Many of the readers of SurvivingChurch will know of the story of Lizzie Lowe. This 14-year-old devout Christian teenager committed suicide over three years ago in Manchester. At her inquest it transpired that she was suffering from a deep conflict over her sexual identity. She believed that she was a lesbian but could not square this with her faith or share it with her parents. They were also devout Christians. What followed was a profound soul-searching by the congregation of St James Didsbury where she was a member. With the help of the organisation OneBodyOneFaith, the church has released a video in two parts for general release. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G51jf2sGts8&t=5s This tells Lizzie’s story and the outcome after her death. The well-known Scottish hymn writer and lecturer, John Bell, was also caught up in the story. He interviews the Vicar Nick Bundock about the events of Lizzie’s death. Nick then in the second video interviews John himself about his story of coming out as gay after he listened to a broadcast by Nick on Lizzie’s tragic death.
This blog post is not going to tackle the vexed question about the incompatibility of the gay identity and conservative Christian teaching. No doubt Lizzie had picked up negative comments from somewhere in her church about the evils of a gay life-style. But according to Nick, the Vicar, the subject had been rarely raised within the congregation. He, like possibly a majority of Anglican clergy, preferred not to raise the issue on the grounds that it was too divisive. Thus, there was almost an environment of secrecy around the topic and on the issues of sexuality in general. Lizzie’s death forced the church to confront these attitudes very forcibly.
The three years since Lizzie’s death and the inquest that followed it have resulted in an enormous amount of soul-searching by the entire congregation. This is spoken about in the first of the two videos which I hope my readers will watch. The end result of this process was that the Vicar and his congregation decided they needed to make the church a place of welcome for sexual minorities and others who, in various ways, found themselves effectively excluded by other churches. The fact that they were becoming a church which sought to include everyone meant that some members felt they had no option but to leave. The old boundaries of certainty were being, in their eyes, eroded. Nick spoke of the way that although some had left, others had arrived no doubt attracted this policy of inclusion. The congregation officially adopted the statement of Inclusive Church which seeks to welcome all. These newcomers numbered not only members of the LGBT community but also individuals with learning difficulties and members of racial minorities. Lizzie’s death had caused a revolution in attitudes as well as a transformation in the entire congregation. We can compare this with the revolution that I recently wrote about at the Kentucky Baptist Church of Immanuel.
The story of the legacy of Lizzie’s tragic death does not end there since the church’s decision to be inclusive has attracted the attention of other congregations across the UK and abroad. The point which I feel needs flagging up and is of relevance to our own concerns is the issue of secrecy. These are the aspects of church life that are never discussed because there is a conspiracy of silence around them. Sexuality is certainly one area and few people will find it comfortable to discuss their sexuality even when, by doing so, they can help others face up to this area of identity in themselves. Embarrassment and awkwardness will be quite difficult to manage. Mainstream denominational churches have little appetite for provoking such discomfort among their members. But there is another area of vulnerability which, alongside sexuality, is of concern to every single person but is seldom discussed or opened up. This is the topic of power and especially the dynamics of power within a congregation. Because everyone is in some way caught up in the power dynamics of a congregation it is almost impossible to discuss it with objectivity. As with a discussion on sexuality, power is a threatening topic and thus has to be avoided at all costs. Few people have the energy to challenge abuses of power even when they are a major cause of unhappiness in a congregation. Secrets sometimes have to be confronted and dealt with.
Nick Bundock spoke about the opening-up and the new freedom to discuss sensitive issues that was taking place since they had become an inclusive church. They were now free to welcome not just minority groups but also minority opinions. They had in other words shifted from being a church that pretended to hold a single perspective on teaching and moral guidance to a church which embraced diversity and openness. From the perspective of this blog it would mean that they could enter the still more vulnerable area of understanding power in the congregation – the way it is used and the way that it is experienced.
The tragic death of a teenage girl who, because of secrecy and misunderstanding believed she was in some way damned, may have helped to begin a small revolution in many churches. It is not just that the vitriolic homophobic rhetoric across many conservative churches may be blunted by Lizzie’s story, but also that some churches will follow Nick Bundock’s church and create for themselves a new openness, inclusivity and a readiness to talk about hitherto closed topics. Those who approach such churches will discover that there is in these churches a ministry of welcome that is one of good news. The good news is that God accepts and welcomes all humanity. He does not reject people because they are different or do not fit the stereotype of respectability. Our good news is that all are welcome to be part of the feast of the kingdom of God. Joining in that feast we find that we are growing in love, tolerance and openness.
I think this makes some very important points about the issues of secrecy and power dynamics within congregations. Sadly, it seems to have taken the tragedy of Lizzie’s suicide for one congregation to realise this and I hope this story becomes much better known and reflected upon by other congregations and their leaders.
Whilst C of E bishops are so caught up in secrecy and abuse of power themselves it seems unlikely that many of them will be engaging with the implications of this, but perhaps – somehow – parish priests could be encouraged to do so.
You highlight the very important point that it wasn’t so much vocal opposition to the idea of being gay that was the determining feature of this tragic situation, but rather the silence around the topic. In the video Nick Bundock make the statement that Lizzie Lowe was not able ‘to bring her Christianity and sexuality into a conversation.’
Lizzie is a tragedy of enormous proportions, especially to her family. But misunderstandings about sex are common, and I don’t know the answer. In my day, the girl’s magazines said sex hurt! I just decided not to get married! We shouldn’t make the mistake of talking only about gay sex.
It can do.
I agree that the great difficulty in the Church has been the ability to talk freely about sexual matters and to some extent I understand this because it is seen as the personal garden of two people (but more than two is coming now that the bipartisan nature of gender has been removed). The move to convert society and bring general acceptance of homosexuality has been fought on different lines which has meant opposing forces, like jousting knights, have charged past each other but never come face to face on the same ground.
The LGBT side has fought fiercely on the abstract social field of people, relationships and love with the aim of getting a comparison with racism, namely people being disliked or hated because they were different from the norm.
The traditional side has fought on the sexual practice side of things looking at the much more delicate area of what Stephen Fry spoke of as being “slippery between the sheets”
Stones were thrown over the wall with the LGBT ones hitting more heads, whilst the Traditional stones were taken to the Police Station of public opinion as deserving arrest.
Words have been garnered like “inclusion” to shine a beam of warmth around the LGBT side and “unbiblical” which only served to isolate the traditionalist side.
We have yet to meet in a genuine middle ground to assess the arguments and look at the genuine care of people with all backgrounds of sexual disharmony in our lives.
The Revoice Event next month in America is another attempt at this but the long list of responses to Warren Throckmorton’s blog (https://www.wthrockmorton.com/2018/06/03/revoice-and-again-i-say-revoice/ ) shows that the argument is not nearly over. But Matt’s first comment on the blog is well forth reading from the predicament of another person caught up in the painful subject.
Lord have mercy
Christ have mercy
Please remember that my main point was not about the LGBT debate but about secrecy and not talking about things. It was the secrecy and lack of openness that caused Lizzie to take her life. The healing is taking place because people are eschewing secrecy and now opening up. They may still disagree but they are not avoiding areas of conflict. Human beings will always disagree. Let us get over it! They can still love each other.
This secrecy is built into our system – the lectionary deliberately omits many Bible passages which could be regarded as upsetting or controversial. This in turn means that those subjects become much more difficult to preach on, if your church follows the lectionary – and most do. I once complained about this to the head of our diocesan worship committee and he replied, ‘We don’t want to hear THAT in church!’ Which is odd, because it’s the stuff of people’s lives. And they tune into Netflix or TV and watch films which portray just these situations.
I once used the story of David & Jonathan to preach about homosexuality, because Jeffrey John having been offered a bishopric and then having the offer rescinded was in the news. I was quite nervous tackling it in a sermon because I didn’t know how the congregation would react, but they were pleased and relieved that I had. At the same church, which was on a really tough estate, I did a series on ‘The Banned Bible’ – some lurid stories from Judges and the lessons that could be learned from them.
It proved very difficult to do the same when I went to a more middle class parish, however, because they insisted on using the lectionary readings. As they were all printed out (not by me) and the readings were done by lay people it was too hard to change.
I’m not sure I’ve ever preached a sermon on the good and bad uses of power, and I’m wondering whether I should have. As you say, Stephen, it would be difficult to do that without appearing to be pointing the finger at individuals. But if we were more open about a lot of other topics, it would certainly help.
There are opportunities for preaching because the use and abuse of power is at the heart of the Gospel. Mark 10.42-44 is in the lectionary and a classic starting point which could be used. Especially the heavy irony with which Jesus mentions the Gentile norms, and adds “but it is not so among you” – a perfect opener for questioning problems in the church.
I once knew a Bishop who reckoned we should preach on Revelation because other people did, and that gave the congregations the wrong idea. He meant Moonies and Witnesses. It’s not a bad principle. Teach the hard stuff or people will learn their theology behind the bicycle sheds!
I like the lectionary but it can be patchwork quilt in its teaching and personally my background is to preach systematically through the Bible varying Old and New Testament but not missing out the difficult bits. When was the last time you heard a sermon on the imprecatory Psalms for example? The whole counsel of God for the whole people of God is the pattern I have always thought best.
On the silence issue those on the LGBT supportive side in the Church will not realise the strong pressure to remain silent on these matters that the traditional Church feels. I won’t say it is bullying but at times it feels akin to it.
The real issue is what is right and how to support people who feel conflicted in their inner beings on the subject. “It’s all right, you don’t need to hold back” may be one answer but to imagine it is the be-all and end-all of the subject is far from the truth.
Goodpoint, wayfarer, I have of course preached on that text. But people do assume that it refers to leaders – which it does. We all have some power, somewhere, which can be used for good or evil. Which is why we need to be talking about bullying, coercion, rape, othering, and all kinds of abuses of power.
Janet, I’ve read much more about it in books than I’ve heard in sermons! Perhaps this is a call to me to see how I can find the right ways to say more about this when I preach.
Yes, we have to work hard to find ways to preach more on topics that matter to people and that they talk about. I’m fortunate in that I’m able to preach extempore, and therefore on occasion have been able to change my sermon at the last minute when something happened that needed comment.
But the Church’s structures sadly don’t help us to find ways to talk about difficult issues. It takes effort and creativity.
Even something like atonement or the Trinity! I don’t think I’ve ever heard a sermon that doesn’t sound like God wants to kill someone and doesn’t care who!
Oh dear, you really have been going to the wrong churches! Or maybe you heard some of my sermons from a couple of decades ago – I wince to think of some of them now.
You’re right, we should be able to talk honestly about faith, doubt, the Creeds etc. I was a curate in a big charismatic church where we had some full-on, joy-filled, ever-victorious Christians – and also some sensitive souls, and people who had tragic events in their lives. I had my first ‘dark night of the soul’ when there, and it wasn’t easy. I wrote a book, ‘To Be Honest’, about how we can and should be real with God. It didn’t sell of course.
And just for completeness, I’ve never heard a sermon about the hard bits about homosexuality, either. I worked it out for myself eventually. But preachers go on about love, and not treating people badly, which is fine. But if you’ve had lessons based on the nasty texts in the past, you need to learn how all that can be squared with a loving God and a 21st century perspective. Otherwise it tends to appear that Christianity has nothing to say about modern society and changes in scientific understanding. Like people who are born intersex for example. How does that fit with the Bible saying there’s only male and female? If we don’t tackle that, people just say, “yeah, well that’s not true for a start”, and reject us completely. I’m not looking for straight answers, by the way! I think I could do such a sermon. And I have tackled the Trinity and the atonement! Not necessarily brilliantly mind! But why are there so few people who do?
Daft question. I was asked in an interview whether I had ever experienced a dark night of the soul. I think my jaw dropped. I’m not the sort of person who should take up poker! It seemed rather a Gothic turn of phrase to be used straight, and I floundered. I think my interlocutor thought I was dodging the issue. But what did she mean? Clinical depression? Doubts? There was no context, just out of the blue. What would you think was meant, Janet?
‘Dark night of the soul’ is a term in common use among contemplatives and those inclined to the more mystical side of Christianity. I think it may have been coined by St. John of the Cross – I first encountered the term when reading the life of St. Teresa of Avila who also had them and received advice from John. As I understand it, it refers to a time when God seems very distant, prayers aren’t answered, there’s no sense of God’s presence, and the means of grace which we’ve previously treasured seem to lose their meaning o rampant for us. Doubts might well be a feature. It might accompany, or be accompanied by, a clinical depression, but not necessarily.
Though a ‘dark night’ feels like a desert experience, the consensus is that it’s actually a time of growth – the winter when we put our roots further down and make buds for next year, to use a gardening analogy. That was my experience.
Thanks for that. I knew it was St. John of the Cross, but I assumed that he was trying to describe clinical depression. I never knew what a modern interpretation might be. That still leaves me wondering what my interviewer meant! And it’s a big assumption that everyone would know! Weird question! Well, I flunked it and waffled! Should have asked her what she meant!
I have always heard that described as spiritual drought. So I was a bit confused.
‘Spiritual drought’ describes it very well.
How did you disable autocorrect? That does sound clever.
I’ve filled in the questionnaire once so far, but will do more.
You need to find a menu and go to settings. I didn’t know that the spots on the right and the lines on the left give you menus! But they do. And on a tablet, scroll down from the top. A wiggly red line for spelling, and blue for grammar are useful to warn you, but I don’t miss auto.
I’m sure I didn’t mean ‘o rampant’, but I’m not sure now what I dd mean! Autocorrect is a real nuisance, it changes words when you’ve already moved on.
It does. I disabled mine. Which I thought was pretty clever!
Oh, and I’ve done three entries of the questionnaire. More to follow.
Stephen, the title and some of the reporting on this blog, and other Christian blogs, about Lizzie Lowe makes me uneasy. Have you seen the Samaritans’ guidelines on reporting about suicide? These are evidence-based and aimed at preventing further harm. So, for instance:
“Be careful not to promote the idea that suicide achieves results.
For example, that, as a result of someone taking their own life, a bully was exposed or made to apologise. ….
Some suicides attract intense media scrutiny. However, where possible, refrain from positioning a story too prominently, for example on a front page or as a lead bulletin, as this may unduly influence vulnerable people.
Take extra care with the selection and placement of imagery linked to a report about suicide.
For example, question if a large or prominently placed picture of the person who has died is necessary.
Try to avoid repeated use of images of a deceased person, for example in online galleries…..
Be wary of over-emphasising community expressions of grief.
Doing so may suggest that people are honouring the suicidal behaviour rather than mourning a death.
Reporting suicide as a tragic waste and an avoidable loss is more beneficial in preventing further deaths…..
Over-simplification of the causes or perceived ‘triggers’ for a suicide can be misleading and is unlikely to reflect accurately the complexity of suicide.
For example, avoid the suggestion that a single incident, such as loss of a job, relationship breakdown or bereavement, was the cause.
It is important not to brush over the complex realities of suicide and its devastating impact on those left behind…..
Remember that there is a risk of imitational behaviour due to ‘over-identification’.
Vulnerable individuals may identify with a person who has died, or with the circumstances in which a person took their own life.“
You can read the whole thing here:
https://www.samaritans.org/media-centre/media-guidelines-reporting-suicide/best-practice-suicide-reporting-tips
I think the things I am particularly wary of is the interpretation that Lizzie’s suicide had a single cause, and that it was an understandable if tragic response to a facet of her life, and that she became a tragic heroine who “transformed” her community by it. I think this is a dangerous message to give out to others in similar situations.
Movingon – Thanks for adding this wise note; suicide is a delicate area to traverse without specialist training. In my last town a young girl committed suicide by hanging herself and a few days later her fiance repeated the act on the same tree. The schools were aware that some young people had begun to talk in terms of a tragic/romantic way of being together for ever and worked hard to make sure this wasn’t the memory that was to remain. The police and authorities were so concerned that they had the tree cut down. Truly the causes of suicide are never clear-cut.