Enitled “Precious in My Sight: Accompanying Students Who Question Their Gender,”the document states that ministering with gender dysphoric students is “a complex but essential pastoral duty,” but one in which Catholic educators “feel unsupported and without sufficient guidance,” Bishop Patrick McKinney recommends walking with students “respectfully, sensitively, and compassionately,” a phrase which echoes the Catholic Catechism’s direction for ministering with lesbian and gay people.
The guide is laid out in four parts: explaining Catholic anthropology, outlining principles of pastoral accompaniment, practical applications, and ten pages of appendices.
Part One is standard for gender identity policies released by mostly U.S. dioceses, which presents LGBTQ-negative teachings while emphasizing respect for human dignity.
Part Two, on pastoral care, names each person’s situation as “complex” and encourages that these matters “can never be reduced to a fixed single response,” but “must always remain grounded in both charity and truth.”
In this vein, general best practices for pastoral care are named, yet there is an explicit prohibition on encouraging gender-affirming care for students and caution against social transition. The goal is to help students accept their assigned sex, rather than live into their gender identity. The guide is clear its focus is on students, not on employment of LGBTQ+ staff.
Part Three, on policies and practical applications, is by far the longest section. A ny pastoral work with gender dysphoric students is required to be provided by staff who have attained the “Certificate in Pastoral Accompaniment (Schools),” and should generally not be done except on an individual basis.
The guide continues with a ban on celebrating Pride in schools:
“It is not appropriate for our Catholic schools to celebrate Pride as we cannot endorse its entire agenda. Whilst there is a statutory obligation at secondary level for all schools to include curriculum on LGBT, there is no legal obligation for them to celebrate Pride. . .[I]n the Diocese of Nottingham LGBT+ History month (February) should be used rather than Pride month (June). . .Is it right and truthful to celebrate an agenda with which we cannot completely agree?. . .To approve only one part of it could be seen as dishonest and could lead to confusion.”
Likewise, LGBTQ+ student groups are discouraged, and must be approved by the diocese with appropriate restrictions, “even if it were suggested that this put same-sex attracted or gender-questioning students at a disadvantage.”
Schools are encouraged to comply with the United Kingdom’s laws on equality and human rights, particularly in ensuring that there is no discrimination against students. The emphasis on this section, however, is on explaining how schools can opt out of or minimize the government’s LGBTQ-inclusive policies and practices.
For instance, schools “should not proactively initiate action towards a student’s social transition” unless “explicitly requested by the student.” One example of questions educators should ask is “Has the student been influenced by peers or social media?”
If circumstances permit, educators may use a student’s chosen name or pronouns, though for the later “there will be very few occasions” allowed. Matters involving restrooms, uniforms, and single-gender spaces should be treated according to a student’s assigned sex at birth, though gender-neutral options or unisex uniforms are permissible.
Finally, sex education inclusive of LGBTQ+ issues is legally mandated and must be provided for secondary school students, but it can include LGBTQ-negative perspectives from Catholic teaching. The guide closes with appendices of resources and a glossary.
LGBTQ+ advocates in England have sharply criticized the Diocese of Nottingham’s guidance. Notts LGBT+ Network, a local equality group, said it was “disappointed” with the “regressive” advice. Martin Stone, a Notts LGBT+ Network leader, told the BBC:
“The Bishop of Nottingham has previously been explicitly clear about the warm welcome that LGBTQ+ Catholics should receive in the diocese. To now ban discussions of arguably the most important month in the LGBTQ+ calendar in [C]atholic schools could be seen as a confusing and contradictory decision.
“Pride Month is ultimately a celebration of love, equality and diversity. We have volunteers from multiple faiths and many of them equally associate those attributes with their religious beliefs too, so we’d certainly welcome a discussion with the Bishop of Nottingham about this decision.”
Nottinghamshire Pride, which organizes LGBTQ+ celebratory and educational events each June, called the guidance “disappointing” and “regressive.” The group’s statement continued, per MSN:
“Given the recent comments made by the Pope, we would have hoped to have seen more positive action from the diocese in our area. . .To all LGBT+ Catholics who ever feel excluded by their church, remember that you will always have a home with Notts Pride.”
Pride Month is a common celebration of LGBTQ+ identities, but one that is carried out in many different ways.
If there are aspects of Pride with which the Diocese of Nottingham disagrees, there are still many aspects - recognizing each person’s dignity, embracing oneself as beloved by God, rejoicing in community - very much aligned with Catholicism.
Generalizations and writing off Pride wholesale is not productive, nor does it best serve students or their families.
As Nottinghamshire Pride rightly points out, Pope Francis has shown that, even where there are differences, finding commonalities and emphasizing them is the better path for LGBTQ+ inclusion.