|
|
|
|
Gays must change, says archbishop
Jonathan Wynne-Jones
(Filed: 27/08/2006)
The archbishop of Canterbury has told homosexuals that they need to change their behaviour if they are to be welcomed into the church, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal.
Rowan Williams has distanced himself from his one-time liberal support of gay relationships and stressed that the tradition and teaching of the Church has in no way been altered by the Anglican Communion's consecration of its first openly homosexual bishop.
The declaration by the archbishop - rebutting the idea that homosexuals should be included in the church unconditionally - marks a significant development in the church's crisis over homosexuals. According to liberal and homosexual campaigners, it confirmed their fears that the archbishop has become increasingly conservative - and sparked accusations that he has performed an "astonishing" U-turn over the homosexual issue.
advertisement
Liberals who had previously hailed his appointment said they are dismayed that he appears to have turned his back on an agenda that he previously championed.
However, the archbishop's comments have received strong support from traditionalists. The Rev Rod Thomas, a spokesman for the evangelical pressure group Reform, said: "There is no doubt that he is distancing himself from the views that he has previously expressed. He's right to want to see people converted. The fact that he's saying this is a hugely welcome development."
The revelations came in a newspaper interview last week in which the archbishop denied that it was time for the church to accept homosexual relationships, suggesting that it should be welcoming rather than inclusive. "I don't believe inclusion is a value in itself. Welcome is. We don't say 'Come in and we ask no questions'. I do believe conversion means conversion of habits, behaviours, ideas, emotions," he told a Dutch journalist.
"Ethics is not a matter of a set of abstract rules, it is a matter of living the mind of Christ. That applies to sexual ethics."
At the same time he tried to distance himself from a controversial essay he wrote 20 years ago, in which he defended same-sex love. "That was when I was a professor, to stimulate debate," he claimed. "It did not generate much support and a lot of criticism - quite fairly on a number of points."
The archbishop said that he was determined to preserve the unity of the church from being destroyed by the warring factions in the gay crisis. He said he has backed a resolution which says that homosexual practice is incompatible with the Bible.
The Rev Giles Goddard, the chairman of Inclusive Church, a liberal group, said the archbishop's comments revealed an "astonishing" change in his position. He added: "The implication is that there is no justification in scripture for the welcome of lesbian and gay people. It appears that he has moved into the conservative camp."
Chris Bryant, a homosexual Labour MP, said that many people would feel betrayed by the archbishop's comments. "The Church of England wouldn't survive without gay clergy in inner cities.
"People will feel this is a huge betrayal. Rowan has refashioned the Church of England into a narrow-minded, conservative sect."
Liberals, meanwhile challenged the archbishop's attempt to downplay his involvement in the homosexual movement, claiming that he had in fact played a significant role in spearheading moves to make the Anglican Church more tolerant.
In 1989, while professor of divinity at Oxford University, he founded the Institute for the Study of Christianity and Sexuality - a group that set out to combat bigotry towards homosexuals, this newspaper has learnt. At the time it was launched, he said: "The pressure that some church figures put upon people of differing sexual identities is a greater disgrace than anything else seen in the church."
A Lambeth Palace spokesman said of the archbishop's latest comments: "They do not represent a departure from the Christian understanding of sexual relationships."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/08/27/ngay27.xml
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Homosexuals need to change their behaviour"
Either that is a completely inaccurate quote from the Torygraph, or Rowan Williams is really losing it in his old age.
Being homosexual doesn't "mean" any behaviour at all. There are plenty of celibate gay people. There are married gay people. "Homosexual" only denotes an attraction, and you don't need to act on it for it to count. If he means changing the attraction he is sorely deluded, because there is no evidence it works.
What is "homosexual behaviour", anyway? Admitting the attraction? Being in a relationship with another man? A sexual relationship? A platonic relationship? Having promiscuous sex? Entering a civil partnership? Telling the church to bugger off?
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cossie
|
 |
On fire! |
Location: Exiled in North East Engl...
Registered: July 2003
Messages: 1699
|
|
|
... but the second-in-command of the Anglican Communion is Dr. John Sentamu, Archbishop of York, and HE is very much an 'inclusive' Christian in the excellect tradition of the likes of Desmond Tutu, former Archbishop of Cape Town.
Google will give you lots of info about John Sentamu, and it's well worth reading.
There's hope for the Anglicans/Episcopalians yet!
For a' that an' a' that,
It's comin' yet for a' that,
That man tae man, the worrld o'er
Shall brithers be, for a' that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
 |
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13800
|
|
|
the Arch of Cant seems only to care abouyt keeping the church intact. This is a commercial thing because any split by (eg) the African fundamentalists would cause so many lawsuits regaridng the CofE's property that lawyers would become wealthy!
The CofE is very big business, you see.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I thought the Church of England was about being Christian, and that being a Christian meant doing the right thing. How stupid of me.
Presumably he is now so surrounded by sycophants that he doesn't realise how out of touch he is getting.
No-one in the UK actually cares what the African church is doing. I can't believe that it would not be worth it, in anything other than pecuniary terms, for the church to separate. Why should other countries' churches have any say in how the English church is run?
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13800
|
|
|
Well we "owned" much of Africa, once. And the African Anglicans are part of the Anglican Communion. Remmeber that this is an evangelical religion.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If it's evangelical -- in other words, the good news of Christ radiates outwards from the enlightened to the "uncivilised heathens" -- then shouldn't changes in society and outlook do the same?
That's a rhetorical question. Evidently they don't. Or, if they do/will, it isn't the church that is carrying that message.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cossie
|
|
On fire! |
Location: Exiled in North East Engl...
Registered: July 2003
Messages: 1699
|
|
|
I have to say that I think both of you are being unfair.
First of all, the Anglican Communions outside of the Church of England have no direct input to the stance of that Church. The problem is the position adopted by Rowan Williams, who is the leader of the Church of England as well as being leader of the whole communion. He's bringing his 'own' Church into line with the Central African Churches, and I believe that he's wrong to do so. The Central African churches are suspect in a number of ways; in particular, the Church in Zimbabwe has aligned itself with Robert Mugabe, one of the most obnoxious dictators of our lifetime.
The Church in South Africa is entirely different; under Desmond Tutu and his successor it has consistently preached the doctrine of inclusion, and gays are made welcome.
Back in the UK, what impressed me about the Anglican Commumion when I was young was the fact that it was all-embracing. Some Anglican churches were 'High Church', and virtually indistinguishable from Roman Catholic Churches except that the services were conducted in English, rather than Latin. Others had a pretty strong affinity with Methodism - rousing hymns and evangelical leanings. You could choose your place on the spectrum and find a Church to suit you, but all worked together for the good of the Anglican Communion.
Of course, social changes have had an effect. Political correctness has put minority views ahead of the common good. Nevertheless, the 'conservatives' in the home team seem to be a voiciferous minority. I've already mentioned the Archbishop of York, whom I admire greatly. The former Bishop of Durham, David Jenkins - now 81 - is another of my religious heroes. As Bishop of Durham - the fourth in the Anglican hierarchy, after the Archbishops of Canterbury and York and the Bishop of London - he caused great controversy by arguing that belief in the resurrection of Jesus was not a prerequisite of the Christian faith; what mattered was acceptance of Jesus' message of tolerance, forgiveness and inclusion. David Jenkins blessed one of the first civil unions in England (and, regrettably, was chastised by the Bishop of Newcastle for doing so). He is currently Assistant Bishop of Ripon and Leeds, and has preached regularly throughout that diocese. He was recently banned by the local vicar from preaching in a parish of three churches in Upper Teesdale, following objections from a few members of the congregation at Romaldkirk that he had used the words 'bloody' and 'damn' in one of his sermons. The parishioners of nearby Cotherstone revolted, claiming that he was the most inspirational preacher ever to visit their church. The Bishop of Ripon and Leeds accepted their petition and over-ruled the vicar.
I may no longer be a committed Christian, but I believe that the Anglican Communion offers the best hope of progress for those who ARE Christian. Criticism of individuals is valid in this context, but the Church as a whole merits understanding, if not support.
For a' that an' a' that,
It's comin' yet for a' that,
That man tae man, the worrld o'er
Shall brithers be, for a' that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Harris: Elect Christians or sin
U.S. Rep. Katherine Harris (R-Fla.), the leading GOP contender for a Florida U.S. Senate seat, said not electing Christians amounts to “legislating sin.”
“If you are not electing Christians, tried and true, under public scrutiny and pressure, if you’re not electing Christians then in essence you are going to legislate sin,” Harris told the Florida Baptist Witness in an interview last week. “Whenever we legislate sin and we say abortion is permissible and we say gay unions are permissible, then average citizens who are not Christians, because they don’t know better, we are leading them astray and it’s wrong.”
Harris, who also described the separation of church and state as a “lie,” later issued a clarification to Fox News saying that she is pro-Israel and supports Holocaust education.
Harris, famous for her role as Florida secretary of state in stopping the 2000 presidential recount, is likely to take the Republican nomination, but lags substantially behind incumbent Sen. Bill Nelson, a Democrat.
The paradox has often been noted that the United States, founded in secularism, is now the most religiose country in Christendom, while England, with an established church headed by its constitutional monarch, is among the least. (Richard Dawkins, 2006)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Republicans have shot themselves in the foot and have a very bad case of foot in mouth. electing tried and true Christians into office is the forrunner of a dictatorship run by Jerry (fatso Castro) Falwell.
I believe in Karma....what you give is what you get returned........
Affirmation........Savage Garden
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13800
|
|
|
Odd, is it not? This is the religion on whoch christianity was founded.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gay snub firefighters disciplined
Nine firefighters who refused to offer safety advice to people attending a gay pride march have been disciplined.
A watch manager in Glasgow has been demoted to crew manager with a £5,000 salary cut. The remaining firefighters were given a written warning.
Strathclyde Fire and Rescue said all nine would undergo diversity training.
A spokesman said: "The nine now accept that they should have performed their duties. Their refusal was a fundamental breach of their core responsibilities."
The nine firefighters are based at Cowcaddens and were asked to distribute community safety advice to people attending the Pride Scotia festival in George Square on 24 June.
The fire service spokesman said: "Firefighters cannot, and will not, pick and choose to whom they offer fire safety advice.
"Strathclyde Fire and Rescue has a responsibility to protect every one of the 2.3m people it serves, irrespective of race, religion or sexuality."
The Fire Brigades Union in Scotland said it would be waiting until the individual members had been contacted before commenting.
Chairman Roddy Robertson said one option for the men would be to appeal against the verdict.
Mr Robertson said: "With any disciplinary outcome, it could be subject to an appeal.
"But we have to wait until the members have been contacted.
"We would be unable to comment until the disciplinary process has been exhausted.
"If the members don't wish to proceed, then we can make a comment."
Before the hearings started last month, Mr Robertson said the issue had been "highly controversial".
Some of the firefighters involved had argued it would be embarrassing for them to turn up in uniform to the Pride Scotia event, while others claimed it would contradict their moral beliefs.
The decision to discipline the firefighters was described by the Roman Catholic Church as "dismaying".
Archbishop Mario Conti of Glasgow said: "We have followed this case with concern.
"They were asked, while in uniform, to hand out leaflets during a demonstration where they had legitimate concerns about being the subject of taunts and jokes, and in which in some cases, their religious sensibilities would have been grossly offended by people dressed as priests and nuns lampooning the Church."
He added: "That the officers concerned are being forced to undergo diversity training is alarming. The duty to obey one's conscience is a higher duty than that of obeying orders."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/5301334.stm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My religious sensibilities (atheism) are grossly offended by the implication that, in the eyes of the Roman Catholic Church, gay people shouldn't matter so much to the fire service.
If you're offended by people dressing up as nuns and priests, well -- I'm offended by people dressing up as nuns and priests as well. Especially when they spend their days talking to a non-existant entity and spouting rubbish like this.
Shouldn't the Archbishop be going on "diversity training", too? I can't think of any punishment more patronising. 
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
... never, ever, go to fancy dress parties?
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The most suprising thing - to me - is the lack of understanding of the sensitivities involved shown by Strathclyde Fire & Rescue.
Yes - they were legally right to insist that the nine carry out their orders.
Yes - they are morally right that the Fire service must never discriminate, but must serve all sections of the community impartially. If I'm in a burning house I'd like to be rescued regardless of whether I'm wearing a Gay Pride T-shirt or not!
But are Strathclyde Fire & Rescue really such a homophobic organisation that a call for volunteers would not have found nine out gay firefighters who would have loved to be paid to take part? (Actually, don't answer that: yes, they probably are!)
As for the Archbishop Mario Conti objecting to priests being lampooned ... perhaps he should go to some of the end-of-year shows put on by students at some of the theological colleges! Judging from what has been repeated to me of some of the material, the ability of future priests to laugh at themselves and the hierachy is a cause of hope for the future.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Strange, isn't it, how fond these boys are of honorary titles..
Is he going to present them to St. Peter when his time comes?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I guess we are all equal in the eyes of God... but some are more equal than others.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indeed! 
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
And a ray of hope! 
