Session 7 – Committed Relationships

The brief period of silence before this wider YMG session was strewn with ministry, something that is not typical of this space that tends to remain silent, for people to ensure that they are attendng with hearts and minds prepared. This ministry, although well meaning, was not helpful for myself at least, as I use this space for the purpose of ensuring that I do have my heart and mind prepared.
This blog will have a paragraph for each speaker, hence covering everything adequately.

The committed relationships session was not a formal session, but instead more of an information group. It was certainly that – informative. It focused on many different sorts of committed relationship, both gay and straight. Present for this session were the interfaith visitors.

The first speaker was a lesbian woman, who has been in a committed relationship with her partner, and this has been held throughout in the presence of Quakerism. At times during this experience she felt very welcomed, yet at other times she felt sidelined or invisible, not having the full support of the meeting she was a member of. Throughout this time she had a painful awareness of never being able to have a Quaker wedding, yet she entered instead a civil partnership, celebrating this at a Meeting for Worship. She felt that she had as typical Quaker wedding as possible, but it was not made under the formal care of the meeting, and the committment was only discussed briefly in the newsletter.
She felt that the booklet on the Quaker Wedding was homophobic, heteronormative as it was, so wrote and produced her own, after she felt frustrated with the slowness of Quakers.
She felt that she had had supportive and encouraging personal treatment, but that the discrimination in the Society of Friends was a structural issue and that there was no corporate path for same sex partnerships. She felt that this issue wasn’t difficult, and that the society needed to stand up for everyone and practice what it preaches.

The next speaker was male, a gay man who was married to his partner. He felt that they had been totally welcomed as a gay couple, and that slowly they had gone through milestones to reach a sense of marriage themselves, getting a dog, putting both their names on house deeds, getting joint wills.They had considered getting a ceremony with no legal backing, but this hadn’t felt right for them. Following this they were approved as adoptive parents, changing their surnames to be the same, as only one of them couldd be the legal parent, and they had no reason to want to make this obvious, they were both dads.They adopted a 6 year old girl and her five year old brother, and lived as a nuclear family.
To them, a civil partnership would not be quite legal or right, so they instead married in a Canadian Quaker Meeting, and returned to their local meeting as a married couple. Following this they felt their relationship haad been brought before God.

The third couple were a straight married couple, both of whom were on their second marriage, having been previously bereaved. For both of them, they had had civil ceremonies before, and they felt that this time they wanted a Quaker wedding, knowing that they wanted to make the lifelong committment that was marriage. They enjoyed having a Quaker wedding because it felt special, and was a spiritually prompted declaration, so long as they both on earth shall live.

Chastity was the only option for gay peple,as they coupldnt marry and es outside marriage was seen as sinful
The final couple to speak stood together, a gay male couple who had just celebrated having met twenty years before. The first partner spoke of his struggles in coming out. He had been brought up as a Roman Catholic, and had entered a monastry, then later the priesthood in attempts to control a sexuality he had felt was abhorrent and abnormal, as with thee teachings of his church. He had felt that celibacy was the only appropriate choice, but this hadn’t worked for him, and he had had anonymous sexual encounters that had felt disgusting and sinful, hurting him. He then got married, but the marriage broke down, hurting his wife, because he had been unable to be honest with himself.
His partner had been brought up in the church also, but had drifted away as a teenager, having a jaundiced view of religion, and having realised early on that he was gay.
Their relationship developed against a background of negativity, and they were both aware that it was risky to be gay, but it was a decision they made consciously, and were glad to have had supportive neighbours, and no abuse from them, so that the times when they did face discrimination were rare, rather than being the norm. The recent introduction of legal near-equality was productive. They considered a civil partnership, and concluded that although to some it was a second class marriage, they went ahead for the legal protection that it offered. Both partners are Quakers, one having joined the Quaker meeting because it offered acceptance for gay relationships. When they affirmed their marriage in a Quaker meeting, the first time this had been done in Manchester, they had full-hearted support. They wished to end their lecture reminding people that their relationship was often private, and that there was nothing exceptional or exotic about loving each other, and that it was familiar and ordinary. They still felt that their marriage was made second class however.

“One is either equal or one is not”

Miranda Chadkirk, JYM

Advertisement