The LGBT Church in Wales

Drawing on the teaching of the Bible, and of the Church down through the centuries, the Church in Wales Marriage Service talks about marriage as a gift of God. Marriage is described as the lifelong, faithful union between a man and a woman, and married love is compared with the love Jesus has for his people – a love expressed in his willing sacrifice of himself on the cross. 

Church in Wales Weddings

 

The Governing Body of the Church in Wales will next meet on April 14-15 2021.  Details of a Consultation have been issued:

"A Bill to authorise experimental use of proposed revisions of the Book of Common Prayer (service of Blessing following a Civil Partnership or Marriage between two people of the same sex)"

In an explanatory memorandum the bishops 'unreservedly and collectively' commend to the Governing Body, a service of Blessing following a Civil Partnership or Marriage between two people of the same sex.

The standing Committee has appointed a Select Committee ‘for the purpose of considering and collating any amendments which members of the Governing Body may wish to move to the Bill’. 

The Chair of the sub-committee is the John 8:32 quoting vicar whose church in the above photo has the Holy Table decked in rainbow colours, not of God's covenant with all living creatures but of those who like bishops and priests in the Church in Wales regularly parade under the LGBT rainbow flag. 

The bishops claim that the Rite is a "step on the way towards repentance of a history in the Church which has demonised and persecuted gay and lesbian people, forcing them into fear, dishonesty and sometimes even hypocrisy, and which has precluded them from living." 

Utter balderdash! Yes, homosexuality was treated as a crime in the past and is still in parts of the world, punishable by death in some countries. I have no experience of the bishops' allegations. Rather the reverse when trying to uphold traditional marriage which is the union  of one man and one woman for life.

Much has changed. 

 Civil partnerships rightly extended legal protection to same sex partners leaving any physical attraction between them and God.

Many Anglicans of conscience have been left by their Church leaving their LGBT trumpeting bishops to lead astray what remains of their flock.

  

 As predicted in 2017, liberal drift has engulfed the Church in Wales. There are gay bishops, transgender priests with same sex marriage on the cards. Polyamory next?

This Bill makes every Church in Wales member complicit in the bishops' actions.

Postscript [12.12.2020]

1. The bishops' memorandum is discussed on Anglican Unscripted (edition 636) starting at 25 Mins in.

https://youtu.be/vSrv7ZAumIM

2. The Explanatory Memorandum from the Bishops of the Church in Wales – a response.

    Reflections of an Anglican Theologian

Pope's support for same-sex civil unions

Pope Francis                                                                                  Source: Twitter

American Magazine carries the headline:

 "Pope Francis declares support for same-sex civil unions for the first time as pope"

"Gay couples deserve legal protections for their relationships" Pope Francis said in a documentary.

Fine. Not so fine if this is taken as a green light leading to same-sex marriage. Marriage is between a man and a woman, to the exclusion of all others and for life.

Same sex partnerships are to be welcomed but activists take any opportunity to further their cause. Witness feminism in the Church and how civil partnerships were bent and twisted in demands for same sex marriage.

Pope Francis has not changed his stance. When Archbishop of Buenos Aires he advocated same-sex civil unions in an attempt to block a same-sex marriage law.

Probably the best archbishop we never had, Bishop Michael Nazir Ali, summarises the situation in this tweet:

"Anyone living together in long term arrangements should have legal protection. This can include siblings or mother and daughter, as well as those in other kinds of relationships being protected eg in tenancy or visiting rights. Such legislation, however, should not mimic marriage."

Exactly.

Marriage

Church wedding                                                                                          Source: Church of England

In 2017 Premier reported that Anglican church weddings had reach a record low: "Figures from the Office for National Statistics show they hosted 49,717 ceremonies in 2014, a reduction compared to 50,226 in 2013."

In April this year the Church Times reported that "for the first time ever, fewer than one quarter of all marriages in England and Wales were religious ceremonies. They accounted for 24 per cent of marriages in 2016, falling by nearly a half (48 per cent) from two decades ago. In the same period of time, the number of all marriages fell by 28 per cent. In 1966, a third of marriages were civil ceremonies. Since 1992, civil marriages have increasingly outnumbered religious marriages every year."

The Government plans to introduce a new system of registration for marriages, including church weddings, in England and Wales.

Premier reports that the new system could lead to criminal offences and £1,000 fines. Under changes which may be law before 2020, couples will no longer be given a marriage certificate at the end of a church wedding. Instead of being asked to sign a register and certificate, they will instead sign a "marriage schedule", the Faculty Office said. The couple then have to take this document to their local register office to record their marriage into a database and only then will they get a certificate, it added.

A London-based Anglican priest commented said it was "an astonishing change to the way marriages are recorded. Now, instead of marriages being registered then and there by the priest, the couple will get a temporary certificate which they then have to present to the register office within a week of the wedding. When they might want to be on honeymoon."

In addition the Government wants to give every married couple in England and Wales the chance to downgrade their marriage. As the Coalition for Marriage (CM4) points out, by allowing people to downgrade their marriage, the Government is creating new instability, a halfway house to family breakdown. Just because a tiny minority of people want the rights of marriage without the commitment.

The slide continues with another nail in the coffin for Christian marriage!

More marriages in Register Offices followed by Church blessings are likely to lead to more pressure to allow same sex blessings in church.

Civil partnerships were welcomed by many but it did not stop there as illustrated by CM4:

"It’s part of plans to introduce heterosexual civil partnerships, after the Supreme Court ruling last year. C4M predicted this ruling all along. It stems directly from introducing same-sex marriage for homosexual couples in 2014 when they already had access to civil partnerships. The court said this was discriminatory against heterosexuals, who only had access to marriage."

Once people start fiddling with an institution change by stealth takes over as illustrated by the decision to ordain women.

After women were made deacons they complained that they were discriminated against if they were not allowed to be priests. Once they were priests they complained of a stained glass ceiling. Before long virtually anything goes.

The Church of England has lost its way with All the fun of the fair in Cathedrals which are used to play mini golf and provide helter skelter rides at £2 a slide.

There are secularised archbishops charged with being 'not fit for office' by a vicar who says his disclosures about being sexually abused as a teenager were ignored by senior clerics while Justin Welby keeps digging a pit for himself over gay marriage.

One would have thought that the Church would provide some stability based on scripture but that is no longer what the Anglican Church is about. It is about satisfying personal desires regardless of biblical teaching.

In Wales Archbishop John Davies said after a Governing Body vote in September 2018: "The bishops are united in the belief that it is pastorally unsustainable and unjust for the church to continue to make no formal provision for those in committed same-sex relationships."

The Governing Body had agreed by 76 votes to 21 that the lack of formal provision was "pastorally unsustainable". Abdicating all responsibility the archbishop responded: "the vote was an important steer to the bishops in exercising pastoral care." So much for leadership.

Pastoral care used to be in line with scripture and tradition. Under the current regime it has become liberal social work in vestments.

Coalition for Marriage letter

From: Coalition for Marriage (C4M)

WHERE IS DAVID CAMERON’S PROMISE NOW?

Dear marriage supporter,

In February 2013, David Cameron wrote to a constituent who was concerned about the redefinition of marriage:

“You raise particular concerns about the role of teachers. Teachers will continue to have the clear right to express their own beliefs, or that of their faith, in a professional way. This includes the belief that marriage should be between one man and one woman.

No teacher will be required to promote or endorse views which go against their beliefs.”

But now, David Cameron’s assurance is being flatly contradicted by draft Government guidance for England.

An independent school is to be failed if its curriculum “suggests that same-sex marriages or civil partnerships should not be recognised as being lawful unions under civil law”.

If schools have that threat hanging over them, it’s inevitable that teachers who believe in traditional marriage will be prevented from expressing their beliefs. The same goes for pupils. Debate will be shut down.

Many of those who voted in favour of same-sex marriage weren’t expecting disagreement to be forbidden. They weren’t voting for traditional marriage supporters to be gagged. They took promises about free speech – including David Cameron’s – at face value.

But it seems the Department for Education has forgotten those assurances.

We need to remind the Government to keep its promises.

Yours sincerely,

(Sign'd) Colin Hart

Colin Hart
Chairman
Coalition for Marriage (C4M)

Scottish Episcopal Church votes to consider accepting SSM

The bishops of the Scottish Episcopal Church (SEC).                                                                                                                                          Source: SEC

"Today the Scottish Episcopal Church, meeting in its General Synod in Edinburgh, takes the first step in a process which may lead to same sex couples being able to marry in our churches and to our clergy being able to enter into same sex marriages [SSM]. It is a two-year process. In 2016, the voting needs to produce a simple majority in each of the three 'houses' – laity, clergy and bishops. The second and final stage in the process will be reached in 2017 when two-thirds majorities will be needed in each house". - The Most Rev David Chillingworth, Bishop of St Andrews,Dunkled & Dunblane and Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church. Full report here.

Bishop Chillingworth writes: "Within churches, human sexuality issues have the capacity to expose deep fault lines in our understanding of faith. Some see the full inclusion of LGBT people as a matter of justice. Jesus was a person always open to those excluded by others – the lepers, the adulterous woman, tax collector and sinners. Would he not have been also open to LGBT people? Others point to the authority of scripture which in some places warns against same sex relationships. They call us to an understanding of God's law and life as it has been understood from the creation. So this is an important moment for our church. "

The problem with the 'full inclusion' argument is that Christ healed the sick and told the sinner to sin no more. In what category does LGBT fall? LGBT people can hardly claim to be excluded when they are driving the agenda. The legal effects of a civil partnership are almost identical to marriage. To agitate for SSM is counterproductive.

The bishop concludes: "It is not just about whether we can find agreement, it is about whether what we do is within our understanding of our faith."

Unfortunately for Anglicanism, faith has become too malleable. Ultimately will there be anything left if SSM in church is adopted?

Postscript [11.06.2016]

GAFCON offers alternative oversight to Scottish Anglicans

Same sex marriage. Cold feet or a return to sanity? Probably neither.

Cake decorations at a gay wedding. Photograph: Hector Mato/AFP/Getty

The above illustration appeared in The Guardian in 2006 under the heading "Gay marriage could improve health". Actually the article was more about civil partnerships which many applauded as a victory for natural justice. But a connection with same sex marriage (SSM) was being made as though there were little difference between them which is reminiscent of the position taken by those who pressed for the ordination of women.

It was argued that the difference between a deacon and a priest was small, merely saying a few words at the Altar with the authority to pronounce absolution as though neither had any great significance. After the ordination of women to the priesthood was accepted it was argued that if a woman could be a priest it was discriminatory to deny a woman priest the right to become a bishop. The fact that the Anglican Church had no such authority within the Apostolic Church was ignored because Provinces could take authority for themselves under their own constitutions while still professing to be part of the Apostolic Church in their Creed.

Following Western Anglicanism's acceptance of women deacons, priests and bishops, LGBT issues have become the dominant issue, something the Archbishop of  the Church in Wales has been keen to take forward, particularly his gay marriage agenda after bouncing through women bishop legislation. But are his revisionist policies coming unstuck?

Publishing the Agenda for this month's meeting of the Church in Wales' Governing Body a Provincial press release includes this surprise statement under "Other items on the agenda include":
'A report on same-sex marriage consultations which took place in each diocese this year, followed by a plenary debate. Please note: no decision on whether the Church in Wales will change its law to allow same-sex marriage (SSM) will be taken at this meeting – it is debate only.' [My emphasis - Ed.]

Cold feet or a return to sanity? Probably neither. Looking at the Report of the Standing Committee (Item 7) a different picture emerges with this statement:

SAME SEX MARRIAGE
[29.] The Committee was informed that, following the group discussions at the April 2014
Governing Body meeting and work carried out by the Standing Doctrinal Commission,
the Bench had consulted dioceses on three possible options for the way in which the
Church should relate to same sex partnerships in future:
1. No change to the Church’s current teaching and practice on marriage and
partnerships;
2. To allow same sex unions to be blessed in the Church in Wales;
3. To allow same sex couples to marry in the Church in Wales.

[30.] The Committee received a report from the Bench summarising the results of the
consultation with dioceses. The Bench proposed that the results be circulated to
Governing Body members for this meeting when the Governing Body would itself be
invited to discuss the three options. There would be no motion for debate but, at the
end of the discussion, members would be invited to indicate in a secret ballot their
preferred option (and, if they so wished, their second preference). The results would be
announced at the meeting, and would then be considered by the Bishops at a subsequent
Bench meeting. The Bench would report back to the Standing Committee on its
proposed way forward in the light of the consultation. The Committee endorsed the
approach proposed by the Bench. [My emphasis - Ed.]

Readers may wonder why the report from the Bench summarising the results of the consultation with dioceses has not been made public. One would think they are of no concern to the Church members whose views are summarised. The implication is that the results were unacceptable to the Archbishop but by proposing that the results be circulated to Governing Body members to discuss the three options the Bench is likely to receive their desired result from like minded supporters despite the wishes of the Church in general.

Designed to show which way the wind is blowing, what is there to prevent one of Barry's acolytes proposing that a vote be taken? This is what happened when the devious Jackson/Wigley amendment scuppered any meaningful provision for Church in Wales Anglicans who have remained loyal to the Apostolic faith of the Holy Catholic Church. The bishops dropped their own proposals when they saw the wind was in their favour. Sadly the rest is history with the faithful struggling on the best they can supporting a Province which does not support them. But as long as the money rolls in who cares? Certainly not the bench of bishops.

So more skulduggery as witnessed in the deceitful Code of Practice manoeuvres to complete +Barry's secular agenda? In this video the Archbishop refers to the Bench's two stage legislation which was supposed to make provision for those who are opposed to women bishops but abandoned after the the first part was accepted. Unscrupulous, devious and cunning it seems that nothing will deter Dr Morgan from achieving his secular objectives even if his policies destroy the Church in Wales in the process.

Little surprise, then, that members have become disillusioned giving rise to this comment which appeared in the Conclusion (Section 1) of the note after the Diocese of St Asaph's SSM deliberations:

"Clear support of traditional teaching
There is a clear group of about 19% of the respondents who reject any change in marriage doctrine and not only oppose the blessing of same sex unions, object to the unions themselves. Comments indicate that they do want change – but this is a significant change in the teaching and practice of the church to reinforce the traditional theology of marriage in preaching, teaching and pastoral practice. They state that the Bible is clear and so the church should be clear.

They fear that many will leave the church if any change in doctrine or practice is made.

In this reading Option 1 is a change option. Comments indicate a distrust of the leadership and membership of Church in Wales. They fear that society’s values are already ruling over biblical values. The call in the comments is for commitment to this option from all, at every level of the church, but especially in leadership. Comments speak of the surprise they feel that the Bishops seek to even ask the question when the Bible is so clear. For them there are no Options, only one Option – to be faithful

There are within the comments calls for celibacy of homosexual persons. One comment speaks the most loving response being to be firm and state that homosexuality is wrong. Comments suggest that Option 1 is the pastoral option. Comments said that blessing that which is condemned in the Bible is sinful and misleading."

It is not surprising then that the latest attendance figures for 2014 show another 2% fall on the previous year along with a 11% Electoral Roll fall, a 15% fall in Confirmations and a 7% fall in Baptisms. Regular income is also down for the sixth successive year. The Report indicates that "regular giving is coming under increasing pressure as general attendance continues to fall and fewer members are required to meet the financial demands of parishes".

The road to ruin continues while +Barry claims "the church of God ... has faced all kinds of difficulties and crises in the past but God has been steadfast in His care for us". The 'church of God', yes, but who cares for the Church in Wales? Not the bishops.

"The Christian faith is based on trust". What a joke!

"In the church you do have to accept a certain amount of trust. After all, if you can't accept that trust is pretty fundamental in the church, then where are we? The whole base of the Christian faith is based on trust."

- Lord Harries of Pentregarth, former Bishop of Oxford

Since the House of Bishops can no longer be trusted to care for all, the implication in Bishop Harries' remark is that they are no longer Christian. You can listen to his interview here. A strong advocate of blessing civil partnerships in church he was rather coy about discussing the current controversy of gay marriages in church saying, "there is a prior and more important step and that is actually warmly to welcome civil partnerships and offer a blessing for them. That is what I think the church could do and what it should do". 

Bishop Harries continues to push the liberal strategy of change by stealth while denying traditionalists what they were promised, an honoured place in the church. If the bishops want to restore trust in themselves they must show due contrition and make proper provision acceptable to orthodox Christians in their care.

Alien marriage

Every time I read the press I become more convinced that many national figures have been possessed by alien spirits. What possible excuse can there be for redefining marriage to accommodate a minority, many of whom see no point in it, other than that they are being driven by alien forces?

David Cameron's assertion that marriage is such 'a great institution' that all should have the opportunity to marry is absurd when the institution of marriage is increasingly ignored by heterosexual couples who prefer to cohabit in a less privileged position than same sex couples benefiting from 'civil partnerships' which are already widely regarded as 'marriage' in all but name. 

Boris Johnson's change of heart is of mega proportions while Tory strategist George Osborne has placed same-sex marriage at the centre of the the Party's bid to win the next General Election!  Also joining the clamour is Sir John Major, former Tory Prime Minister and acknowledged adulterer who would have been better advised to keep his head down as would have his co-adventurer, also a fan of gay marriage.

Hoist with his own petard is former Archbishop of Canterbury George Carey who called on church leaders to “rip up its rule book” and speed through the introduction of women bishops when he disapproved of a NO vote over women bishops without proper provision for those opposed to the measure. Given his "highly controversial" remarks at a rally of anti-equality campaigners, that "opponents of gay marriage are being treated in a similar way to the Jews at start of Nazi rule in Germany", the Archbishop should at least have some feeling for the way orthodox Anglicans have been treated.

Always keen to support a minority other than orthodox Christians in his own Church of Wales is their Archbishop Barry Morgan who displayed similar double standards when he warned: “Gays and lesbians claim they are still treated as second-class citizens, tolerated at best and vilified at worst. Very often homosexuality is talked about as if real people were not involved and gays and lesbians complain of being talked about rather than talked to in Church.” If he believes that the Archbishop needs to get out more or change his advisers. 

Heterosexual Christians no more want to see gays and lesbians treated as second-class citizens any more than heterosexual Christians want to be branded as bigots for holding their genuinely held belief that marriage can take place only between a man and a woman. If same-sex couples want to be 'united', 'pledged' or otherwise 'associated' that is up to them but to be 'married' is totally alien to the meaning of the word. If that is not obvious to our political and religious leaders then they must be possessed of an alien spirit. 

Self or selfless?

The current debate on gay marriage ignores an important aspect of marriage - children. Children may not be in the minds of all gay or lesbian couples but if they are, they ignore the fact that it is normal for a child to have a mother (female) and a father (male). 

In probably the most high profile case, Sir Elton John and his partner have admitted that their son "faced 'challenges' and potential 'double' stigma as he grew up and have consulted counsellors to find out the best way of dealing with any potential problems." Hardly surprising when the boy's 'mother' (and possibly his biological father) will be 84 when Zachary Jackson Levon Furnish-John is 21 and his father (also possibly his biological father) is in his 70th year and both are/were male. In the US there was another bizarre story of a pregnant father giving birth to a bouncing baby girl. These sort of cases are so far removed from normality that they highlight the absurdity of change for no apparent reason other than self-gratification. I want, therefore I must have, no matter what the consequences.

Fresh from his Review for the Archbishop of Wales who appears to be somewhat accident prone in his choices, the liberal-minded former bishop of Oxford, Lord Harries of Pentregarth has stepped into the debate with the suggestion: "Instead of at first opposing civil partnerships, and then only accepting them grudgingly with gritted teeth, they should have welcomed them warmly from the first and immediately proposed services of commitments and blessing in church. They should do this even now." Few people are any longer interested in what the Anglican Church has to say but it will be interesting to see what trendy recommendations Lord Harries comes up with for the Church in Wales to hasten its further decline.

Many religious and non-religious heterosexual people supported civil partnerships despite reservations that some participants sought to have their partnerships seen as a marriage. In the church this has become a familiar pattern of give a little, grab the lot. Spurious arguments about equality have seen women's ordination and liberal sexuality take more bites out of the apple until there is nothing left but a barely recognised core. The Anglican Communion is now in its death throws as the Anglican Covenant attempts to paper-over the cracks. For some odd reason, once a band wagon starts rolling people jump on for fear of being left behind and branded yesterday's people, many clergy included. 


PM David Cameron has been followed by the Leader of the Opposition Ed Miliband in support of so-called gay rights but in reality it has more to do with electoral advantage than ethics or conscience. By implication Cabinet Minister Francis Maude now associates family values with being nasty!  There is a moral here. Trendy desires have done the Anglican Church no favours in her drive to become more relevant to society. What the country needs is strong leadership based on traditional values instead of pandering to current whims which favour self over selflessness.

Not such a gay day

There is a delicious irony in today's announcement  of government plans to allow churches in England and Wales to host civil partnership ceremonies. The church is complaining of "a breach of undertakings made by government ministers during debates on the Civil Partnership Bill". That has a familiar ring about it here and here and here and here. Need I go on?

Oh what gay day!

If God had intended this, why did He make male and female? He could have done without men and perhaps tucked something under Eve's arm to go with her hand bag. 

Apparently the Church of England has pledged not to allow any of its buildings to be used for civil partnership ceremonies. Now call me cynical but haven't we had promises and pledges before? Civil partnerships were not weddings but that didn't last long. As the Google headline puts it:

  Gay and lesbian couples will get right to marry in church. 

I have no problem with civil partnerships or with gay and lesbian couples. The treatment that many have experienced and still experience around the world is shameful but why is it that liberals can't let things be? Grab an inch and take a mile is their motto with the consequence that religion is becoming irrelevant to many leaving a vacuum to be filled by the one that appears untouchable.

What people want to hear

Recently the shadow Home Secretary found himself in hot water for his secretly recorded anti-gay comments which were contrary to party policy. Similarly former notables oversold themselves in a Channel 4 Despatches sting while attempting to earn more than a few extra bucks for themselves. It is a tempting device.

The general election campaign provides a golden opportunity for telling people what they want to hear. But can the parties deliver so much? Giving “All things to all men” is an impossible task but no doubt we will be treated as idiots and expected to believe it to be possible. Much sadder though are those who hear only what they want to hear making a complete nonsense of the whole process.

Postscript: Gay “Marriage” (2)

In previous blogs on this subject I have suggested that describing Civil Partnerships as “marriage” struck the wrong note. Whether or not civil partners are ‘joined together’ is not a matter with which others need concern themselves so should not be implied.

However, it appears that following the shadow Home Secretary’s boo boo, the Tories are so desperate not to lose pink votes that they had a meeting with Pulpit-crasher Tatchell: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5gjjrw_a-7904Aq0Cy8jE6I2g0xLQ

As Tatchell said afterwards, "The best he [George Osborne] could do on gay marriage was say he would consider it." Not quite what he wanted to hear and certainly not what I wanted to hear but clearly what Osborne thought they wanted to hear.

Gay “Marriage” (2) – Wahee….!

The Independent reports that the amendment to the Equality Bill, which was tabled as a free vote by gay Muslim peer Waheed Alli, received overwhelming backing in the Lords, including from a number of prominent Anglican bishops. The report continued, “MPs are unlikely to oppose [the Bill] because the vote was so overwhelming in the Lords.”

In a previous Blog I predicted that civil partnership blessings would soon be turned into ‘weddings’. Within days pressure was building up to refer to these ceremonies as such and voices have grown ever stronger following the vote in the Lords. Some may regard that simply as semantics but more worrying from The Times, “Church of England clergy will be sued for discrimination if they refuse to “marry” homosexuals under a proposed law, a bishop has warned. Other religious leaders fear that churches that refuse to bless civil partnerships might be forced to close”.

Such a shame to close churches after all the hard work put in by our American friend with her WATCH campaign, supposedly revitalising the church despite its dwindling numbers. Who will put the next nail in the Church of England's coffin I wonder? But I thought this quote from our Muslim friend took the biscuit, “Religious freedom cannot begin and end with what one religion wants.” – Waheed. I shall have to remember that one.