Religious discourses on sexuality

The discourses regulating religion and sexuality were reconstituted during the mid-20th century, as Western campaigns for gay liberation and women’s liberation gained pace. These campaigns would contribute to a new understanding that religions were, in the main, sex negative, opposed to queer sexualities, and oppressive to women. This was cemented in the sets of pronouncements, official statements, and broader discourses that circulated from dominant religious sources. But understanding the relationship between religion and sexuality in this way was not inevitable. This section will examine dominant discourses -or what Jordan (2000) calls rhetoric - surrounding sexuality and religion and how institutional-led discourses formulated a pattern whereby religion comes to be associated with traditionalism and conservatism, with seemingly little to offer women or sexual minorities. As Foucault (1976) noted, however, discourses rarely operate singularly, and can simultaneously convey contradictory discourses. As Jordan (2000) argues, even when gay people are formally ostracised by a religious tradition, it does not mean that all available spaces within that tradition are closed off - indeed, there may be major differences between the rhetoric and practical experience.

Religious pronouncements on sexual issues constitute powerful claims. But the extent to which such statements are heeded will depend on whether the religious tradition is centralised, and how much power is accorded to those making the pronouncements. The Roman Catholic Encyclical Humanae Vitae (see Chapter 8) is underpinned by the authority of the Pope, who, because of the doctrine of papal infallibility, cannot be in error. Yet its controversy is generated as much by the extent to which it is ignored by vast numbers of Catholics (Delgado, 2015). Even in centralised traditions where there is a singular authority, or at least a clear chain of command, does not mean that religious practitioners will endorse that pronouncement, or follow through its implications in their own lives. Yet the official teaching remains, with the Roman Catholic Church being well-known for its oppositional stance to contraception.

Similarly, Brittain and McKinnon (2011) note the divisions in the Anglican Communion in the lead-up to the 1998 Lambeth Conference - a meeting of the worldwide bishops of the Communion, occurring every decade. A draft Resolution outlining that homosexuality went against scripture, as well as a call for Anglicans to offer pastoral support to queer people, provoked outcry, provoking negative reaction both from liberals and conservatives. When the Episcopal Church in the United States allowed the consecration of Gene Robinson as an openly gay bishop in 2003, this provoked further disquiet. By the 2008 Lambeth Conference, a group of conservative bishops had created a separate conference altogether, Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON), and duly boycotted Lambeth. On occasion, religious schisms are played out on a broader stage, with little consensus from the religious authorities regarding an “official” position. This was typified in the media frenzy following an altercation between the secretary of the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement and a bishop from Nigeria at the 1998 Lambeth Conference (Brown and Woodhead, 2016). The bishop, brandishing his Bible, shouted that God will punish homosexuals, and that in the Old Testament, homosexuals would be stoned to death. He tried to lay hands on the secretary to exorcise a homosexual demon, at which point the assembled journalists started to giggle. The mood of this display shifted from one of dire threat to amusement. This emphasises the fragility of public statements and pronouncements by religious authorities; they can, and do, backfire.

This incident highlights the global configurations surrounding sexuality, and how religious institutions that operate internationally exist in very different cultural contexts. In the Anglican Communion, this has led to tensions between Provinces, especially between sub-Saharan Africa and the Global North (McKinnon and Brittain, forthcoming). As already observed, the impact globalisation has on sexuality and religion is complex but can invoke particular understandings of homosexuality as something inherently Western, and therefore seemingly at odds with the national values of a given country (Boellstorff, 2012). These interplays are also contextually framed, for as McKinnon (2017) notes, within the context of sub-Saharan Africa where conservative Pentecostal churches gain popularity, the Anglican Church becomes negatively perceived as the “gay church”, and in response, a traditionalist line is perpetuated. Global alliances have been forged between conservative American Anglicans and Global South church leaders, but this also creates tensions within the Global South, as some oppose the way that sexuality issues come to dominate the debate instead of other issues such as poverty and disease prevention (McKinnon and Brittain, forthcoming).