|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Gay clergy wedding at St Bart's, London
|
Cadfael
Shipmate
# 11066
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Hermeneut:
(Especially since your clergy can be married ![[Razz]](tongue.gif) )
Our clergy can be married. Our clergy cannot marry. I shouldn't think the distinction TOO hard even for a westerner.
I don't ask you to think my joke is terribly funny, just not to take it as a serious comment. Hence the angle brackets. God, give me patience.
Indeed, I am a terribly simple Westerner, although the distinction that you so helpfully pointed out was actually indicated in my earlier post (...before ordination...), which is why the wording was as quoted.
Also, the tiny limits of my intellect meant that I did not know that angle brackets denoted a joke. I have seen others use the device simply for tangents that did not seem to be humorous at all, which probably confused me.
Thank you kindly for enlightening me, as I will now be able to enjoy all the comic moments that come my way.
Posts: 576 | From: North by North West | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
Actually, this isn't quite right - 'celibacy' technically just means 'living alone' i.e. being unmarried.
Are monks in a monastery celibate, or no? They don't live alone, yet (if they're true to their monastic vows) they don't have sexual relations either and are thus chaste.
Yes, they are chaste (or have, at any rate, sworn that they will try to be). And yes, they are celibate in that they live singly in the sense of not being married. The fact that they live in a community with others does not, I think, make any difference, any more than a man is not celibate if he lives in a shared house.
But I'm just guessing there!
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
I find that an odd use of "living alone" but maybe it's a technical term in some circumstance(s)?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
antSJD
Shipmate
# 13598
|
Posted
I was trying to stay diplomatic but I have to say it:
I think the notion that a couple who are so in love that they want to get married and publicly affirm their love, are going to stay celibate after confirming their vows for each other is ridiculous. This is me being judgemental, but I just can't see many people doing it.
I'm not saying that's wrong. I just think it is another level of hypocrisy in all of this that I had to get off my chest!
Posts: 440 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
Back to Nightlamp's OP quote:
I suspect this thread will end up in the old nag's derby but any way it is a live issue.
I am of the opinion that this will make things more difficult in the Church of England particularly for gay clergy. I cannot see any benefit for anyone other than some people had some nice food
Oh - I dunno, Nightlamp. Call me an old-fashioned agent provocateur, but I think it's brilliant.
Clearly intended to be broadcast as widely as possible (was your wedding liturgy blasted over the intertubes?) we have to ask who the intended audience for this dissemination are. ( Not, please note, the beneficiaries, who are of course the happy couple).
So what other information have we got?
1. Not long till Lambeth 2008 now.
2. GAFCON attendees swithering over whether to come to Lambeth
3. TEC/ECUSA/Whatever they are calling themselves this week is in the corner of the room over being naughty
4. St. Bart's has specially strong links to the USA
5. Democracy is a retroactive kinda thing in the USA (see Iraq (invasion of), Women Priests (ordination of) - might being right etc.
Whatever your views on the legitimacy of the issue itself, you have to appreciate the hand of a master tactician when you see it.
[ 15. June 2008, 17:12: Message edited by: Honest Ron Bacardi ]
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by antSJD:
quote:
Originally posted by glockenspiel:
I suspect we can all think of at least one vicar who has had, or is most likely having, a sexual relationship outside marriage. Is that wrong?
I've never known this to be the case. I'm not saying they are all saints, but still, I've never known it personally.
Like Lydia, I know three personally (and others at a remove). Of the three, two were straight, and the other gay. One of the straight offenders was given the opportunity to retire early, and lose his licence, with no reference to the bishop of his place of retirement, so no permission to officiate- ever. The other straight offender and the gay offender agreed to have their incumbencies terminated. The straight offender eventually took a parish in another diocese when his personal situation became regularized (i.e., divorce & remarriage), working in a bookstore in the interim. The third, whose personal situation involved an underage male (at that time, and I think still, an offence under the Criminal Code) can still be seen about town, running a marriage service as he somehow retained his provincial marriage officiant's licence while losing his clerical one. No specific pastoral initiatives for the parishes involved and, at least in one of the cases, this was a serious omission by the bishop.
My two single and not-by-choice clerical friends have ceased dating during their curacies, as they work in small towns where gossip is a problem, let alone the legal pitfalls of dating in the congregation (likely a criminal offence in Canada under the Breach of Trust provisions of the Criminal Code-- two years on summary conviction, eight on indictment).
One mentioned that the burden of curacy with an ineffective rector left her with no time for dalliance, and a growing understanding (for her, at any rate) that checking out the talent while trying to be a pastor was impossible. She mutters sometimes that the Orthodox are right in requiring that any marriages preceded ordination and complains bitterly that she hasn't "been laid since the Ember Days before deaconing," a phrase which one hears rarely. The other has basically asked his archdeacon to set him up with some godly young woman who doesn't mind a pudgy cleric. No takers yet.
I do not know if the two clergy of the OP wanted to put the Bishop of London between a rock and a hard place, but they have likely done so. If he takes action, he will face some disgruntlement in his diocese. If he does not, he will not enjoy his Lambeth. Still, mitres are not supposed to come easy.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nightlamp
Shipmate
# 266
|
Posted
In what way is it going to help Gay clergy? It will probably strengthen the hand of the conservatives in synod and probably lead to some churches with holding money from the diocese
It is interesting to note none of the people involved lose their job over this. Since a bishop will be unable to revoke a chaplain's licence on the grounds of sexuality since they will run into trouble with employment law. Martin Dudley is pushing the bounds between blessing and marriage and so it will hard to take any action against him.
So you could argue it was tactically clever but strategically unwise.
--------------------
I don't know what you are talking about so it couldn't have been that important- Nightlamp
Posts: 8442 | From: Midlands | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
quote:
So you could argue it was tactically clever but strategically unwise.
Actually I would argue just that. But that's high-level stuff. The job of the agent provocateur is just to stir the pot and create a commotion, leaving the big strategic stuff to the big boys.
Sure, the life of gay priests in England is going to get more difficult this week. Presumably it will have to be regarded as collateral damage.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Reuters have this, so I think the Bishop of London ain't a happy bunny ...
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
EJCardiff
Shipmate
# 12289
|
Posted
It is such a shame that yet again the Church has shown that it cannot treat people with respect and humility. One does have to consider that the service perhaps was not authorised, however, the rhetoric by some is just unchristian. Why should we have to return to traditional values and I will not accept that the bible teaches discrimination.
At least the congregation were shown to be supportive. That women who is a member of the general synod was absolutely disgusting on the BBC news in what she said, God help us if these people are running the Church, I am very glad that the Church In Wales is far more accepting.
--------------------
In principio erat Verbum, et Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat Verbum. Evangelium secundum Ioannem
Posts: 103 | From: Cardiff | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Audrey Ely
Shipmate
# 12665
|
Posted
From the Reuters report:
quote:
"I will be asking the Archdeacon of London to investigate what took place at the church of St Bartholomew the Great."
It will be interesting to learn the results of the Arcgdeacon's investigation.
quote:
It wasn't intended to be provocative.
This is a quotation given to Reuters by the officiant. The press coverage has been enormous. It was clearly staged for the press. The order of service is available to the public.
Whether it was the right thing to do or not I maintain - It was provocative.
Personally, and I know this is a contentious position to hold, I believe there is something different about holding such a ceremony discretely and quietly on the one hand, and on the other involving the press, speaking to the media and publishing the order of service.
Posts: 1432 | From: Cambridgeshire, England | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lydia
Shipmate
# 12161
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Audrey Ely:
quote:
It wasn't intended to be provocative.
This is a quotation given to Reuters by the officiant. The press coverage has been enormous. It was clearly staged for the press. The order of service is available to the public.
Whether it was the right thing to do or not I maintain - It was provocative.
Personally, and I know this is a contentious position to hold, I believe there is something different about holding such a ceremony discretely and quietly on the one hand, and on the other involving the press, speaking to the media and publishing the order of service.
Well indeed. If the officiant it really claiming that it wasn't intended to be provocative, he is either lying or unimaginably naive, IMO.
--------------------
You mean I'm supposed to think of something interesting to write in a sig?
Posts: 204 | From: England | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Comper's Child
Shipmate
# 10580
|
Posted
If it were intended to be provocative, why would it have taken 2 weeks before the "press reports" appeared?
It has become provocative.
I don't envy any of the authorities involved, but God bless the two blokes. Many happy years together!
Posts: 2509 | From: Penn's Greene Countrie Towne | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Audrey Ely
Shipmate
# 12665
|
Posted
This event was planned to take part close to the Lambeth Conference. It was a public event with over 300 attending in a prominent London church.
It was inevitable that news would spread, those attending would know that.
Those involved, including the officiant, have spoken to international press agencies, and national press and media.
It was provocative.
Has it helped Archbishop Rowan?
Posts: 1432 | From: Cambridgeshire, England | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Comper's Child
Shipmate
# 10580
|
Posted
As I said, I don't envy ++Rowan or +Chartres or the parish priest, but to suggest it was planned as a provocative act doesn't seem to be the case. Few weddings I've attended have had less than 300 people, many are in central city churches, and the officiant spoke to the press -after- the news story hit the news, not months or days in advance.
I'd not have used something so closely resembling a wedding service, but they did.
God bless 'em...
Posts: 2509 | From: Penn's Greene Countrie Towne | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Geneviève
Mother-Hatting Cat Lover
# 9098
|
Posted
Regarding celibacy: Monks and nuns in TEC takes vows of celibacy (+poverty & obedience)natch. They live in communities so "living alone" is not considered the point; sexual abstinence is the point.
--------------------
"Ineffable" defined: "I cannot and will not be effed with." (Courtesy of CCTooSweet in Running the Books)
Posts: 4336 | From: Eastern US | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Carys
Ship's Celticist
# 78
|
Posted
How and why did this get into the press?
Was it the clerics involved who broke the story? or someone on the other side of the issue? If the latter, how did they find out about it.
There seems to be a lot of hypocrisy on this issue, with people being penalised for being honest about their relationships.
Carys
--------------------
O Lord, you have searched me and know me
You know when I sit and when I rise
Posts: 6896 | From: Bryste mwy na thebyg | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Geneviève
Mother-Hatting Cat Lover
# 9098
|
Posted
well, as an "across the ponder" I don't know the intricacies of CoE, but coming a few weeks before the Lambeth the ceremony can not help but make a statement. Whether one approves of that statement is a matter of opinion, no doubt fiercely divided. But surely these folks were aware of that. Reading the link I found that "hundreds of people" attended. If so, that is quite a stunning statement.
--------------------
"Ineffable" defined: "I cannot and will not be effed with." (Courtesy of CCTooSweet in Running the Books)
Posts: 4336 | From: Eastern US | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stoker
Shipmate
# 11939
|
Posted
Blah, Blah, Blah..............
Bishops, Authority, Church, Religion, Man made rules, Diocese, Anglicanism,
Blah, Blah, Blah............Are the cows home yet?
Has anybody read their Bible recently and checked out God's revealed purpose for family and marraige? I'm not talking about using semantics on a verse here and there, I'm talking about the big picture.
Posts: 428 | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
the coiled spring
Shipmate
# 2872
|
Posted
It is fairly clear that nothing will happen for the same reason when Jeffery John and his partner had civil union followed by a celibration in St Albans Abbey. The heart is not in it. Lest we forget the communion service last year at Eaton Square presided over the Welsh gentleman for gay clergy and their partners.
What next, maybe a baptism for a child born of one these unions.
--------------------
give back to God what He gives so it is used for His glory not ours.
Posts: 2359 | From: mountain top retreat lodge overlooking skegness | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376
|
Posted
Celibacy = living alone. Living alone in this sense does not necessarily mean living within four walls all alone,but rather not living as a couple and yes without sexual intimacy.
My question was about the poster who said that this ceremony involved two celibate priests.Leaving aside the question of loving sexual intimacy it does not seem that the two 'civilly partnered priests' are going to be celibate. Their love for each other is surely going to be one of the most important things in their 'shared' not 'single' life.
Whether that is a good thing or not for two anglican priests was not my question.
Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
I must say that as a traditionalist in terms of liturgy, I'm especially pleased that the couple chose to use the 1662 Book of Common Prayer as their liturgy for their wedding.
Now if I could convince my imaginary partner to become an Anglican, then the world will be well.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Geneviève
Mother-Hatting Cat Lover
# 9098
|
Posted
quote:
What next, maybe a baptism for a child born of one these unions.
Not sure what this means but I certainly know of babies born to one of a couple (lesbian) being baptized; babies adopted by gay couples baptized, and most oddly, although the story has gone off the main pages:
Here in the US a woman who had gender change surgery and is now officially a "man" but still has a womb and vaginal canal and the rest of the necessary plumbing is giving birth soon or may already have done so. He is married to a woman.
[ 15. June 2008, 20:39: Message edited by: Geneviève ]
--------------------
"Ineffable" defined: "I cannot and will not be effed with." (Courtesy of CCTooSweet in Running the Books)
Posts: 4336 | From: Eastern US | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Qoheleth.
Semi-Sagacious One
# 9265
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EJCardiff:
That women who is a member of the general synod was absolutely disgusting on the BBC news in what she said, God help us if these people are running the Church
The BBC R4 Sunday programme (links should be up on Monday) this morning had David Banting pronouncing on this, and also Jimmy Mizen's parents discussing their journey of loss and forgiveness.
I found the conjunction <cough> illuminating. Who is nearer the mind of Christ?
--------------------
The Benedictine Community at Alton Abbey offers a friendly, personal service for the exclusive supply of Rosa Mystica incense.
Posts: 2532 | From: the radiator of life | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Audrey Ely
Shipmate
# 12665
|
Posted
The following is an extract from a press statement of the Anglican Church in New Zealand, on this matter:
quote:
The New Zealand priest involved has felt it appropriate to lay down his clergy license, in the light of Anglican Communion processes and discussions in the area of same gender Blessings and ordination.
Will other clergy involved in the ceremony do the same?
Posts: 1432 | From: Cambridgeshire, England | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cadfael
Shipmate
# 11066
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
Celibacy = living alone. Living alone in this sense does not necessarily mean living within four walls all alone,but rather not living as a couple...
I can't find a definition that puts it quite like that.
Much to my surprise, when I was corrected, I did find a number of web dictionaries that gave the first definition as (roughly): celibate = unmarried.
Dictionaries don't seem to have anything to say about other forms of 'shared life', it's purely about marriage. So by the primary dictionary definition, if two men are not married, then they are indeed celibate.
However, the second definition (and first in some) seems to be about chastity, which is what I think most people really mean by the word 'celibacy' now.
Personally, I don't care whether they are celibate+chaste, celibate+unchaste, or married. Their life choices seem to be have been made honestly, lovingly and in good faith in the face of God and their fellow men, and I wish them happy in whatever state they be.
But a ten-tier wedding cake?! I mean, really...
Posts: 576 | From: North by North West | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
antSJD
Shipmate
# 13598
|
Posted
Whatever your position on this, it is quite ironic that there is no mention of it on the latest news page of the Diocese of London website, although there is something else about 'wider weddings'...
Diocese of London Latest News
--------------------
I yearn to understand some measure of your truth which my heart believes and loves. For I do not understand in order to believe, but I believe in order to understand.
Posts: 440 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
I've never heard of celibacy meaning 'living alone' ![[Confused]](confused.gif) . I know many people who live alone and who are extremely sexually active. In some cases, even promiscuous. I wouldn't describe that as being celibate.
Isn't celibacy a description of the state of abstaining, whether from choice or imposition, from sexual relations? Aren't vowed celibates such as nuns and monks, even those who don't live alone, people who have vowed not to engage with sexual relations, as the celibate clergy of the Catholic Church also do?
Not to be confused with 'chaste' which means remaining faithful within the context of one's sexual relationships or practice.
On the face of it, it looks like some line must have been crossed if a blessing was given to this gay couple, so far as CofE guidelines go, if it's true that CofE clergy are requested not to offer such blessings. So I'm not sure in what way the officiant means it was 'legal'.
--------------------
Irish dogs needing homes! http://www.dogactionwelfaregroup.ie/ Greyhounds and Lurchers are shipped over to England for rehoming too!
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cadfael
Shipmate
# 11066
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Audrey Ely:
The following is an extract from a press statement of the Anglican Church in New Zealand, on this matter:
quote:
The New Zealand priest involved has felt it appropriate to lay down his clergy license, in the light of Anglican Communion processes and discussions in the area of same gender Blessings and ordination.
Will other clergy involved in the ceremony do the same?
I don't think so, although some reports have suggested that the other of the newlyweds will also be making his next career step outside of the church.
Do you think that they should?
Posts: 576 | From: North by North West | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
FreeJack
Shipmate
# 10612
|
Posted
I hope that +Richard and ++Rowan can find a magisterial solution to this.
Something like the participant stepping down as Priest Vicar at Westminster Abbey, and the celebrant having his diocesan PTO suspended for x years, plus a pretty clear message to anyone else in the diocese and province that anyone else trying this might face a tougher sentence than that.
Hopefully that can happen before the evo vicars wading into the controversy.
The tragedy of this publicity is that the actual diocesan parochial ministry on the ground is going very well. To spend time on spats on the matters that divide us (mostly the dead horses!) seems such a waste of time.
Posts: 3588 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cadfael
Shipmate
# 11066
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
On the face of it, it looks like some line must have been crossed if a blessing was given to this gay couple, so far as CofE guidelines go, if it's true that CofE clergy are requested not to offer such blessings. So I'm not sure in what way the officiant means it was 'legal'.
I think that the officiant is using a few 'weasel words' here. That is, a guideline is not a regulation (let alone canon law). It is a to be understood as a document offering guidance - so it is advisory, not prescriptive - by being described as a guideline.
The implication being, I guess, that you can't be disciplined for dismissing advice as unhelpful...
Posts: 576 | From: North by North West | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cadfael
Shipmate
# 11066
|
Posted
The relevant guidance / fudge from the CofE House of Bishops can be found here
[Short Version:
The common people mayest act as it pleaseth them and their beloved (of a gender which be not different); we trusteth that they heareth God aright. Thou shalt not exclude them, neither shalt thou cast them out, for they payeth the bills and keepeth the flowers nice.
But a minister that loveth in a manner like unto those cherished laity thou shalt utterly despise, for they surely knoweth not how God speaketh. And woe! they doeth that which encourageth the use of lace and other ungodly ornamentations. And knowest thou not that they provoketh Mrs Curmudgeon, who shalt then go forth and giveth the Bishop an day of grief without end.]
Posts: 576 | From: North by North West | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Geneviève
Mother-Hatting Cat Lover
# 9098
|
Posted
I was leaning on the side of hmmm, this is going a bit too far in terms of a statement right now, and then Bishop Orumbi (sp?) leaped in with a smug statement trashing the English church and yadda yadda yadda. I found myself leaning back towards Vicar Dudley and the blessing ceremony.
ETA: but to remake an obvious point--quite a few people attended the service. So if some "evangelicals" (the label given) were furious, other people were quite happy. I think that the matter is quite delicate. ISTM that if this gets turned into a dichotomy in terms of choices for the honchos, everyone loses.
[ 15. June 2008, 22:01: Message edited by: Geneviève ]
--------------------
"Ineffable" defined: "I cannot and will not be effed with." (Courtesy of CCTooSweet in Running the Books)
Posts: 4336 | From: Eastern US | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
pete173
Shipmate
# 4622
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by antSJD:
Whatever your position on this, it is quite ironic that there is no mention of it on the latest news page of the Diocese of London website, although there is something else about 'wider weddings'...
Diocese of London Latest News
Unsurprisingly, the guy who updates the diocesan website doesn't work at weekends!
Posts: 1653 | From: Kilburn, London NW6 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Incensed
Shipmate
# 2670
|
Posted
No, he doesn't work at weekends but he (and the senior team in the diocese) has had two weeks to prepare for the inevitability of it hitting the headlines. The service was very widely known about.
Posts: 241 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Incensed:
No, he doesn't work at weekends but he (and the senior team in the diocese) has had two weeks to prepare for the inevitability of it hitting the headlines. The service was very widely known about.
Were the appropriate authorities 'in the know' then? ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Or is that another urban legend from the Great Wem?
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by FreeJack:
I hope that +Richard and ++Rowan can find a magisterial solution to this.
Something like the participant stepping down as Priest Vicar at Westminster Abbey, and the celebrant having his diocesan PTO suspended for x years, plus a pretty clear message to anyone else in the diocese and province that anyone else trying this might face a tougher sentence than that.
Hopefully that can happen before the evo vicars wading into the controversy.
The tragedy of this publicity is that the actual diocesan parochial ministry on the ground is going very well. To spend time on spats on the matters that divide us (mostly the dead horses!) seems such a waste of time.
Bravo! ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
Rather frivolous in my opinion. Like so many 'making a statement' actions by the empowered it rings rather hollow to me. ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
It seems like all attention on the Anglican Communion is focussed either on extremists of the Moore/Southern Cone variety or parblind 'revolutionaries' of this ilk.
Certainly I find both equally revolting.
God Willing, the Bishop of London will show some spine. ![[Votive]](graemlins/votive.gif)
This is not about 'human rights' or 'gay liberation' but illconsidered stirring by the privileged.
Perhaps they think they're back at school and this is just 'another jolly rag'. ![[Help]](graemlins/help.gif)
Resignation is now, IMO, the only 'honorable' way out. Ecclesiastical hari-kari. Otherwise discipline should follow.
We've had enough ecclesiastical Guy Fawkeses trying to blow us up.
--------------------
Well...
Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Geneviève:
Regarding celibacy: Monks and nuns in TEC takes vows of celibacy (+poverty & obedience)natch. They live in communities so "living alone" is not considered the point; sexual abstinence is the point.
They take vows of chastity, not celibacy. Chastity only means living in a moral way with regards to sexuality. A married couple having relations only with one another are chaste. However, for monks and nuns, chastity does generally imply celibacy.
[ 16. June 2008, 02:39: Message edited by: Choirboy ]
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cadfael
Shipmate
# 11066
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):
Rather frivolous in my opinion. Like so many 'making a statement' actions by the empowered it rings rather hollow to me.
Do what the majority can freely do, and you risk losing your job = frivolous & empowered? Really?
Isn't it a terrible nuisance. How embarassing people wanting to be equal can be. Go sit at the back of the bus, M'am. Don't make a fuss.
![[Projectile]](graemlins/puke2.gif)
Posts: 576 | From: North by North West | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):
Rather frivolous in my opinion. Like so many 'making a statement' actions by the empowered it rings rather hollow to me.
For the first time I wonder if Sir Pellinore has been (ret'd) too long.. I usually agree with his posts.
Sometimes it needs those who are relatively 'empowered' and privileged to do something before the even more empowered and privileged 'leaders' respond. There have been any number of low profile gay 'marriages' celebrated in churches (Leo says he has attended three recently), which no doubt to the relief of those involved haven't hit the headlines. If it takes a high profile service in a fashionable London church, involving three respected priests, to cause a stir, then so be it.
The hypocrisy of the current compromise can't hold out for ever. I can't believe that the participants in this service had as their first motive to challenge this. But they must have realised - as would any of those involved in the lower profile and unreported celebrations - that there was the possibility that they would be seen as pioneers/martyrs/whatever. Good for them that they didn't chicken out.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):
quote:
Originally posted by FreeJack:
I hope that +Richard and ++Rowan can find a magisterial solution to this.
Something like the participant stepping down as Priest Vicar at Westminster Abbey, and the celebrant having his diocesan PTO suspended for x years, plus a pretty clear message to anyone else in the diocese and province that anyone else trying this might face a tougher sentence than that.
Hopefully that can happen before the evo vicars wading into the controversy.
The tragedy of this publicity is that the actual diocesan parochial ministry on the ground is going very well. To spend time on spats on the matters that divide us (mostly the dead horses!) seems such a waste of time.
Bravo!
Rather frivolous in my opinion. Like so many 'making a statement' actions by the empowered it rings rather hollow to me.
It seems like all attention on the Anglican Communion is focussed either on extremists of the Moore/Southern Cone variety or parblind 'revolutionaries' of this ilk.
Certainly I find both equally revolting.
God Willing, the Bishop of London will show some spine.
This is not about 'human rights' or 'gay liberation' but illconsidered stirring by the privileged.
Perhaps they think they're back at school and this is just 'another jolly rag'.
Resignation is now, IMO, the only 'honorable' way out. Ecclesiastical hari-kari. Otherwise discipline should follow.
We've had enough ecclesiastical Guy Fawkeses trying to blow us up.
Well, I'm not actually sure that the service concerned is a helpful development. It does seem a bit like rubbing the noses of the people opposed to SSM in the dirt. But...
There is a point where prophetic action is the correct course to take. Of course, consensus and reasoned argument is the best way forward, but it may not always be possible. I'm sure Erasmus was really irritated by Luther's actions. AIUI he was all for working for change within the system, but, in the end, it just proved impossible. Or maybe Luther just ran out of patience. Do you feel confident asserting that Erasmus was right and Luther wrong?
Or, as in the case which Hermaneut alluded to, was Rosa Parks wrong to kick up a fuss on that Montgomery bus. Sometimes people feel obliged to make a stand for, as they see it, righteousneess. Dreradfully inconvenient, and all that, but sometimes necessary.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
aumbry
Shipmate
# 436
|
Posted
quote:
I know Fr. Martin Dudley - he is doctrinally very orthodox and liturgically catholic.
He is also considered a bit of an oddball and has been the source of plenty of not very helpful articles in the papers when it comes to improving the status of Anglican priests in the eyes of the public.
Aumbry
Posts: 3869 | From: Quedlinburg | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Foaming Draught
The Low in Low Church
# 9134
|
Posted
Some posters approving of this highly unorthodox liaison have entered the HTB/Alpha in Brighton thread on the grounds that they are orthodox, and canonically obedient HTB/Alpha aren't. We live in strange times.
--------------------
Australians all let us ring Joyce
For she is young and free
Posts: 8661 | From: Et in Australia Ego | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
the coiled spring
Shipmate
# 2872
|
Posted
quote:
Not sure what this means but I certainly know of babies born to one of a couple (lesbian) being baptized; babies adopted by gay couples baptized, and most oddly, although the story has gone off the main pages:
Here in the US a woman who had gender change surgery and is now officially a "man" but still has a womb and vaginal canal and the rest of the necessary plumbing is giving birth soon or may already have done so. He is married to a woman.
These are things that are engineered by man, what would would be interesting if a same sex couple who had not medical help had a baby. If one of the clergy from St Bart`s became pregenant due to God`s hand blessing them life ould start to get interesting, though I would not be in earshot of the screaming as baby was born.
Would be interested if my old Mate, Pete has any gay clergy in his area who have their partners living in the vicarage and how he handled the situation.
--------------------
give back to God what He gives so it is used for His glory not ours.
Posts: 2359 | From: mountain top retreat lodge overlooking skegness | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cadfael
Shipmate
# 11066
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Foaming Draught:
Some posters approving of this highly unorthodox liaison have entered the HTB/Alpha in Brighton thread on the grounds that they are orthodox, and canonically obedient HTB/Alpha aren't. We live in strange times.
Perhaps none of us has all the answers, or should consider ourselves righteous.
Posts: 576 | From: North by North West | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
chukovsky
Ship's toddler
# 116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by the coiled spring:
quote:
Not sure what this means but I certainly know of babies born to one of a couple (lesbian) being baptized; babies adopted by gay couples baptized
These are things that are engineered by man, what would would be interesting if a same sex couple who had not medical help had a baby.
If a gay couple adopt a child, there is no medical help involved.
We put our wedding service sheet on the internet - not sure what that says about us, except that we are show-offs and/or wanted friends who couldn't be there to share our exciting day.
--------------------
This space left intentionally blank. Do not write on both sides of the paper at once.
Posts: 6842 | From: somewhere else | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Donne
Renaissance Man
# 220
|
Posted
quote:
leo:
Very traditional - almost BCP.
'With my body I thee worship' need not necessarily mean full-on sex.
Are cuddles a form of worship? Can two men cuddle and remain chaste/celibate?
I was under the impression that 'with my body I thee worship' referred to conjugal acts, specifically marital congress. Can anyone up on the history shed light?
Even if all that is meant in this instance is non-sexual physical affection, if the traditional understanding is sex, then it seems unwise to include it.
Posts: 13667 | From: Perth, W.A. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dee.
Ship's Theological Acrobat
# 5681
|
Posted
quote:
This is not about 'human rights' or 'gay liberation' but illconsidered stirring by the privileged.
Perhaps they think they're back at school and this is just 'another jolly rag'.
Member of the congregation Rev Dr David Lord ministers in checking in here.
I don't have a lot to say but I can say this, This was not an "ill considered stirring by the privileged" or "a jolly rag" but the celebration of the commitment of two people to one another and the blessing of their union.
There was no agenda, and to be honest naive or not I don't think David expected the furore that has followed.
That it could be suggested that two people committing to each other before God for life could be an "ill considered stirring" makes me sad.
Where I come from its called a wedding
--------------------
Jesus - nice bloke, bit religious
Posts: 2679 | From: Under Downunder | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
