Latvia: Churches defend "traditional family values"

Leaders of the Lutheran, Catholic, Baptist and Adventist churches in Latvia have criticized a new social science school textbook that describes gay and lesbian life as a ”normal aspect of sexuality.” The Latvian Ministry of Education is giving in to the Churches’ demands, and that, in turn, is criticized by local representatives of sexual- minorities.
The Churches promise to continue to defend ”traditional family values”. ”The church isn't alone in its traditional view of the family in Latvia,” said Ivars Kubcis, spokesman for the country's Evangelical Lutheran church (ELCL).

About a quarter of the Latvians are Lutherans and Catholics, respectively, while some six per cent are Orthodox.
Latvia decriminalized homosexuality as late as 1993, and was the last EU member to forbid discrimination of homosexuals in 2006.

Latvian churches reiterate condemnation of homosexuality (ENInews 17.6.11)
Latvian kirkot paheksuvat oppikirjaa (Kotimaa24 23.6.11)



Estonia: "We do not tolerate homosexuality"

The Estonian Justice Chancellor Indrek Teder made a statement in May 2011, saying that Estonia should start registering partnerships, since the present system with exclusively heterosexual marriages doesn't give same-sex couples enough protection. In his opinion, the Constitution wouldn't bar a gender neutral marriage law, but that the time isn't ripe as yet. In 2010, the Conservative government stopped the preparations of a law on registered partnerships, but now the country has a new government.
In July, the Estonian Council of Churches (Eesti Kirikute Nõukogu), an ecumenical body consisting of the leaders of the Evangelical Lutheran and the Roman Catholic churches, the two Orthodox churches (Moscow and Constantinople) working in Estonia, and a number of Free Churches, sent an open letter to the Ministry of Justice as a reaction to the Chancellor's statement. "The Council of Churches does not tolerate homosexuality," they wrote, and claim that the traditional marriage is a guarantee for the stability of the Estonian people and the Estonian State.
Most regrettable.

Õiguskantsler: samasoolistel peab olema võimalus kooselu registreerida (Postimees 23.5.11)
Õiguskantsler soovitab samasooliste partnerlussuhted reguleerida (Delfi 23.5.11)
Postimees: Viron oikeuskansleri haluaa Viroon rekisteröidyn parisuhteen (Ranneliike 23.5.11)
Viron kirkot ilmoittavat, etteivät ne suvaitse homoseksuaalisuutta (Ranneliike 9.7.11)



Conservatives boycott ELCF bishops

I noted earlier that the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland consecrated its first woman bishop, Irja Askola in Helsinki, on 12 September, 2010, and that some sister churches abroad boycotted the event.
Now, five of the ten ELCF bishops are being boycotted by groups within and without the ELCF for being too liberal. These are, in addition to Askola, archbishop Kari Mäkinen, Mikko Heikka (Espoo), Wille Riekkinen (Kuopio) and my own bishop Björn Vikström (Porvoo). The groups honoring these bishops are the neopietist revival movement Kansanlähetys (the People's Mission) and some Free Churches, including the Pentecostals.
This boycott seems to be mainly a Finnish-speaking affair. The Swedish-speaking Free Churches in Porvoo aren't keen on an actual boycott, even if they, too, have misgivings about the Bishops' support for a so-called "homosexual lifestyle". But (they say) they have a good relationship with bishop Björn, who has been invited to speak at some of their conferences.

That's all well and good. I do, however, feel that the Pentecostal Filadelfia Church is behaving rather hypocritically in this matter. Let me explain.
A few years back, I was responsible for the ecumenical relationships of my congregation. We had monthly meetings, the Free Church pastors and I, and our relationship was warm and cordial. We arranged common events and preached in each other's services. The system was that I would preach at one of the Free Churches (Pentecostal, Methodist, Adventist, Mission Church and, at times, the Salvation Army) twice a year, and they would reciprocate. In March that year, the Pentecostal pastor preached a fine sermon in one of our services, and I was supposed to preach in Filadelfia in May. A couple of weeks before my sermon was due, the Pentecostal pastor called to tell me that it was off. Despite the pastor's efforts, the Elders of Filadelfia had decided that I was too controversial to preach at their church; that if I did so, someone might think that they, too, were in favour of "the homosexual lifestyle".
This came as a shock, and the whole ecumenical cooperation, that thus far had worked so well in Porvoo, was shattered. Since they rejected me as the Lutheran representative, they rejected the Lutheran Church, too, and we had no choice but to withdraw for a couple of years. Now, we have sent another representative, but the relationship is not the same.
Not all of the Free Churches had the same hostile attitude, I hasten to add. The Methodists and the Adventists would have liked to continue their cooperation with us, but I was (we were) so dejected by the blow we had recieved that it seemed impossible for us to continue at that point.

Of course, Filadelfia have a right to their opinions, as do we. Of course, they don't have to agree with us, as we don't with them. But ecumenism is not about agreeing, but about working together in spite of our differences. And Filadelfia refused.
Now, they're singing a different tune about how important it is that the Churches discuss with each other. Hypocrites! Do you think our memory is that short? What is done cannot be undone, but wouldn't at least an apology be in order?

Konservativa grupper vill bojkotta finska biskopar (Kyrkans Tidning 27.9.10)
"Alla har rätt att föra fram sin åsikt" (Kyrkpressen 27.9.10)
Frikyrkorna sväljer inte vigsel av samkönade par (Borgåbladet 28.9.10)

Bangladesh: Christians Suffer Extortion, Beatings

Two Christian women in Bangladesh’s northern district of Jamalpur said village officials extorted relatively large sums of money from them – and severely beat the husband of one – for proclaiming Christ to Muslims.
Johura Begum, 42, of Pingna village said a member of the local union council, an area government representative and the father of a police officer threatened to harm her grown daughters if her family did not pay them 20,000 taka (US$283). The police officer whose father was allegedly involved in the extortion was investigating a fabricated charge that Christians had paid Muslims to participate in a river baptism on May 26.
Begum had invited seven converts from Islam, including three women, to be baptized on the occasion, she said. Only six men among 55 converts were baptized by the leaders of the Pentecostal Holiness Church of Bangladesh (PHCB), Christian leaders said, as the rest were intimidated by protesting Muslims; the next day, area Islamists with bullhorns shouted death threats to Christians.
Begum said her husband is a day-laborer at a rice-husking mill, and that 20,000 taka was a “colossal amount” for them. She was able to borrow the money from a Christian cooperative, she said.
“I gave the extortion money for the sake of our safety and security,” Begum said. “It not possible to say aloud what abusive language they used against me for inviting people to God.”

Villagers backed by a political leader of the ruling Bangladesh Awami League party also allegedly extorted 250,000 taka (US$3,535) from another Christian woman, 35-year-old Komola Begum of Doulatpur village, whose husband is a successful fertilizer seller.
The villagers claimed that she and her husband had become rich by receiving funds from Christians. After the baptisms, local Muslims beat her husband to such an extent that he received three days of hospital treatment for his injuries, she said.
Komola Begum, who had invited 11 persons including three women to the baptisms, told Compass that her husband’s life was spared only because she paid what the Muslims demanded.
“My husband is a scapegoat – he simply does business,” she said. “But he was beaten for my faith and activities.”

For three days after the baptism ceremony, Jamalpur district villagers announced through bullhorns the punishment Christians would receive for their activities, chanting among other slogans, “We will peel off the skins of the Christians.” They also shouted that they would not allow any Christians to live in that area.
Johura Begum said that when she became a Christian 20 years ago, area Muslims beat her and forced her to leave the village, though she was able to return three years later.
“Local Muslims bombarded us with propaganda – that when I became a Christian, I would have to be naked in the baptism before the Christian cleric,” said Johura Begum. “Recently they are bad-mouthing Christianity with these kinds of disgraceful and scurrilous rumors, and my daughters cannot attend their classes.”

Compass Direct News 2.8.10

Sweden: Many "No":s to same-sex weddings in church

The Swedish Pentecostal newspaper Dagen ("The Day") has made a survey of what the different religions and denominations will do with same-sex couples coming to them, asking to be married. Not surprisingly, most didn't want to perform such a ceremony. The by far largest denomination in the country, the (Lutheran) Church of Sweden, is, however, positive to this development. And then there is the third group, who haven't made their minds up yet.
The list of the different religious groups can be found here in Swedish, but to mention some:

YES:
The Church of Sweden
The Jews
The Quakers

NO:
The Roman Catholic Church
The different Orthodox churches
The free churches, including e.g. Pentecostals, Seventh-Day Adventist, Methodists, the Salvation Army and some Lutheran organisations
The Moslems
The Mormons
The Jehovah's Witnesses

DUNNO:
Anglicans
Baptists
Baha'i
The Scientology Church
Some Lutheran organisations

There is also the question what to do with consciencious objectors, i.e. pastors who refuse to marry same-sex couples.
In many of the above religious groups, there is an ongoing discussion about the right to perform marriages - should our church retain that right or give it up? Does the right to perform marriages include an obligation for the individual pastor to do so? Should the right to perform marriages no longer be a question for a whole denomination, but rather given individually to those pastors who have no objections to marrying anyone that the state deems worthy? These questions are far from being solved.