The way forward is for leaders at all levels within the denominations to take their pastoral responsibility, writes the Riksförbundet's EKHO chairman Robin Paulonen due to the latest revelations about congregations that want to "convert" LGBTQ people.
Another desperate email from an anonymous address in my inbox. This time it is about how a love has gone out of time and that no one in the congregation can find out, because the leader of the congregation has expressed homophobia on several occasions.
All of this spring's debates about LGBTQ people's living conditions and the right to believe have made visible a dissonance that exists between the bearers of responsibility and the holders of rights. Pastoral responsibility and dialogue with the rights holder is absent. Perhaps the debate over the banning of the conversion therapy makes it even clearer. The core of the proposal is about stopping a dangerous and violent practice that has cost people their lives, but that is not what the debate is about. There is still great ignorance among church leaders about the church's legacy linked to conversion attempts. Rarely is there room to discuss how this practice has affected and is affecting parishioners. A good example here is the pastor who invited to an event titled Conversion Therapy. The idea was to criticize Aftonbladet's attention to the fact that conversion attempts are still being practiced, but instead it landed in a deep wound in many Christian LGBTQ people and relatives who themselves underwent or saw someone close to undergo self-erasure and self-disclosure rituals. Dagens Nyheter's latest review shows how easily the church can fall into the harmful imposition of anti-human theology.
The conversation about why there is a need for a ban on conversion therapy instead becomes an incoherent debate about religious freedom where some Christians portray other Christians as an external problem. Why is there so much fear in talking about these issues? Why is there such a strong taboo around the issues that affect the lives of our fellow siblings? Even in the interview "Jag går till himmelen som en pststvän" with Sten-Gunnar Hedin, which was published in Sändaren, one can read between the lines and not in plain text. And why is it talked about LGBTQ people and not with LGBTQ people?
As a church, we have a mission to protect creation, protect human life and support what gives people a dignified life. This is a mission that is far older than the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights and developed in the Church's involvement. Central to the church's view of humanity is that humanity is linked in a collective and that the individual comes into being and develops in community with others. In the Eucharistic liturgy, we express it with the words "One bread, one humanity".
The Yogyakarta principles on the application of the international protection of human rights regarding sexual orientation and gender identity also speak for themselves. Freedom of religion is everyone's business, which in turn means that LGBTQ people have the right to their beliefs and to practice their traditions. This means that violence against LGBTQ people in the form of coercive theological interpretations, theological political stances and violence is against religious freedom as well as personal integrity.
Riksförbundet EKHO's experience of violence and harassment against minorities in the church shows that there are things that the church continues to have difficulty dealing with. Where theological and political stances come before stopping the Bible-related violence against, among other things, LGBTQ people. Our members and contacts talk about everything from exorcisms to forced celibacy. Among the most common negative experiences we hear is that LGBTQ people can be accepted as members of congregations if they themselves want to "repent" or live celibately. Another idea is that the act of becoming a Christian means a change of identity and that "everything changes, even sexuality". Testimonies that also echo in the sorrows of the anonymous emails.
No, a ban is not really the way forward. A ban would not really be needed if the pastoral responsibility was transferred from the individual parishioner to the community's leader. The real way forward is for the bearers of responsibility, i.e. leaders at all levels within the communities, to take their pastoral responsibility. This is possible, because I believe in the church. Because similar processes have happened before. Everything from slavery and child abuse to divorce. I think we can do better. But if not, maybe a ban is the only way when other doors close. The law can be seen as a necessary evil to try to make up for the conversion attempts. Because when it comes to its core, the proposal is about putting an end to an inhuman process of violence. A potential solution for those of us with weak social protection when communities are still characterized by ignorance and a culture of silence.
With the certainty that God loves all his children and that none is free before all are free, I return to my inbox and continue to meet the silent cries for a single loaf of bread, but not all of humanity.
Robin Paulonen Sakkunnig i Mänskliga rättigheter Förbundsordförande i Riksförbundet EKHO - Ekumeniska grupperna för kristna hbtq-personer