Ship of Fools: The continuing process of shooting oneself in the foot

Thread: The continuing process of shooting oneself in the foot Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=028626

Posted by Horseman Bree (# 5290) on :

Andrew Brown writing "Anglican Mainstream and the Enemies of Christianity" in today's Guardian makes the point that some of the church's splinters go out of their way to prove that they are foolish and arguably unChristian.

(Yes, I know, I read the Guardian. Get over it)

The article deals with a surprisingly badly organised and attended conference focussing on the denigration of gays, which, in the end, only pointed out, very publicly, how out of touch with mainstream Anglicans the Mainstream Anglican group is.

I rather enjoyed this paragraph:

quote:
Two more small straws in this wind came in the form of letters: Lord "Hallelujah" Carey, the former archbishop of Canterbury, signed along with Michael Nazir Ali, the former bishop of Rochester and Wallace Benn, the suffragan bishop of Lewes, a letter defending a psychotherapist who tries to "cure" gay men. That's two has-beens and a never-was lining up on the anti side. Meanwhile 100 serving clergy in the diocese of London signed a letter asking to bless civil partnerships in their churches. Which represents the future?

You'd think Brown might make a good shipmate!

Does Anglican Mainstream carry any significant weight among any but the more reactionary bishops?

Posted by Kaplan Corday (# 16119) on :

Since when was popularity; a local (spatially or chronologically) majority; and the support of isnows (as opposed to hasbeens, who are presumably old, or non-celebrities) been more important than orthodoxy?

Mirabile dictu, Christians from every tradition across the world still regard the Vincentian Canon (“Quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est”) as more important than the opinion of The Guarniad.

The church has always believed, and continues to believe, that the Bible, the faith’s foundation document, teaches that homosexual behaviour (which, regardless of inclination, remains a matter of choice) is unacceptable.

It is amazing to witness the theological erudition which instantly devolves upon any critic of any aspect of Christianity, authorizing them to tack the label “UnChristian” to whatever they happen to dislike.

Does anyone in their right mind really believe that doctrine should be determined by newspaper polls?

Does anyone in their right mind really believe that an opportunistic change of stance on homosexuality would see multitudes embracing the faith and flocking into the churches?

For what it’s worth from a straight, I personally would rather the Bible didn’t forbid homosexual activity, and I agree that a homosexual inclination cannot be “cured”, though, like alcoholism, it can be controlled.

Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
The church has always believed, and continues to believe, that the Bible, the faith’s foundation document, teaches that homosexual behaviour (which, regardless of inclination, remains a matter of choice) is unacceptable.

Ha hahahahaha. Before this gets transvapourised to Dead Horses, I just want to say how beautifully just it is that the church will without a shred of doubt eventually die by its own fucking hideoulsy ugly homophobic sword. Ignorant, damned ignorant tosspoles, the lof of 'em.*

* not KC, I mean, but 'the church'.

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Ha hahahahaha. Before this gets transvapourised to Dead Horses, I just want to say how beautifully just it is that the church will without a shred of doubt eventually die by its own fucking hideoulsy ugly homophobic sword. Ignorant, damned ignorant tosspoles, the lof of 'em.*

* not KC, I mean, but 'the church'.

Just as long as you don't think you're being a Good Little Atheist by saying so. I'm a priest, and I couldn't agree with you more.

Posted by The Great Gumby (# 10989) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
Does anyone in their right mind really believe that doctrine should be determined by newspaper polls?

Does anyone in their right mind really believe that this is being suggested?

Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :

It's an overt Dead Horse, Horseman Bree, despite the final sentence of the OP. No need for me to "out" it.

Off it goes.

Barnabas62
Purgatory Host

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
The church has always believed, and continues to believe, that the Bible, the faith’s foundation document, teaches that homosexual behaviour (which, regardless of inclination, remains a matter of choice) is unacceptable.

Given that 'the church' has no separate mind, 'the church' has never believed anything. The church might have official doctrines though. This is does not necessarily mean that all the PEOPLE in the church believe that the official doctrines are correct - if they did, we wouldn't be here in Dead Horses.

PS As to your personal wish that the Bible didn't forbid all homosexual activity: good news! The copy I read doesn't! [Big Grin]

[ 03. February 2012, 08:15: Message edited by: orfeo ]

Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Ha hahahahaha. Before this gets transvapourised to Dead Horses, I just want to say how beautifully just it is that the church will without a shred of doubt eventually die by its own fucking hideoulsy ugly homophobic sword. Ignorant, damned ignorant tosspoles, the lof of 'em.*

* not KC, I mean, but 'the church'.
Just as long as you don't think you're being a Good Little Atheist by saying so. I'm a priest, and I couldn't agree with you more.

No, you do not steal my thunder in the least bit. On the contrary, I'm only delighted that you share the view from these our high horses.

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
... from these our high horses.

I've never liked horses much. Nasty big smelly things with a will of their own, that keep moving under you while you're trying to keep your balance. Rather like organised religion, really.

Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
I just want to say how beautifully just it is that the church will without a shred of doubt eventually die by its own fucking hideoulsy ugly homophobic sword. Ignorant, damned ignorant tosspoles, the lof of 'em.*

Amen

Posted by LQ (# 11596) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:

The church has always believed, and continues to believe, that the Bible, the faith’s foundation document, teaches that homosexual behaviour (which, regardless of inclination, remains a matter of choice) is unacceptable.

Except those pesky bits of "The Bible" [sic] that don't. "The Bible" (ta biblia = "The Books") doesn't teach anything, as "it" does not exist. As for its components, in addition to Leviticus and Romans, it also includes the inconvenient Galatians ("in Christ there is ... neither male nor female" - much less male and female being the line between the same objective action being good or evil) and the Gospels ("The sabbath [marriage] was made for man"). Heck even the "For this reason" bit contras love to quote has to be quickly cut off before the dangerous "Not all can accept this teaching" and acknowledgement of marginal cases. After all, if we're going to repeatedly and belligerently dare gay Christians to "show us where in the Bible this is acceptable" it will hardly do to be feeding them their own answers!

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
homosexual behaviour (which, regardless of inclination, remains a matter of choice) is unacceptable.
a homosexual inclination cannot be “cured”, though, like alcoholism, it can be controlled.

I have lived a celibate life - I didn't expect to, I didn't choose to, and it has had nothing to do with an inclination to homosexuality, which I don't have.

Knowing what I know about what it is like to live without a great many things beyond mere sex as a result, I would not suggest to anyone that what God wanted for them was for them to go through life alone. In fact, I think He is recorded as saying something about this very matter.

If someone finds that the help fitting (meet) for them happens to be of the same sex, how is this comparable with alchoholism, to be controlled?

Are they supposed to go to HA, and stand up, and say "My name is Adam, and I am a homosexual, and this is my 4532nd day without a loving glance over the breakfast table, a hug when I feel down, someone to share my thoughts with, and laugh with, any touch at all"?

Expletive that.

Penny

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
Are they supposed to go to HA, and stand up, and say "My name is Adam, and I am a homosexual, and this is my 4532nd day without a loving glance over the breakfast table, a hug when I feel down, someone to share my thoughts with, and laugh with, any touch at all"?

Quotes file.

Posted by Aelred of Rievaulx (# 16860) on :

Back to the original question

quote:
Does Anglican Mainstream carry any significant weight among any but the more reactionary bishops?

The answer: NO
And by now even the reactionary ones it did have some credence with (Nazir-Ali, Scott Joynt) have resigned. Some of the peole involved with AM have caused so much havoc for the Anglican Communion with their colleagues around the world that most English bishops will be glad when they finally pack up shop.

The conference was a disaster for them - and with the prominence given to the negative reaction that that has gathered from commentators and others, that end of things Christian is looking decidedly less authoritative than it sometimes has.

In fact AM is a tiny outfit - a busy website which doesn't allow comment, and a small group of extreme people obsessed with trying to control the personal lives of others.

Bad timing too - just before Synod.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

There is a report of AM's conference here. They seem to be a bunch of inadequates who need some loving.

Posted by Aelred of Rievaulx (# 16860) on :

Then they should go and get some - what on God's good earth possesses people to make it their whole mission to stop other people hasving the relationships/enjoying the sex that they do beats me. Perhaps it is all the closet cases in those outfits wanting to stop people enjoying what they "can't" have - but desperately want!

And as for that Lisa Nolland.....

Posted by FooloftheShip (# 15579) on :

From my point of view as a reluctantly single gay man, it feels sometimes like the b**tards have already won, precisely because I am in the situation Penny described. They have moved into my head. Now who's shot himself in the foot?

No text is worth feeling like this. Quite honestly, I sometimes wish my faith hadn't regrown while I was a student, but God just doesn't seem to want to keep his distance. The b**tard.

Posted by whitebait (# 7740) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
..... a homosexual inclination cannot be “cured”, though, like alcoholism, it can be controlled.

I've heard that comparison before. It doesn't stand up.

For every alcoholic there are around twenty moderate drinkers.

... and I'm a very moderate homosexual.

As for AM. They were just beginning their peak of influence in 2003 when they were desperate to stop Jeffrey John becoming a bishop. They said some very unpleasant (and untrue) things about gay people, and as I was only just coming to proper terms with my own sexuality then (and celibate like Jeffrey), I found it very hurtful and confusing - especially as many people I respected seemed to be in support of AM.

Since then, their increasingly rabid obsessions with sex seem to have shown them up as the weird little group they really are. Their continued outpourings are now actually working in gay people's favour, in much the same way as Fred Phelps extremism.

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :

quote:
Originally posted by FooloftheShip:
From my point of view as a reluctantly single gay man, it feels sometimes like the b**tards have already won, precisely because I am in the situation Penny described. They have moved into my head. Now who's shot himself in the foot?

No text is worth feeling like this. Quite honestly, I sometimes wish my faith hadn't regrown while I was a student, but God just doesn't seem to want to keep his distance. The b**tard.

(((((FooloftheShip)))))
Not as good, of course.

Penny

Posted by LutheranChik (# 9826) on :

quote:
They have moved into my head. Now who's shot himself in the foot?

Broadly paraphrasing my therapist: Don't let the fucktards rent space in your head.

Posted by FooloftheShip (# 15579) on :

quote:
Originally posted by LutheranChik:

quote:
They have moved into my head. Now who's shot himself in the foot?

Broadly paraphrasing my therapist: Don't let the fucktards rent space in your head.

They seem to be renting space in my head and in my church. WTF do I do about that???

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

quote:
Originally posted by FooloftheShip:

quote:
Originally posted by LutheranChik:

quote:
They have moved into my head. Now who's shot himself in the foot?

Broadly paraphrasing my therapist: Don't let the fucktards rent space in your head.
They seem to be renting space in my head and in my church. WTF do I do about that???

It may be time to find a different congregation to worship with.

I am not gay, and can only passingly empathise. I stayed in my previous ConEvo church far too long - and my only fault was I was politically left-leaning. The cognitive dissonance was extraordinary, but the scale of it only finally recognisable when we decamped to another church.

Posted by FooloftheShip (# 15579) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
I am not gay, and can only passingly empathise. I stayed in my previous ConEvo church far too long - and my only fault was I was politically left-leaning. The cognitive dissonance was extraordinary, but the scale of it only finally recognisable when we decamped to another church.

I should clarify. My congregation isn't homophobic - not at all. The wider C of E, however, seems far more concerned with providing space for homophobes than nurturing my desire to be a "human being fully alive" as a rather wise saint once described as the glory of God.

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

quote:
Originally posted by FooloftheShip:

quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
I am not gay, and can only passingly empathise. I stayed in my previous ConEvo church far too long - and my only fault was I was politically left-leaning. The cognitive dissonance was extraordinary, but the scale of it only finally recognisable when we decamped to another church.
I should clarify. My congregation isn't homophobic - not at all. The wider C of E, however, seems far more concerned with providing space for homophobes than nurturing my desire to be a "human being fully alive" as a rather wise saint once described as the glory of God.

In which case, your congregation is wise and sensible. Wise and sensible enough to ignore the squalling from the shallow end and get on with embodying the incarnation.

The CofE (both my previous and current churches are CofE) is a funny old stick and doesn't handle change well. In 50 years time, the matter will be done and dusted, because my kids will be in charge. [Razz]

Posted by FooloftheShip (# 15579) on :

Let's see if I've successfully incarnated your wisdom (in my signature)

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by FooloftheShip:

quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
I am not gay, and can only passingly empathise. I stayed in my previous ConEvo church far too long - and my only fault was I was politically left-leaning. The cognitive dissonance was extraordinary, but the scale of it only finally recognisable when we decamped to another church.
I should clarify. My congregation isn't homophobic - not at all. The wider C of E, however, seems far more concerned with providing space for homophobes than nurturing my desire to be a "human being fully alive" as a rather wise saint once described as the glory of God.

I agree wholeheartedly. Maybe we need a 'Pink Sunday', as has been suggested before, when all LGBTs and all who support LGBTs stay away from church. Maybe we'd them know what is the true 'mind of the church.'

Posted by Aelred of Rievaulx (# 16860) on :

Why should the LGBTs have to spend yet another occasion on the OUTSIDE of things? Let a "Pink Sunday" be one when LGBTs and their families, friends and supporters were very specifically invited in to church - and all the people who think we are a problem can stop at home. Just for once.

Posted by Aelred of Rievaulx (# 16860) on :

Fool of the Ship says

quote:
They seem to be renting space in my head and in my church. WTF do I do about that???

I would move church. That one sounds unhealthy. Lots of religion is.

Find a place where you can be yourself without looking over your shoulder, or feeling bad about yourself. I simply don't believe that the God shown us in Jesus has any problem at all about you being gay and working out a way of being a sexual human being at the same time.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Aelred of Rievaulx:
Why should the LGBTs have to spend yet another occasion on the OUTSIDE of things? Let a "Pink Sunday" be one when LGBTs and their families, friends and supporters were very specifically invited in to church - and all the people who think we are a problem can stop at home. Just for once.

Agree but the point about LGBTs staying away is that most churches would cease to function.

Posted by ToujoursDan (# 10578) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:

quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
homosexual behaviour (which, regardless of inclination, remains a matter of choice) is unacceptable.
a homosexual inclination cannot be “cured”, though, like alcoholism, it can be controlled.
I have lived a celibate life - I didn't expect to, I didn't choose to, and it has had nothing to do with an inclination to homosexuality, which I don't have.

Knowing what I know about what it is like to live without a great many things beyond mere sex as a result, I would not suggest to anyone that what God wanted for them was for them to go through life alone. In fact, I think He is recorded as saying something about this very matter.

If someone finds that the help fitting (meet) for them happens to be of the same sex, how is this comparable with alchoholism, to be controlled?

Are they supposed to go to HA, and stand up, and say "My name is Adam, and I am a homosexual, and this is my 4532nd day without a loving glance over the breakfast table, a hug when I feel down, someone to share my thoughts with, and laugh with, any touch at all"?

Expletive that.

Penny

Posted by malik3000 (# 11437) on :

quote:
Originally posted by leo:

quote:
Originally posted by Aelred of Rievaulx:
Why should the LGBTs have to spend yet another occasion on the OUTSIDE of things? Let a "Pink Sunday" be one when LGBTs and their families, friends and supporters were very specifically invited in to church - and all the people who think we are a problem can stop at home. Just for once.
Agree but the point about LGBTs staying away is that most churches would cease to function.

At our parish we have never had a specific day when LGBTs and Family/friends were specially invited, as I don't think it would be necessary, as it is very clear that we are a welcoming parish (and in fact, not to sound vain, we have a reputation for it). One of our priests is gay, as was one that we had who recently retired. We do have, every year, when the Gay Pride Parade takes place and it goes past our church, we have a welcome table set out with refreshments for the participants. We are on a main street where there are several parades and that's the only one we do something like this for.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0