You are here . on the pale blue dot


Blog notes

'Anonymous' comments for publication must include a pseudonym.

They should be on topic and not involve third parties.
If pseudonyms are linked to commercial sites comments will be removed as spam.


Showing posts with label gay bishops. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gay bishops. Show all posts

Tuesday, 12 November 2013

Queer bashing


■ Peter Tatchell:  “Traditional hetero masculinity
oppresses women and gay people, with sexist
jibes, domestic violence, rape, homophobic taunts
and queer-bashing assaults.” 
Source: UK Gay News
Readers may have noticed that I was taken to task by a commentator following the 'Morgan's organ' entry for interpreting 'gifted queer' as a slur rather than a badge of honour. Forgive my ignorance and my apologies to all those queers, gifted or otherwise, who glorify in the appellation while choosing to read this blog if only to find offence when none is intended. For others who are similarly ill-informed in matters queer, there is some preparatory reading on "The New Sexual Radicalism" here.

Lest there be any doubt, I have no problem with 'queers' as such. But let me be clear. I have little if any sympathy for queer bishops who put themselves first by promoting their gay agenda at the expense of the Church. The damage they have caused to the Anglican Communion in particular has been immense yet the promotion of their self-centred movement has been described as progress! The first openly gay bishop in The Episcopal Church, Gene Robinson, attributes this to "decades of activism and of gay people identifying themselves as such" (story here). The reality can be read here. Shrinking congregations hardly equate with progress.

 Earlier this year the House of Bishops announced that they would allow gay clergy to become bishops if they promised to be celibate. I had no problem with that in principle but the policy created a conflict between intrusion and Gene Robinson's "gay activism" which puts bed sharing above house sharing. Activists did themselves no favours with supporters of civil partnerships when it became clear that we had been used by people who regard civil partnerships only as stepping stones to their true goal of same-sex marriage. Same sex people living together for companionship is nothing new. Being able to benefit from the legal safeguards provided by the civil partnership legislation was a matter of justice, not a sexual liberation free for all. I campaigned for civil partnerships on the basis that security should not be denied to people living together for companionship simply because they are of the same sex. But that was not good enough for same-sex marriage campaigners. They demanded that marriage should be redefined. Dave fell for it and made one of his biggest mistakes.

How people behave in the privacy of their own homes, regardless of their sexuality, is not something that should concern others but actively promoting homosexual preferences does not indicate celibacy. The latest rumours have it that the Pilling Report will suggest a further relaxation of the guidlines: "Clerics should be able to follow Church teachings without having to make a solemn vow", what amounts to a "don't ask, don't tell policy" leaving sexual matters to conscience and the mercy of God. The difficulty with this approach is that clerics such as Gene Robinson queer the pitch for others by making it clear that their sexual proclivities are paramount creating open conflict within the Church in a campaign of stealth leading to same sex marriages in church and blessing civil partnerships.

When Prince Charles let it be known that he was to marry Camilla Parker Bowles with whom he had been having an adulterous affair, it was decided that she would be known as the Duchess of Cornwall, not the Princess of Wales for fear of offending people's memories of Princess Diana. It was also misleadingly suggested that she would become the Princess Consort on the accession of Charles to the throne for fear of offending loyal subjects who couldn't bear the thought of 'that woman' being Queen Camilla. Not so according to experts. Unless legislation is enacted, which is most unlikely, when Charles is King we will also have Queen Camilla. This strategy of progression by stealth is the same process which Women and the Church have used in their campaign of self-advancement regardless of the fate of others and is being used by the LGBT movement to advance their objectives.

Homophobia, like Islamophobia, has become a common charge against anyone who dares to have a contrary opinion. So let's get this in proportion. "LGBT people constitute at best 1 percent of the entire globe’s population. Their “rights” are largely non-essential things such as the sentimental need for acceptance, the joy of throwing a wedding banquet, the delight in showering with people of different genitalia, and the ambition of having children without having to share property with a partner of the opposite sex. Yet the campaign for such “rights” has received 6 percent of all generosity in the world, from a pool that also meets the needs of orphans, paupers, refugees, and victims of famine and natural disasters." See Witherspoon Institute report on Sexual Radicalism here.

Gay bishops: Episcopal Bishops Gene
Robinson (New Hampshire, retired, left),
and Mary Glasspool (suffragan, Los
Angeles) with Guy Erwin Bishop of
Southwest California Lutheran Church. 
(Gene Robinson via Twitter)
Not content with the decriminalisation of homosexuality in this country, the introduction of civil partnerships which many non-queers supported, and 'same-sex marriage' which many queers and non-queers alike did not support as Dave rammed it through parliament, queer bashing continues. But queer bashing has been reversed in this country. It is the queers who do the bashing if they take exception to anything they don't like. From UK Gay News: "Gay Activist Says Straight Male Machismo Underpins All Tyranny". If that sounds familiar, it is the same strategy used by the feminist movement to blame all the world's ills on opponents of the ordination of women, see here and here to give two examples.

I must give credit for this entry to a persistent critic who prides himself on being "queer" and who opined in response to a comment: "gifted queer" is not in any way a slur - queers (like myself) have reclaimed the term into a positive self-description. It's the true genuis [sic] of us homosexuals to take an insult and redeem it into a label of self-idenitification [sic] (something almost Christian there). I'd be happy if someone called me a "gifted queer". That is on the same lines as voiced by the 'gifted' but offensive queer, Peter Tatchell who along with other queers invaded the pulpit while the then Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey, was preaching an Easter sermon in his Cathedral, story here. Nothing is sacred any more. The Church is being used from without and within.

The way homosexual people were treated in the past and are still treated in many countries is abominable but so is their treatment of straight people now. To protest in a Cathedral on Easter Sunday showed an astonishing insensitivity but so does the use of the Church by bishops who choose to advance their own cause at the expense of the Church . It has been widely trailed that the Pilling Report, in addition to relaxing the rules on celibacy, will also recommend that "a formal form of liturgy is introduced by the Church for couples entering into same sex ‘marriages’ or civil partnerships". The tail is now wagging the dog. How queer is that!

Thursday, 10 January 2013

C in W: Going for broke



This is a view of the future for the Archbishop of Wales. Women priests and gay bishops in a thoroughly modern setting, bending the church to the fancy of an atheistic society. But will the church survive long enough under the gospel of Barry to achieve his ambitions?

As he continues his political campaigns the Church in Wales struggles to survive. It has been announced in a Press Release today that a group of five people will examine how radical proposals for the Church in Wales can be delivered: "They will look at recommendations made to the Church following an independent review, which took place across Wales last year, and advise the Church on how they can be taken forward." There are recommendations about Governance (I & II), Ministry areas and Team leadership (III) to (VII), Cathedrals (VIII), Leadership training (IX & X), Clergy support (XI), Young people and outreach (XII & XIII), Worship and outreach (XIV), Ministry training (XV to XXI), Dioceses (XXII to XXV), Administration (XXVI), The archiepiscopal see (XXVII to XXIX), Church Buildings (XXX to XXXIII), Finance (XXXIV to XLI), Fees (XLII to XLIV), The Welsh language (XLV), Mission and ministry (XLVI to XLVII), Bishop and archbishop elections (XLVIII), Constitution (XLIX) and Leadership for change (L). 

There has already been a mixed response. From the Diocese of St David's: There was a general feeling that the Province had not sufficiently taken into account the current developments and thinking within the individual Dioceses and the ongoing review of their mission and ministry and vision for the future. It was also considered that the short time frame in which the Diocese was expected to discuss such a large and comprehensive review was not conducive to allow a full discussion of all the issues. I previously reported here that things had got off to a bad start in Dr Morgan's own diocese of Llandaff. But one recommendation has now been achieved, the implementation of Recommendation L: the formation of a small working group charged with processing the changes! Only 49 to go.

Looking at the make up of the working group I see it is to be chaired by a Welsh NHS professional with a business consultant and a market researcher joined by a bishop to say the opening and closing prayers and a vicar perhaps to take the minutes. Whatever the clergy's functions they are outweighed 3 to 2 by business orientated laity, currently a sensitive subject in the C of E, but we must wish them well because my understanding is that even parish officers in the Church in Wales have not heard of the Harries Review let alone comprehend it. But it was an 'independent' review carried out under the chairmanship of Archbishop Morgan's friend and co-conspirator, both of whom are determined to change Anglicanism into a Protestant sect. There lies another problem. The former Bishop of Oxford has a problem with understanding the meaning of the word trust. Doesn't augur well!

Postscript
An interesting description of the review group here. It highlights that "a business consultant and PR and marketing experts have been included [sic] in the group to look at radical shake-up plans for the Church in Wales". Just what the modern church needs! But some spirituality is catered for. The Church in Wales is working in partnership with Good Relations Wales in Teleos which sees spirituality as "a creative and crucial dimension of enlightened organisations and their cultural architecture". The link? Helen Birtwhistle aka Helen Biggin, Chair of the new group.

Personally I find the Gospel more than adequate.