I’m not sure what these limitations are exactly, but maybe someone can share more details in the comments. Are homosexuals welcome in the congregation? (They may feel inclined to hide in the closet?) Can they get married in the church? (Probably not.) I believe they are not allowed in leadership, right? What about celibate homosexuals?…

Here is another dangerous combination: a religion or church with celibate clergy, operating in the context of a homophobic culture. That scenario encourages homosexuals to become members of the clergy. No one will then wonder why they are single. All the wrong reasons for choosing a path through life, in my opinion.

I often wonder if the same thing does not happen at Shofar, which has a relatively significant number of “supposedly ex-gay” members in the congregation. In homophobic culture, Shofar would be a nice place to play-pretend that you are straight, as couples are discouraged from kissing, or being physical, until wedding day. That is when the icky brown stuff meets the spinning thingy, and I start calling “foul!”, or “evil!” even. But I digress… let us get back to the Dutch-Reformed church and its future.

In a previous post, I provided some of the South African context with regards to apartheid and the Dutch-Reformed church. Being wedded to the state (mixed marriage…), the church condoned apartheid for quite some time. And the congregation loved their church and its supposed “purity”. However, at some point, the church started standing up against the wrongs of the regime, and the congregation started complaining. (Sure, not everyone, but I’m generalising here, bear with me.) Ironically, they wanted their church to stay out of politics… Nevertheless, the church persevered, continued playing its part to help overthrow the evil, and apartheid was overthrown. Now hit the fast forward button, and return to the present. Go listen to that very same congregation bitch and moan about the evil the Dutch-Reformed church committed, by supporting apartheid in the first place… (generalising again, apologies.)

Some currents in the church leadership believes it is only a matter of time until the church sheds its homophobia, while other currents insist that the moment the church does this, it might as well self-destruct. The church should stay pure, they say, and keep them moffies out. The church should apparently not fold under the “pressures of the time”. And so they bitch and moan about moral decay.

Now this is all good and well, as opinions will always differ. What I’m more interested in, is the future. Let us imagine a future where humanity as a whole decided to embrace compassion as the ultimate ground truth. Homosexuality is accepted in all corners of life, on the grounds that it is completely natural (genetic and/or environmental in the pre-birth sense). The Dutch-Reformed church has also turned around and embraced the homosexual community, on the grounds that Paul taught us to not go against our own nature. (Just humour me, whether you like the idea or not.) The big question is, how do the formerly homophobic members of the congregation behave? Those same ones that spent all their time bitching and moaning about how the church should not allow homosexuals to do whatever… God save their souls if they turn into the post-apartheid members bitching and moaning about how the church was so evil to condone homophobia in the first place…

The Dutch-Reformed church and the majority of its members are all too aware of the skeleton in the closet. This does make them fearful for the future, and prefer to not push the boundaries of their comfort zone. Either way, I believe the church and its congregation will eventually have to stop its own homosexual affair with itself, step out of their closet of safety, and start focusing on making a positive contribution in the rest of the world again.

Fear not change, for the more things change, the more they stay the same…

There seems to be a debate amongst evolutionary biologists between “group selection” and “standard selection”. A quick glance at the Wikipedia page for group selection seems to indicate it is mostly a matter of how much group selection contributes to evolution, rather than whether it does. Sure, I seem to be digressing, so let me get back to the point: in human culture, our memes have a very significant contribution to selection, and religion is a key factor in survival of a particular tribe. (I’m referring to a book titled The White Tribe of Africa, which I’m interested in reading if I can find the time.) Whether group selection happens amongst other animals or not, humans are clearly meme machines, governed as much by their memes as by their genes.

Just over a century ago, this country saw a war between the British Empire and two independent Boer republics. Among South Africans, this war is known as the Anglo-Boer War. At times of war, religion, being a shared world-view, plays a very significant role in encouraging humanity and giving them hope and unity. During this time, the Dutch-Reformed church and politics got welded together, setting the stage for the rest of the twentieth century.

Enter Apartheid, another originally noble but ultimately misguided idea (similar to the versions of communism/socialism that have been implemented so far), for it did not take human nature into account. The wedding between the Dutch-Reformed church and the state resulted in a deadlock situation that was resolved largely thanks to outside influence (sanctions, international pressure, etc). This experience has left many South Africans aware of the dangers of fundamentalistic dogma.

The Dutch-Reformed church is doing what it can to make amends. A large percentage of those in charge are truly “very good guys”, carefully considering the problems and weighing the odds, in an attempt to find the best path forward. This is not an easy job.

Like any large community with a modernistic creed or culture, like any large community or organisation not consciously embracing diversity as a whole, there are various forces and undercurrents at work. Some of these undercurrents seem dangerous, some seem misguided, and some are truly focused on building bridges and engineering peace, prosperity and mutual understanding in this diverse rainbow nation of ours.

Over the next few weeks, I hope to investigate and examine some of these undercurrents, and attempt to share what I learn about the current state of affairs as well as what I see with regards to a possible future. During this discussion, please contribute what you know. Please share your knowledge, ideas, criticisms and questions, and let us have a friendly conversation about the state of affairs. Please question and contradict my statements. Please maintain your critical thinking faculties.

Everyone is welcome. May I request of all militants, extremists, fundamentalists and polemicists, of all sorts and flavours, including those that refuse to accept the militant, extremist or fundamentalist labels: Please lay down your torches and axes for the purpose of these discussions. On this blog, in this church of diversity, we are interested in cross-cultural understanding and peaceful coexistence. Thanks.