both General Colin Powell, the forcer Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Barack Obama, the current Commander in Chief, would strongly disagree with that assessment.

On a different note, the first woman to command a U.S. Navy guided missile frigate, Captain Holly Graf, has been relieved for cause. (Michael Evans, “Captain Holly Graf faces ignominious end to her fast-track US Navy career,” Times Online, March 20, 2010) Questions invariably arise whether CAPT Graf was selected for command precisely because people expected her to fail, thereby proving that women do not make good warriors. That certainly happens in the business world, as a recent article about Erin Callan, former Chief Financial Officer of Lehman Brothers, suggests (Patricia Sellers, “The Fall of a Wall Street Highflier,” Fortune, March 22, 2010, pp. 140-148).

Proving such allegations is exceptionally difficult. Yet during my years of active duty I repeatedly observed women assigned to positions without having the credentials or experience that the Navy would require of a man filling the same billet. Needless to say, many of those women ran into trouble on the job, fueling talk that women were inherently unsuited for that type of role in a combat organization.

Neither the Church not the military is part of the sex industry. Gender and gender orientation are irrelevant. God created us, male and female, straight and gay. Anyone whom God created is worthy of dignity and respect. Ironically, even as senior military personnel fight a losing battle against gender equality and the full and open inclusion of gays in the military, those issues have ceased to be issues for the vast majority of junior military personnel. Times have changed.

Similarly, the vast majority of people who attend worship don’t care about the gender or gender orientation of the person leading the service. They do care that the leader loves them, appropriately. They want to know about God, not the leader’s personal intimate relationships. Furthermore, all faith communities should be safe places for all attendees. The same rules that keep a community safe from inappropriate heterosexual conduct will keep the community safe from inappropriate homosexual conduct.