What’s the Big Deal About “Dear Gay Anglicans”?

What’s the Big Deal About “Dear Gay Anglicans”?

Last week, a group of leaders in the Anglican Church of North America (ACNA) released an open letter to gay Anglicans. It followed on the heels of the ACNA’s recent “pastoral statement” on human sexuality, which I wrote about last month, where the ACNA College of Bishops stated that gay people must not only stop using the term “gay Christian” but must also stop using the term “same-sex attracted Christian” and, instead, only refer to themselves as “Christians who experience same-sex attraction.” 

It was an unhelpful statement to say the least. Most gay people I know were dismayed by its disregard for their needs and its almost Orwellian efforts to control their language. 

In response, the “Dear Gay Anglicans” open letter (see screenshots below) was a good faith effort to repair some of the damage caused by the ACNA statement by reaching out to gay people in the Anglican church. The letter affirmed traditional sexual ethics but didn’t dwell there. Instead, it focused on confessing the sins of the Anglican church toward gay people, and it committed to taking “practical steps to become churches where gay Anglicans can share all of their story, find community, and seek support.”

But the letter had barely been out for a day before the Anglican Diocese of Pittsburgh shut it down. 

“Many of our bishops, and rightly so, feel this is an attempt to undermine our roles as guardians of the Faith and teachers of the doctrine of the Church,” said ACNA archbishop Foley Beach. Anglican Church of Nigeria bishop Henry Ndukuba said, “The deadly ‘virus’ of homosexuality has infiltrated ACNA.” “A Gay is a Gay,” he also said, comparing the concept of a gay Christian to the concept of a “Christian murderer” or a “Christian terrorist,” among other comparisons.

Archbishop Foley seemed to get defensive, suggesting that the signatories of “Dear Gay Anglicans” didn’t appreciate all the hard work he had put into the ACNA’s statement. “We literally spent over a year wrestling with this in response to questions and concerns we have been receiving from all over the province,” he said, insisting that the statement is an “excellent document” and that the open letter was an “in your face” challenge.

The Diocese of Pittsburgh asked for the letter’s removal within hours of its release online, and in a remarkable display of submission to the diocese—which speaks to the good faith of those involved in this letter—Pieter Valk acquiesced and removed it from the website, preventing any further signatories.

Just what exactly did the “Dear Gay Anglicans” letter say to elicit all this drama?

Many are seeking to frame it as some kind of homosexual coup of ACNA authority. It’s important to understand that it’s anything but. In fact, most of the letter affirms the ACNA’s pastoral statement on human sexuality, repeatedly thanking the College of Bishops for its thoughtfulness and care. Further, the opening paragraph explicitly affirms traditional sexual ethics, and the rest of the letter almost entirely consists of re-emphasizing points in the ACNA’s pastoral statement.

So the question is, what’s the big deal?

The issue boils down to this one section right here:

“We recognize the various arguments for and against using the phrases same-sex attraction and gay Christian. In the words of the Provincial Statement, ‘neither of the identifying phrases is ideal,’ universally understood, or free of baggage. While spirit-filled Christians disagree about the wisest language for sexual minorities to use to describe themselves, we echo the Provincial Statement’s respect for ‘those within our ACNA family who may disagree with our conclusions and yet remain true to the biblical witness.’ We commit to supporting gay/same-sex attracted Anglicans as they discern before God, in Scripture, and with trusted friends and family the best ways to testify faithfully to God’s goodness in that part of their story. Nor do either of these phrases affect our identity in Christ. As the ACNA Catechism states, faith in Christ signaled by baptism is all that is required to be securely in Christ and to have one’s identity in Christ (ACNA Catechism, Q12 & 14).

We commit to take practical steps to become churches where gay Anglicans can share all of their story, find community, and seek support.” 

That’s it. That’s the debate that will apparently tear the Anglican Church of North America asunder—a group of Anglicans daring to say that they will support gay and/or same-sex attracted people as they discern “the best ways to testify faithfully to God’s goodness” in their lives; a group of Anglicans choosing “not to quarrel about words” (2 Tim. 2:14) and, instead, support gay and/or same-sex attracted people regardless of the language they use.

Yes, the argument boils down to the fact that a group of Anglicans happen to be okay with sexual minorities who call themselves gay and/or same-sex attracted.

For Archbishop Foley, the mere fact that the letter was addressed to “gay Anglicans” at all was a step too far: “Replacing ‘gay Christian’ with ‘gay Anglican’ is pretty much in your face,” Foley said, insinuating that the signatories were intentionally trying to stir up trouble. One can’t help but wonder how Foley would address a letter to gay people in the Anglican church in the first place. Does Foley believe they don’t exist? Would he rather say, “Dear Anglicans who experience same-sex attraction”?

The point of the letter was to reach gay identified Anglicans. Addressing the letter to “Anglicans who experience same-sex attraction” would be pointless. Are gay people such a bogeyman to the ACNA that people can’t even write letters to them without facing discipline?

Ironically, Foley breaks his own rule: “Let’s remember that we have a large number of same-sex attracted individuals who have come to the ACNA specifically because of our stand for Biblical morality.” Take a look at that sentence again. Foley says that the ACNA has a large number of “same-sex attracted individuals,” but the ACNA believes that gay people shouldn’t call themselves “same-sex attracted.” To do so is to identify with sinful attractions, or so the pastoral statement reads.

But even Foley himself can’t follow his own prescriptions. Unless perhaps it’s okay to call yourself a “same-sex attracted individual” as long as you don’t call yourself a “same-sex attracted Christian.” Honestly, there’s no end in sight to how ridiculous and convoluted these expectations will get.

The greatest irony of all is that the ACNA pastoral statement actually states explicitly that they seek to “respect those within our ACNA family who may disagree with our conclusions [regarding language] and yet remain true to the biblical witness regarding Christian marriage.”

Those are the words of the ACNA College of Bishops. But when push came to shove and they actually had a chance to express the respect they claim to have for those within their ACNA family who disagree with their conclusions about language, they instead shut down the conversation and claimed they were being attacked.

But there was no attack here. The signatories of “Dear Gay Anglicans” acted in good faith upon the promise of mutual respect offered by the College of Bishops. That respect was nowhere to be seen in reactions to the letter.

If anything, all the drama in the past week over “Dear Gay Anglicans” getting banned from the ACNA has made one thing clear: the ACNA is afraid of gay people. So afraid, that they can’t even allow letters to be written to gay people. So afraid, that they can’t even stomach the idea of acknowledging the existence of gay-identified people in the ACNA. So afraid, that they can’t even make good on their promise to respect those whose language might differ from their own. 

“Some think this is going to break the ACNA apart,” Foley said. If it does, let’s be clear on the cause. It won’t be the existence of gay people in the ACNA that tears the church apart. It will be homophobia, plain and simple. 

One more thing…

I’m getting ready to release my first book this year (!!). As a brand new author I need to have a strong presence across my socials. Would you mind giving me a follow on Instagram and Facebook below? It would mean a lot to me. I’m already pretty active on Twitter, but I need to buff up my other platforms (I only just created a FB page…so I’ve got a lot of catching up to do!). Click on the icons below to give me a follow. Your support means the world!

Notify of

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Mathew Andersen
Mathew Andersen
1 year ago

I have three problems with the ACNA’s “pastoral statement.”

1) it claims that using the adjective “gay” is confusing and people do not understand the “nuances”. In reality, when I tell people I am a celibate gay Christian no one has ever been confused. They respond to me as a Christians who is attracted to guys but has chosen to remain single because of my faith. The only ones who seem “confused” are pastors who go on long tirades about how “confusing” such language is. So the whole “pastoral statement” is a self serving tool to create a confusion that does not exist but that the leaders of many Church bodies wish did exist.

2) I identify by my sexuality because the Church has so identified me by its actions. When I was a teen in the 70s, I could not join the military, join boy scouts, or look for any job in most government positions or in industries that contracted with the government. The removal of such restriction were each protested by “Christians.”

Being gay was the one excuse other kids could use to bully you and never be held accountable by teachers. I have yet to see one single church body take a stand against gay bullying beyond a mild “gosh, such bullying is kind of naughty.” LGBT kids are significantly more prone to suicide than straight, yet I have not seen one church body address this issue or ask what we can do about it.

Currently, with the election of President Biden, Church leaders are foaming at the mouth warning Christians of the “persecution soon to come” at the hands of LGBT people, thus continuing to make us the villains to be defeated instead of people to ministered to. I also have not seen one church body take a stand against conversion therapy, which is a consumer fraud at best and abusive at worst.

The only “ministering” I see pastors give to gay people is the advice to stay away from temptation which, on a practical level, means “don’t have any friends of the same sex because you might be tempted and don’t have friends of the opposite sex because you might hurt them if they come to expect more from the relationship than you can give – so, yeah, just stay alone and don’t bother anyone and we will be cool with you attending church.

I have yet to see one single conservative Church body offer one single positive thing to any same sex attracted believer.

It is this kind of hate that has made me identify by my sexuality, not the culture. THE CHURCH.

3) The statement says that they want to “minister” to same sex attracted people but does not really give one single specific way in which they will do so. Maybe ACNA pastors should think through how to truly love and minister to gay people before worrying what we call ourselves. Frankly, the ACNA statement on sexuality was a lot of internal complaining and bitching between the writers with little actual knowledge or interest in the actual situation. It was, what I think CS Lewis once described as “spiritual masturbation.”

Mathew Andersen
Mathew Andersen
10 months ago

Along the same line, I see the PCA has voted to damn celibate gay Christians unless they strive to learn to want to fuck the opposite sex.

The biggest issue I see with the PCA resolution and others like it is that it put’s same sex attracted/gay people in a trap. If a pastor says something cruel or offensive about gay people and if we call him out on it that it hurt us, his response is “well, you should not be identifying as gay.” So pastors can say whatever they want without repentance and we are blamed if we feel hurt. It was this kind of situation back when I was growing up in the 70s that led me to believe God hated my very existence…. and led me to hate myself as well. Christians around me were saying all kinds of things about “those gay” and I had to just be silent (because no teen boy back then would have told anyone he was gay) and accept as fact what they were saying about people like me.

I have led my entire life with the goal of celibacy, and have achieved that goal since age 20. Yet that is not enough, according to this non-biblical resolution. I must also lust after women to be sanctified and loved by God and His people. I will continue to be obedient to God but I gave up on his love about 2 decades back.

(feel free to move this to any post you make about the PCA decision – or, since I intentionally used a vulgar word, if you wish to delete it I will understant.)

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x