Being christian and gay in the Netherlands : a journey of conciliation

(1)

Being Christian and gay in the

Netherlands: a journey of conciliation

Lily Golding

Supervisor: Rachel Spronk Student number: 10706836

Word count: 33,682

Master Thesis produced as part of Master of Science (MSc) degree in Cultural and Social Anthropology

(2)

Declaration:

I have read and understood the University of Amsterdam plagiarism policy [published on http://www.student.uva.nl/fraude-‐plagiaat/voorkomen.cfm]. I declare that this assignment is entirely my own work, all sources have been properly acknowledged, and that I have not previously submitted this work, or any version of it, for assessment in any other paper.

(3)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to say thank you first and foremost to my interlocutors who generously gave their time sharing their personal, and in some cases difficult, life stories to me. I also want to thank my supervisor for her continued help and recommendations to improve this piece of work as well as my friends and family who have supported me here in Amsterdam.

(4)

SUMMARY

This thesis will explore the journey undertaken by gay and lesbian Christians from various denominations in the Netherlands in the conciliation of their Christian faith and homosexuality.

Wider European trends such as secularisation and freedom of the autonomous individual have created the space for gay rights in the Netherlands to flourish. This environment raises questions surrounding an apparent paradox between Christianity and homosexuality: that those who have gone through the process of coming out as homosexual as an act of sexual autonomy could also be a person of faith, a believer in an institution that many individuals in Dutch society sought to release themselves from on the grounds of oppressive traditionalism.

This thesis will be based on the stories of nine gay and lesbian Christians from orthodox Reformed and Evangelical Christian churches. I use the concept of navigation to explain the way in which they maneuver the social terrain of Christian traditionalism, their own personal faith and societal expectations placed upon them as a gay/lesbian person in the Netherlands.

In this thesis I conclude with three main themes. The first concerns the process of the re-‐working of faith that is essential for gay and lesbian Christians seeking to actively combine their homosexuality and their Christianity in churches that do not allow them to act homosexual. I use Buchanan’s (2001) understanding of extrinsic and intrinsic faith to identify a distinction in their understanding of their personal faith and community/church faith. This allows them to explore and re-‐work their personal faith individually to find space for their homosexuality. Secondly, by combining the concept of heteronormativity in Christianity with the re-‐working of faith, I show that life choices – relationships, marriage and children -‐ for homosexual couples often present difficult decisions. Invoking the theoretical concept of agency, I show how at each life choice gay and lesbian Christians have to re-‐work their faith in order to justify and legitimise their decision. Unsupported by the church, they are left to find an authority in their own personal faith, which I situate as part of a wider trend of religious individualisation. Finally, I look at the debates over the Gay Pride Holy Boat and same sex marriage that demonstrate a divide in the Christian LGBT community over the issue of visibility, but moreover, highlight remaining contradictions in some of my interlocutors’ sense of self.

(6)

INTRODUCTION

When I knew for sure I was gay I really hoped I would be straight and God would make me straight or something. But I think God makes me gay because he makes me who I am, so I don’t have to deal with it, as I only have to live with it. […] God does not make it some big problem that you have to deal with…but if you think you have to deal with it you make it a problem for yourself. That’s not what I think. I think the world has to deal with it and not me.

These are the words of Dennis, aged 20, who comes from Ede, a small town in the Netherlands. He was brought up in a Christian family, the Nederland Reformed Church to be precise -‐ as I have indeed learned to be precise when it comes to the many Protestant denominations in the Netherlands. Dennis made many friends in church, attending at least once a week in his childhood, enjoying activities and playing with other children. The church has been and still is central to his life; he is now a student living in Amersfoort studying a theological course. He travels back to Ede every Sunday to attend church there with his family and friends, as well as frequently attending another Evangelical church in Ede. Dennis is a committed member of God’s community. So why is he not allowed to his church six times a year for The Lord’s Supper – a significant event for many Christians of all denominations, where bread and wine is shared in remembrance of Jesus? Why is he denied the opportunity to share his faith with his congregation?

Because Dennis is gay and has decided that he will not stay alone for the rest of his life, but find a Christian man to love and share his future. Attendance at the Lord’s Supper service is based upon living a godly life under the supervision of the church, therefore being in good standing with the ministry and congregation. It is the marker, amongst other things, of being a full member of the church. In this church Dennis’ gay identity can be accepted, but acting on his feelings would be a sin and reason enough to deny him attendance at the Lord’s Supper. As a gay man who is not willing to give up on the chance of having a relationship, he is not considered to be living a godly life, but instead going against the wishes of his pastor, parents and many members of his congregation: they do not believe being a true Christian is compatible with being and acting homosexual. This, however, is not the only opinion on the matter:

And my friends from my own age they said ‘yeah I can’t believe in a God that says you can’t have a relationship, so I believe in a God of love, so I believe you can have a boyfriend.

Within the church Dennis has supporters, friends that want him to be able to love, to be in a relationship and to share his life, despite the fact that this will be

(7)

with another man. Dennis is also positive and optimistic about the future for gay and lesbian people in Protestant churches. Despite the tension that has arisen with his home church, he has an air of confidence in his decision to pair being in a relationship with another man whilst being a true Christian.

Dennis is the youngest of all the gay and lesbian Christians I have met over the course of three months’ fieldwork. He has already come out, reworked his faith and made his decision to have a relationship, despite the fact that he will be denied full membership of his church. He has gone against the wishes of his parents and pastor, which for Dennis has been a difficult decision. Many of the other gay and lesbian Christians I have spoken to have been, and in many cases still are, on a journey of questioning, searching, exploring, reworking, accepting and even celebrating, in the process of ‘dealing’ with their homosexuality. It is this process and the context it occurs within some Christian churches of the Netherlands that I seek to explore in this thesis.

The initial question with which I entered the field was: How do homosexual Christians perceive their homosexuality as part of their Christian faith and their Christian faith as part of their homosexuality, at a personal level, in relation to the wider Christian community and Dutch society? As soon as I started to learn about this topic I realised how static this question was: it presumes there is an end point in thinking about the relationship between faith and homosexuality. Whilst talking to my interlocutors about their faith and homosexuality on a subjective level – how they experience the subject positions of being gay and Christian – they spoke about how a development in their thinking about themselves came in response to experiences in their life. Therefore, how lesbian and gay Christians think about their own faith and homosexuality is not self-‐ evident, therefore undergoes drastic change over time as they are forced into a process of coming to terms with, accepting, then finding a space for their homosexuality in their faith. The difficulty of this process is exacerbated by the fact that it cannot be dealt with on a personal level, confined to the privacy of one’s own thoughts or closest family and friends.

Western societies require any gay or lesbian person to speak about their homosexuality, justified by the ideals of freedom of expression of homosexuality, but also by society’s need to label and categorise in order to understand and relate with something ‘different’ (Jivraj & Jong, 2011; 155). It is also necessary to come out in order to meet others in a similar situation. This creates a sense of belonging within a community, which is vital in a process of resolving feelings of shame, guilt and unhappiness that often accompany homosexual feelings in a heteronormative environment (Plummer, 1995; 83). Therefore, following the dominant narrative for being gay, individuals have to declare themselves so by coming out. In the case of gay and lesbian Christians, they not only have to come

(8)

out to their family and friends, but also their pastor and church council. Their homosexuality can no longer stay a matter of personal privacy because of the controversial nature of homosexuality in the church.

Christian churches in the Netherlands have varying stances towards homosexuality; the most orthodox Reformed and Evangelical churches tend to be the least tolerant. There are often no official guidelines written on the issue of homosexuality in these churches, so when gay and lesbian Christians in these churches come out, their homosexuality becomes a matter of discussion between the pastor, church council and, in some cases, the congregation. This discussion decides the fate of that individual in the church; their status among the congregation, the extent of their membership, whether they need therapy, services they can and cannot attend, whether they are allowed a relationship or not and the nature of this relationship – whether it’s sexual or platonic – and marriage. When something so personal to the individual, the fact they are gay or lesbian, becomes a topic of discussion, they are subject to opinions and perceptions, both positive and negative, of themselves by others. Through talking to gay and lesbian Christians during fieldwork, I have seen how this can cause a separation between the person’s individual faith and the practising of their shared faith with a church and community.

I want to show that from the moment a Christian realises they are gay or lesbian they embark on a journey. This journey is a process of self-‐acceptance. Upon realisation, they have to acknowledge their homosexuality, come to terms with the fact they are gay or lesbian, whilst finding the courage and energy to come out. They have to rework their faith at a personal level and be subject to the opinions and decisions of others in their Christian community, whilst finding a way to share their faith and find space to be themselves in their church. Finally, they need to find a way to express their homosexuality in a way in which they feel comfortable, deciding to have a relationship, possibly to marry, whilst maintaining their space in a Christian community that may not agree with their chosen path. All the while this journey takes place in a country with a strong secular gay emancipation discourse (addressed further in chapter 1).

There are various routes along this journey for the gay and lesbian Christians and ex-‐Christians I have met, none of which have reached an ‘end point’. What I have come to understand and seek to show is how the relationship between faith and homosexuality can not be understood if the process – their personal experiences that have shaped their understanding – is not taken into account. Therefore, because I do not want to focus on a static relationship but emphasise their journey, the question I will answer is: How do LGBT Christians reconcile (or not) their homosexuality with their faith?

(9)

During the fieldwork I experienced a change in my thinking that came as a result of my reflections on being a non-‐believer. Raised near a Protestant church in England, I attended Sunday school for a few years of my life and was taken to the occasional service, but I have never considered Christianity, or any religion for that matter, as part of my life. I had read some stories reported in the media on the subject of homosexuality in churches. I heard about people being denied a place in a community, being told they believe in the wrong God, being told their homosexuality is a ‘bad choice’, having to attend ‘curing’ therapy, being denied permission to have a sexual relationship and not given the status of ‘full members’ of the church. All the while they were experiencing this, they also had to defend and justify their belief to wider non-‐religious society. So, as a non-‐ religious person, I began this research struggling to understand why these people put themselves through this – would it not be easier to leave? However, the more Christians I met the more I understood this is not an option, as being a Christian is so much part of who they are that it could never be removed. Most importantly to them, God is real and they have faith in him to help, guide and love them. Once I stopped questioning what I had thought of as a ‘choice’ to stay in a faith that rejects them, I came to understand how their faith works, makes them a part of who they are, and ultimately helps them through their lives.

Themes and concepts

There have been two main approaches to the topics of gender and homosexuality: those that analyse the subject and its positionality, the Foucauldian approach; and those that analyse subjectivities. The former is largely produced by sociologists, philosophers and social theorists while the latter is more likely found in the anthropological field. The Foucauldian approach has been hugely important in recognising the discursive construction of gender and the regulation of homosexuality as well as position of subjects in relations of power. Foucault sought to trace the origin of the concept of homosexuality through a discursive analysis of the history behind the term ‘homosexual’ and its relation to the theme he calls ‘abnormality’. Throughout history, discourses demarking boundaries between ‘normal’ and ‘abnormal’ created certain subject positions for individuals: in other words through the rhetoric defining normal and abnormal, individuals were produced and regulated. During the mid 17th Century the Enlightenment created an environment that necessitated a ‘scientific’ explanation of human behavior. At this point, the field of psychiatry was born and incorporated existing discourses on normality and abnormality into a scientific framework. As a result the category of ‘mad’, as a mental condition identified and labeled by psychiatry, was introduced into society for those deemed ‘abnormal’. Foucault argues that because sexuality was a marker on the border between reason and unreason, or

(10)

sanity and madness, non-‐normative sexuality became equated with the latter. It was only at this point that the sodomite changed to the homosexual: sexuality was produced by the science of sex (Eribon, 2001; 46-‐7). Homosexuality as we know it today did not used to be recognised as such: it is only since the Enlightenment that sodomy as a sinful act became a medical condition called homosexuality, to a behavioural condition and eventually, by the 20th_{Century,
an}

identity.

For Foucault, the historical production of normative ideas surrounding sexuality and gender has served to regulate actions and behaviour as well as how meaning is constituted, to the point they are naturalised within society. Therefore, when the concepts of normative sexuality and gender are combined, a specific set of expectations and acceptable modes of being are produced. For Western societies, this has been labeled as heteronormativity. A term first introduced by Warner (1991), heteronormativity refers to the lens through which we view and understand the world that prioritises, encourages and promulgates heterosexuality, even in ways that have little to do with sexuality. Steven Siedman has explored this concept further, arguing that within adherence to heteronormativity, there are hierarchies of normativity in heterosexuality that are founded on “traditional gender arrangements and lifelong monogamy” as well as reproduction (Siedman in Jackson, 2006; 105). Jackson further examines the creation of heterosexuality, not just as a sexuality, but as an ‘intersection’ between gender and sexuality that defines a ‘normal way of life’. Therefore, she argues that heteronormativity needs to be utilized as a ‘critical concept…defining normative ways of life as well as normative sexuality’; it not only shapes our sex lives, but our whole way of being in the world (2006; 107). These prevalent discourses in society not only subjugate individuals to certain positions in society related to power and representation, but they also influence the way in which individuals think about themselves and others; they provide the lens through which the everyday is viewed and acted upon. This introduces the topic of subjectivity and the question of how religion fits with this concept.

Studies concerned with subjectivation of individuals in society mainly focus on power and representation. Rachel Spronk (2014) introduces the body as a vital medium between the process of subjectivation and the body’s role in transforming these ideas into meanings. In the case of gender, dominant discourses outline the normative ideals, creating an idea of gender in the head that is turned into a ‘thing’ via the body. By drawing attention to the way in which subjectivation and subjectivities are inextricably linked through the body, Spronk shifts the focus to embodiment; how ideas are felt and made sense of in the body, rather than just performed.

(11)

Sherry Ortner (2005) provides a very useful theoretical exploration of subjectivity and its relationship to agency. In a similar way to the work feminist and gay & lesbian scholars have done on the topic of gender and sexuality, subjects have been defined by their political locations and identities. Ortner calls for a Geertzian understanding of individuals, whereby the making of subjectivities, as opposed to the analysis of subjects, is explored. These subjectivities, as the ‘complex structure of thought, feeling, reflection, and the like, that make social beings always more than the occupants of particular positions and the holders of particular identities’, are what I seek to explore (Ortner, 2005; 37). Agency is the way in which these people embody their subjectivity and maneuver in the world: the action they take in order to get along in the world (34). By using the concept of subjectivity, it raises questions about the individual’s sense of self, or more specifically their gendered self, in relation to a homosexual orientation within the Church and how they maneuver between these dominant discourses.

The concept of agency I employ here is Butler’s take on Foucault’s paradox of subjectivation: that acting within subject positions simultaneously reproduces them and creates the space for agency. To connect this with the concept of performativity mentioned earlier and it’s significance to gender, Butler advances the idea that “the iterability of performativity is a theory of agency”; the act of deciding and process of acting a particular gender can be conceptualized as agency (Butler in Mahmood, 2009; 28). Mahmood’s application of this idea to her analysis of Egyptian women’s role in the Islamic revival provides a useful framework that introduces the relationship between agency and religion. Mahmood theorises a way in the way in which maneuvering between dominant discourses can be understood as agency. The Egyptian women rejecting secular liberalism promoted by the state are challenging a feminist notion of agency by adopting and furthering Islamic ideals of womanhood associated with passivity, therefore reinforcing their own domination by men. However, by removing the notion of agency from progressive politics, agency can be seen ‘not as a synonym for resistance to relations of domination but as a capacity for action that historically specific relations of subordination enable and create’ (Mahmood, 2009; 15). Likewise, if the definition of agency is limited to the furthering of Western notions of progressive representational politics – whether it be gay rights or feminist notions of gender equality -‐ room is created for an analysis that is not limited only to the themes of domination, subordination and powerlessness. In this sense, agency can be reintroduced as not only the way in which acts resist norms, but the way in which norms are maneuvered and inhabited by gay and lesbian individuals.

Tova Hartman & Naomi Marmon’s exploration of the experiences of orthodox Jewish women during menstrual separation provide a valuable ethnographic

(12)

reference for a study focused on specific subjectivities within a religious framework. Of particular relevance is their use of a hermeneutic framework that allows the combined study of both the structural elements (religious codes, rules) and their interpretation and lived practice. Acts carried out by the women were conceptualised by two constituent parts: regulation (‘behavioural aspect’) and attribution (reasons given for the behaviour). Hartman found that her interviewees – women subject to rituals and exclusion during menstruation – on the whole did not consider these regulations as oppressive, nor did they provoke shame or degradation. In fact Hartman found many of the practices and rituals that were still performed had lost their ‘ancient classifications and values’. A power-‐orientated systematic approach would most likely interpret these women, as oppressed and their continuance with these practices as a symptom of ‘false consciousness… oppressor identification and patriarchal collaboration’, it would be a reduction of their experiences and feelings. This approach goes beyond the topic of power in relation to gender and sexuality typical of representational politics and Foucaultian theories (Hartman & Marmon, 2004; 391). It delves into the lived subjectivities in the religious codes, the internalisation of these, and the resulting actions, rather than reducing their experiences to a consequence of power relation.

In the sociological field, Andrew Yip & Martine Gross have conducted studies in Britain and France looking at the lived experience of lesbian, gay and bisexual Christians. They concluded that in both the French and British context, among participants there was a ‘high level of disagreement with the Churches’ censorious teachings and statements on homosexuality and bisexuality, which were widely perceived as heteronormative, and indeed heterosexist’, but there were significant structural differences due to greater room for dissidence in the Anglican church as opposed to Catholic (Yip & Gross, 2010; 54-‐5). Yip & Gross assert that ‘in contemporary society, social processes such as de-‐ traditionalisation and individualisation increasingly empower the self over the institution as the basis of identity construction’ and that a trend in privatisation and individualization of faith seen is ‘consistent with current sociological analysis of the religious landscape’ (Yip & Gross; 2010; 56). In another study conducted by Yip (2008), he identified how male Christians created a new ‘frame of meaning about their identity which incorporates both their homosexuality and their religious beliefs’ from a counter-‐rejection of the Church (Yip, 2008; 61). Yip focuses on the strategies of lesbian, gay and bisexual Christians in dealing with their stigmatisation in the Church and the way in which this relates to wider structural processes in society, such as individualisation.

In order to apply the concept of agency and maneuvering between dominant discourses to the journeys of my interlocutors, I will make use of Henrik Vigh’s concept of social navigation. Vigh defines ‘navigation’ as the way individuals

(13)

move within changeable environments; ‘it directs our attention to the fact that we move in social environments of actors and actants, individuals and institutions, that engage and move us as we move along’ (Vigh; 2009; 420). Vigh stresses that, in contrast to the social scientific perspectives on movement and practice of agents within social formations, the concept of navigation takes into consideration the movement of the social environment, in addition to the actor. While Vigh applied the concept of navigation to an environment of warfare, I adapt this concept to the less extreme, yet still conflicting, situation my interlocutors are in: being homosexual in a Christian world. By using the concept of navigation, I bring to the fore the idea that my interlocutors, as individuals enacting agency, are ‘positioned within a force field which moves [the individual] and influences [their] possibilities of movement and positions’ (2009; 420). I will explore how my interlocutors interact with their environment and adjust themselves in relation to changing social forces.

Although simplifying greatly, I distinguish two social worlds occupied by my interlocutors that I focus on: their Christian community and their place as a Christian in a non-‐religious Dutch society. As non-‐religious Dutch society pursues its LGBT emancipation agenda, Christian communities are put under pressure to either adapt to, or resist these changes. My interlocutors are caught at the intersection of these two social environments; a progressive secular social movement with the aim of emancipation, visibility and equality for LBGT people, and the resistance of the conservative Christian communities wanting to retain traditional Christian deals of the family within their community that they see as being threatened. Thus gay and lesbian Christians are subject to two opposing social forces; having to interact with institutions and individuals from both worlds seeking to project their own norms, morals and expectations onto the homosexual Christian. How gay and lesbian Christians manage, move and act from this positionality is where the concept of navigation will come in.

Using this approach, I seek to highlight three main findings from my research. Yip (2008) identified how male Christians created a new ‘frame of meaning about their identity’ incorporating their faith and homosexuality. I seek to expand on his finding, by exploring the process of gay and lesbian Christians realigning their personal faith in order to accommodate their homosexuality, which I will refer to as the reworking of faith. I depart from Yip whereby following Buchanan (2001), I make a distinction between an extrinsic orientation of faith, where faith is practised through the church, doctrine is followed and the authority is external, and intrinsic orientation of faith that relates to an internalised spirituality emphasising a personal relationship with God. While the individuals’ extrinsic faith is up for discussion in the church, the intrinsic faith is separated, questioned, explored and re-‐worked in order to find space for their homosexuality and be at peace with God at a personal level. By

(14)

separating their extrinsic and intrinsic faith, their personal relationship with God is distanced from the potentially damaging opinions of the outside world. While this process happens on a personal level, the support and guidance of other gay and lesbian Christians is vital. It is a difficult process that can bring depressions in their faith, as well as, eventually, peace. What appears is a shift in the authority of faith, from the church to the individual. I will align this with the broader processes of individualisation in Dutch society, in order to situate it within a wider context.

A second finding combines the reworking of faith with the ideas of heteronormativity. In a heteronormative Christian environment, a heterosexual relationship is the most important foundation of the family; a prolific ideal traditional Christianity bases itself upon. Heterosexual couples have a pre-‐ described life course that is outlined by conventions in the faith that articulate it as natural and unquestioned. At each life choice that arises for a heterosexual couple – relationships, sex, marriage, children – there is a path already chosen for them in their faith. For homosexual couples, there is no such path. Unsupported by the church, they are left to forge their own path in their faith. Therefore, the re-‐working their faith is never a completed process. On many further occasions they will have to repeat this process; for relationships, marriage, children, and any other significant life event within the church. Foucault provides the theoretical context for this as gay and lesbian Christians operate within the disciplining framework of their religious doctrine. Choosing to enter a relationship that in many cases is against the wishes of the church can be interpreted as act of resistance in itself. Yet gay and lesbian employing their faith to help guide and justify their decision highlights the ambiguity of their faith: how it can be both restricting, but simultaneously empowering. Gay and lesbian Christians display agency through resisting their church’s wishes to remain celibate, yet stay within a framework of faith that allows them to retain their Christian identity.

Finally, I want to highlight that among the LGBT Christian community, there are divisions that reflect how gay and lesbian Christians both want to be perceived by the outside world, and how they perceive themselves. Debates over same-‐sex marriage and the Gay Pride Holy Boat demonstrate a divide over the issue of visibility, but moreover, highlight remaining contradictions in some of my interlocutors’ sense of self. Interlocutors that spoke about a contentment in their faith and complete self-‐acceptance of their homosexuality still referred to themselves as sinners. They view their homosexuality as a burden they have had to manage, because they cannot remove the heteronormative doctrine that has shaped their understanding of themselves in the world. It becomes what I will call an embodied contradiction; the Christian lens through which they view and understand the world that labels homosexuality a sin is so much part of them

(15)

they are unable to distance themselves. This idea relates to Hartman & Marmon’s idea of regulation and attribution; a repressive system can be maneuvered and made sense of because it is meaningful to the individual.

Outline of chapters

In this thesis, I will mainly focus on the experiences of five gay and lesbian Christians who come from either conservative Reformed or Evangelical churches: Adam, Dennis, Rae, Arno and Koen. I will also draw upon the experiences of my other interlocutors and informal conversations I had especially when attending church services. I will also use the knowledge of two prominent LGBT Reverends, an LGBT minister and the experiences of Ed and Luke, who have lived part of their lives as Christians, before leaving their faith. I will begin their journeys at the moment they realised they were gay, and I will discuss their experiences leading to the place they have reached now. I will introduce the stories of Ed and Luke along the way to show alternative routes that do not necessarily end up in the same place. By doing this I want to emphasise the complex nature of the process of dealing with one’s homosexuality: the tensions that arise, the feelings these tensions produce and the outcomes they result in. I will divide this into four chapters.

The first chapter will set the scene. I will outline the history of homosexuality in the Netherlands as well as briefly describe the formulation of Christianity in the Netherlands and the denominational differences that are relevant to attitudes towards homosexuality. I will also introduce various organisations for gay and lesbian Christians that exist in the Netherlands: the Landelijk Koördinatiepunt (LKP), Evangelische Roze Viering (ERV), Internationale Roze Kerk (IRK), Contrario and CHJC.

The second chapter will deal with my interlocutors’ realisation of their homosexuality and the responses this generates. It will focus on the current environment in the Netherlands for gay and lesbian Christians. It will look briefly at where the norms and expectations to be heterosexual come from in a general sense, before focusing on the particular stories of individuals, their experiences and their feelings. I will show why many Christians realising they are gay pray to God to take it away and explain the subsequent phase -‐ denial, trying to ignore it, or trying to act ‘straight’ – and the effect this has on the person.

The third chapter will deal with my interlocutors’ moments of coming out. I will look at what changes can occur to make the decision to come out viable; namely meeting other gay and lesbian Christians and finding a place for their

(16)

homosexuality in their personal faith. I will also talk here about the necessity to come out in society and how this relates to the larger themes mentioned above. I will go into detail about what I have identified as personal faith and shared/community faith as well as the theological aspects some people needed to deal with. I will also talk about how important Contrario, the ERV and the IRK is for some people. I will introduce the experiences of Ed and Luke, who have chosen to leave their faith and explore how this came to be to present an alternative route in the journey.

The fourth chapter will look at the life my interlocutors have created for themselves. I will look beyond the specific faith-‐related issues and see how my interlocutors have moved past that. I will explore changing attitudes towards the visibility of LGBT Christians as part of a wider LGBT movement in society through debates about the Holy Boat on the Gay Pride Canal Parade. I will show how gay and lesbian Christians are keen to have relationships in ways they believe are closest to their own ideas about their faith, which are not necessarily the wishes of their church authority. I will also use fieldwork research to explore different opinions about same sex marriage that show a general desire not to have a Christian marriage ceremony that is restricted to heterosexual relationships, but maintain relationships that are equally worthy of the status of marriage.

Methodology

During my fieldwork, my time was spent attending the once monthly Evangelische Roze Vieringen (ERV) and Internationale Roze Kerk (IRK), as well as meeting up with interlocutors for conversations and interviews and church services. I have travelled to Amersfoort, Rotterdam, The Hague, Amsterdam and Utrecht to meet people. Alongside the observation in seven church services and informal conversations there, I conducted thirteen full, in-‐depth interviews with ten gay men and three lesbian women who have all been brought up in a Christian church and of whom all but two remain believers. Of these thirteen, three were Reverends and in these interviews I focused on their knowledge and expertise to give me an overview of their experience with LGBT Christians and the role of their church.

The majority of my interlocutors are from conservative Reformed Protestant or Evangelical Protestant backgrounds; two grew up in the Catholic church and two in the Salvation Army. The majority are between the ages of 30 and 50, two are under 30 and two are older than 60.

(17)

How do homosexual Christians perceive their homosexuality as part of their Christian faith and their Christian faith as part of their homosexuality, at a personal level, in relation to the wider Christian community and Dutch society? The question slowly evolved into -‐

How do LGBT Christians reconcile (or not) their homosexuality with their faith?

One point that distinguishes this research from other studies on gay and lesbian Christians in the Netherlands, is that coming from the United Kingdom, I do not speak Dutch, nor, to begin with, was I familiar with the position of Christianity in Dutch society or the denominations. The Evangelische Roze Vieringen (ERV) services were held entirely in Dutch, as was the service I attended with my interlocutor, while the Internationale Roze Kerk (IRK) services were spoken half in Dutch and half in English. When I was with my interlocutor at the service of their own church and another interlocutor for two of the three ERV services, I was guided through the service and parts they felt were important they translated. What is crucial is that I got their interpretation of the service of the parts they found important. My attention was also directed elsewhere, for example to church decoration, the emotions expressed, habits, non-‐spoken movements, rituals and repetitions. My observations of and informal discussions at these events are crucial to my understanding of the wider picture, and often more emotion was expressed during these times than during the more ‘personal’ interviews. I was also able to experience the denominational differences between the Evangelical and Reformed churches, rather than merely hearing about them during the interviews.

What will become noticeable is the lack of women interlocutors. Although I had some informal conversations with women at church services, out of the fourteen interviews I had, only three were with women. This figure, however, is representative of the amount of women at the ERV church services I attended and in the organisation Contrario. During the interviews I asked my interlocutors how they felt about the lack of women and if they knew why. Many did not know why there were so few women and those who had suggestions, put it down to LGBT women having a different political agenda to LGBT men as they have more discrimination to fight. While I do not get a chance to delve into this during this thesis, the ratio of men to women I have included is representative of the Christian LGBT communities I spent time in. It is a topic that requires further research in and of its own accord.

I felt the field was difficult for me to fully grasp in the three month time frame research period; the lack of a specified ‘location’ for my research and the infrequency of the LGBT church services and meetings meant that contact with the field had to be planned and was not as frequent as I could have wished.

(18)

Other events existing for LGBT Christians organised by CHJC or Contrario, were very hard for me to find out about, let alone attend. I felt this was partially because my lack of Dutch prevented me from integrating fully, but also because there was some level of exclusion. Providing a group of people who have experienced similar situations with their church, family and friends and even in their self acceptance, Contrario plays an important role in LGBT Christians’ process of finding space for their faith whilst being able to openly express their homosexuality. It provides friends, discussants, advice and a safe place to just ‘be’, and the safety of this place relies on the shared experiences. Empathy and an open mind are not enough; a complete and total understanding of the process everyone else has been through, or is going through, which can only come from experiencing it firsthand, is required. Nevertheless, this is insightful in itself, and something I will address in chapter 3.

Being christian and gay in the Netherlands : a journey of conciliation