Ship of Fools: Abp Welby will attend your (gay) wedding

Thread: Abp Welby will attend your (gay) wedding 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=030820

Posted by Joesaphat (# 18493) on :

but will have you defrocked afterwards. What do people make of his interview by Michael Gove?

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

what interview? where?

Posted by Chocoholic (# 4655) on :

I've found one asking about what if his children were gay and if he'd attend theirs but not about anyone else.

Posted by Joesaphat (# 18493) on :

The Spectator, a couple of days ago... just don't venture into the comments unless you actually feel too happy.

Posted by Joesaphat (# 18493) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Chocoholic:
I've found one asking about what if his children were gay and if he'd attend theirs but not about anyone else.

That's the one... I just extrapolated to assume that he says he's happy to attend gay weddings in general and yet happy with a ban on their celebration in church... unless of course his kids are not Christians.

Posted by TomM (# 4618) on :

I believe the interview in question is this one:
Spectator Interview

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

It is worth pointing out- although I do not claim that this applies to ++Welby- that one can believe that
a) what is now described as marriage between two persons of the same sex is not, ontologically, quite the same thing as marriage between persons fo the opposite sex AND
(b) that what is described as marriage between two persons of the same sex is neither sinful nor in any way an inferior or less honourable an institution than is marriage between persons fo the opposite sex.

Now, where you go from that position, which is more or less mine, is a judgement call. For myself, I would rather we had different but genuinely equal words for the two. But we don't and I can't think of any term for what is described as marriage between two persons of the same sex which doesn't imply that it is in some way inferior. So I grit my teeth and say that sacrificing a degree of terminological exactitude is much the lesser of the two evils, and let's call it marriage and have done with it. But that doesn't mean I think it's quite the same thing as marriage as it has previously been understood. It just means that applying the same name to the two is the only way I can think of of according to both institutions the equal honour which they should be accorded.

I hope that it goes without saying that I think that the CofE's policy towards gay clergy who marry their partners is petty and vindictive and wrong. I would much rather the Church required cohabiting gay clergy to marry, just as it would require cohabiting heterosexual clergy.

[ 12. December 2015, 10:33: Message edited by: Albertus ]

Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :

I'm glad he is (like me) addicted to "The West Wing", a series hardly known for either gay bashing or sympathy for right wing evangelicalism.

(A famous example.)

At present I'm happy with "Let Welby be Welby".

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Joesaphat:
The Spectator, a couple of days ago... just don't venture into the comments unless you actually feel too happy.

Naturally, I ventured.

You know the way J J Abrams rebooted Star Trek, thus sending its world down a different trouser leg universe?

I feel I've just had a glimpse of another leg from ours.

[ 14. December 2015, 18:02: Message edited by: Penny S ]

Posted by Bibaculus (# 18528) on :

Blimey. The poor chap was obviously put on the spot. What else could he say? I wouldn't suppose that the fact that a man wants to support his children, even if they are making choices which he would not consider ideal, should be taken as making an ex cathedra statement of the Church of England's doctrine; even less that His Grace is indicating that he would be delighted to sing a nuptial High Mass for any random same sex couple who wanted to marry in Canterbury Cathedral.

Posted by Jolly Jape (# 3296) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bibaculus:
Blimey. The poor chap was obviously put on the spot. What else could he say? I wouldn't suppose that the fact that a man wants to support his children, even if they are making choices which he would not consider ideal, should be taken as making an ex cathedra statement of the Church of England's doctrine; even less that His Grace is indicating that he would be delighted to sing a nuptial High Mass for any random same sex couple who wanted to marry in Canterbury Cathedral.

It's probably something that he's though about in quite a bit of detail, actually, since Vicky Beeching is a close family friend. He must have considered what would happen if or when she were to meet someone she wanted to marry.

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :

Penny--

quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:

quote:
Originally posted by Joesaphat:
The Spectator, a couple of days ago... just don't venture into the comments unless you actually feel too happy.
Naturally, I ventured.

You know the way J J Abrams rebooted Star Trek, thus sending its world down a different trouser leg universe?

I feel I've just had a glimpse of another leg from ours.

Ok, I've skimmed a bunch of the comments. They sound like a lot of stuff that's been said on the Ship. (Of course, most of us would each have gone on a bit longer! [Biased]

) A lot of it sounds like the current homosexuality thread in Hell.

What's alt-universe about the comments on the site?

Thx.

ETA: From what the ABC said in that article, I like him--though I disagree about the religious ad.

[ 22. December 2015, 01:15: Message edited by: Golden Key ]

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :

Golly, I've forgotten! And I'm not going back to re-read. But they didn't seem to be the utterances of anyone like anyone I have ever known*, and much more extreme than the threads here. Ignorant, abusive, poisonous, and quite scarey to think that these people share space in any way with the majority of humanity.

*Or indeed of the people who infest the Guardian and who are clearly not typical Grauniad readers.

[ 22. December 2015, 07:56: Message edited by: Penny S ]

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0