It seems the Generall Assembly of the Church of Scotland has finally accepted gay clergy.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/23/church-of-scotland-gay-lesbian-ministershttp://www.heraldscotland.com/church-of-scotland-general-assembly-upholds-appointment-of-gay-minister-1.910855http://creideamh.blogspot.com/2009/04/church-of-scotland-general-assembly.htmlFor those that might not understand the significance of this, and with the greatest respect, I suspect most won't, even those in Scotland, some background might be useful.
As most will know, Scotland entered into a political union with England and Wales in 1707. The two Parliments were unitied, sitting, rather sensibly, in London.
Scotland remained, essentially a separate state. It retained its legal system, its education system, more importantly, especially for the time, its established church.
Americans probably won't understand the concept of an established church but it has enormous historical importance. It was essentially, the method of worship, recognised by the state. Most European countries placed few real restrictions onto non-established churches, apart from the Roman Catholic church in protestant countries. This was because the RCC was controlled from Rome. The Popes there maintained a claim to control the doctrine and worship in all churches. The Protestants refused to acknowlege the RCC and especially its effective veto on measures which it decreed. Successive Popes continue to behave in a petty, intransigent and obstructive manner, even encouraging wars, in an effort to reassert their authority.
The Church of Scotland is based upon the teachings of Knox and Calvin, two of the four principal voices in the reformatoin revolution. Knox, in particular, had an approach of congregational management supervised by committies of worthies through presbitries and a central assembly. Hence the name, Presbitrian.
The established church in England and Wales is epicopalian. This is distinct from presbitarian in that doctrine and worship were managed by clergy, structured in a hierarchal system. This was the model favoured by Luther of course.
Established churches were important as the principal bridge between ordinary people and the aristocries which managed the state.
Now, following the union, the effective government of Scotland was managed by an appointee from the current London government. A Scottish secretary. He was, in effect, akin to a governer general in the colonies, though of course, working within the restrictions of the established law courts. Scottish MPs were full and equal members of Parliment of course, but their importance in swaying national political opinion and adding to parlimentary lobby votes was more important than the relitively petty problems of Scots law.
What this meant was that the CofS became the principal representitive of daily life in Scotland, in matters of government. This remained until 1999 and the establishment of democratic government in Scotland.
In 1972, I was 16 years old and in a pretty poor state, physically and emotionally, because of a number of personal problems. Eventually, after approaching my GP I was admitted to a department of the psychiatric hospital in Edinburgh, dealing with adolescents. The hospital was called the Royal Edinburgh Hospital in Morningside and the department I was admitted into was called the Young People's Unit, (YPU).
The YPU took referrals from the Scottish childrens courts, which were nominally informal meetings called Children's Panels and from GPs.
A quick word about the Children's Panels. These were set up as an alternative to the formality of the courts system for young people. They are supervised by legal advisers, lay people including representives of the CofS and social workers. Children are referred to them, either after being charged with criminal offenses, by schools, by social workers and the police. In adition, children could be referred because of behavoural problems or domestic breakdown.
The Children's Panel has powers to make recommendations to referral in a number of areas, most often forms of supervision but also an Assessment centre and hospital where necessary.
The assessment centres were intended to be for residential assessment. Children admiting criminal behaviour, domestic breakdown including placement of older children, for example when parent have died and no relatives are available. In practice, because of financial limitations, the majority of staff are unqualifed with poor morale. So these are violent polaces where the weak are subjected to daily beatings by stronger children.
A small number of young people could be referred to hoapitals and most took it. In the case of the YPU, admissions were decided by the staff. The majority of patients were young girls, about 10 to 15 usually, the rest made up of young boys, usually between 1 and 3 though for short periods, there were 5.
Now officially, the purpose of the YPU was to create a safe environment for young people to meet daily, in group therapy sessions to discuss their problems and so reform their behaviour. In practice the purpose of the YPU was, intil the late 80s, to get the young people to admit to having been sexually abused by their parents and to treat young boys who were showing tendencies of being homosexual.
When I was first admitted, there were two other boys, one had been referred by the panel, I and the other were voluntary. Of the girls, there were 10, all but 1 had been referred by the panel.
The environment was set up to ensure that the girls could act as potential interest to the boys, while the boys were encouraged to take on a role of alpha male. Sexual contact while not encouraged, was made clearly available by the proxmity of the male and female dormatories, the opportunities for privacy and the policy of the staff to remain in the nursing office during the day or their sleeping quarters at night. There would only be a single member of staff at night.
Children who admitted to having been sexually abused by parents were generally given a lot of support. These were mostly girls. Those that refused, mostly the boys, tended to be labeled as obscructive, uncooperative.
Between 1971 and 1975, every boy admitted was subsequenctly removed, often by force after being accused of being uncooperative. Many, possibly most of these boys was gay and or effininate. Most went on to living on the street, selling themselves and many killed themselves.
This underlying policy was from the Cofs, so opposed was it to homosexuality.
The YPU, the courts, the Scottish legal system, the establish Scottish church was prepared to blackmale young girls to act as potential whores. they were equally quite happy that young boys were killing themselves or selling themselves on the streets. This rather than accepting the reality that some boys might be gay. Or worse, the unthinkable, that they may be transgender.
Homosexuality was eventually legalised in Scotland in 1981. Now, it has recognised that its clergy can legitmately be gay.
One wonders how much longer it will be before the CofS notices that it's pews are actually empty and how much longer after that, until it realises that, with the advent of democracy in Scotland it doesn't matter?
