homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » Bloody Sentamu (Page 2)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Bloody Sentamu
simwel

praying fool
# 12214

 - Posted      Profile for simwel   Email simwel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Sorry for the lack of comment. What I wanted to say is that I am glad + Nigel had something to say. When he was in St Edmundsbury he only seemed to talk about money.
Posts: 74 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175

 - Posted      Profile for Pomona   Email Pomona   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It should be pointed out, Gamaliel et al, that clergy co-habiting with civil partners (believing or otherwise, I don't think it makes any difference) is not bending the rules at all - that is perfectly in line with current guidance. Such situations are supposed to be celibate and bishops are supposed to make sure of this - but obviously that is up to individual bishops. The CoE does not consider civil partnerships to be marriage, so this is OK (per the rules) for gay clergy.

What's not in keeping with current guidance is applying this ban on marriage to laity.

There are strong whispers from people who would know that some dioceses are being strongly encouraged to not put LGBT candidates forward for ordination regardless of their celibacy or otherwise.

--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]

Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012  |  IP: Logged
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984

 - Posted      Profile for Doublethink.   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Nobody believes the co-habiting clergy in civil partnerships are celibate.

--------------------
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
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175

 - Posted      Profile for Pomona   Email Pomona   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
Nobody believes the co-habiting clergy in civil partnerships are celibate.

That is extremely unfair, though - as if gay people are incapable of being celibate. I know it's not meant that way but it just plays into the idea of gay people being sex-crazed and not being celibate even if they say they are. I can assure you that there are plenty of co-habiting clergy in civil partnerships who ARE celibate. It is not nice or fair to accuse people of lying about their level of sexual activity.

--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]

Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012  |  IP: Logged
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984

 - Posted      Profile for Doublethink.   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I don't think it s a prejudice re gay people in this case, I don't think anybody would believe in a celibate hetrosexual civil partnership either.

Essentially, people may believe someone is celibate if they claim to be and are single - most people will not believe celibacy claimed in a long term intimate relationship.

Because a) it is hard to see the point of such a situation and b) people don't believe in perfect self-control.

[ 15. August 2015, 22:21: Message edited by: Doublethink. ]

--------------------
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
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175

 - Posted      Profile for Pomona   Email Pomona   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
I don't think it s a prejudice re gay people in this case, I don't think anybody would believe in a celibate hetrosexual civil partnership either.

Essentially, people may believe someone is celibate if they claim to be and are single - most people will not believe celibacy claimed in a long term intimate relationship.

Because a) it is hard to see the point of such a situation and b) people don't believe in perfect self-control.

Love? Companionship? Legal benefits? I can well believe that there are some asexual homoromantic clergy very happy with a celibate civil partnership, sex is not important to everyone. Even if not asexual, it's not like there's no history of Christian celibacy lived in community - it's not a huge leap from celibacy within a religious community to celibacy within a partnership. Of course there will be clergy who are pretending to be celibate but are really not, but the assumption that this is always the case is very harmful and plays into the modern Protestant distrust of celibacy.

Not clergy or in a civil partnership, but the women who write
A Queer Calling are celibate and in a relationship.

[ 15. August 2015, 23:00: Message edited by: Pomona ]

--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]

Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012  |  IP: Logged
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984

 - Posted      Profile for Doublethink.   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I didn't say it couldn't happen, only that most people will not believe it. And that their disbelief is is largely not to do with sexual orientation.

Theologically it doesn't make a huge amount of sense, in that traditionally celibacy was about not being distracted from God by personal relationships - I believe strong friendships were also discouraged amongst monastics for a while.

[ 15. August 2015, 23:05: Message edited by: Doublethink. ]

--------------------
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
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175

 - Posted      Profile for Pomona   Email Pomona   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
There are many reasons for celibacy in Christians though - and in any case, for asexual people it's the natural way of being and I'm not sure things like whether it makes theological sense should be applied to how people just are.

I think enforced celibacy is wrong, but Protestantism (including Anglicanism in that for the sake of argument) really needs to learn how to deal with celibacy in all its manifestations.

--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]

Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012  |  IP: Logged
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984

 - Posted      Profile for Doublethink.   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
As a gay celibate Christian woman I do understand that, but contracting a civil partnership strongly suggests a different kind of relationship, as does co-habiting

--------------------
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
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:

Because a) it is hard to see the point of such a situation and b) people don't believe in perfect self-control.

Some time ago, a friend bought a house with his then-fiancee. Their wedding was all planned and scheduled, but the logistics of buying a house, starting jobs and so on meant that it made more sense for them to live in their house for a couple of months before the wedding. They intended to live together in the separate bedrooms, trousers-on sense, and I believe them.

The worthies of their local church, however, told them in no uncertain terms that this wasn't on, and that Mr. and Mrs. Old-Couple would be only too happy to have my friend lodge with them (at no charge, of course) whilst his fiancee lived in splendid isolation in their to-be marital home.

I think their local church believed their intentions of continence, too, but they knew that it would have the appearance of a sexual relationship.

Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Conversely, I heard years ago of a couple who were sharing a house before marriage just as your friends intended to, and were claiming benefits. Here the basic benefits for couples are a bit less than two single claimants would be entitled to. They claimed as two single people and the benefits agency didn't believe that they weren't living together as husband and wife- but they did manage to convince the agency (correctly) that for the time being house-sharers was all that they were, so they got their extra money.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715

 - Posted      Profile for ExclamationMark   Email ExclamationMark   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:

1. I can assure you that there are plenty of co-habiting clergy in civil partnerships who ARE celibate.

2. It is not nice or fair to accuse people of lying about their level of sexual activity.

1. But you don't know, do you?

2. No it's not fair and everyone should be encouraged to be honest about it, even if it isn't the easy path to take. Honesty trumps hypocrisy any day

Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715

 - Posted      Profile for ExclamationMark   Email ExclamationMark   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It's happened (and happened now) because:

1. The CofE operates an artificial divide between lay and clergy.

2. The Lay Reader concerned is a leading member of a pressure group aiming for full acceptance

3. There's a window of opportunity as the Anglican Communion is in disarray and one further "block" on what to most people seems a reasonable request, could push it into freefall or division.

4. The tide of cultural opinion is with SSM

5. The church as a whole is more likely to follow culture than vice versa

Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
Spike

Mostly Harmless
# 36

 - Posted      Profile for Spike   Email Spike   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:

I think their local church believed their intentions of continence, too, but they knew that it would have the appearance of a sexual relationship.

So fucking what? Why is it the church or anyone else's business what the appearance is?

Some years ago a friend of mine rented out his spare room to a female lodger. His church came down on him like a ton of bricks, telling him he shouldn't have done this because of the "message" this would sending out to his neighbours. He told the church leaders to bog off as what he chose to do with his spare room had bugger all to do with the neighbours. He also found it strange that the church thought it would be OK for him to have a male lodger.

--------------------
"May you get to heaven before the devil knows you're dead" - Irish blessing

Posts: 12860 | From: The Valley of Crocuses | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
A similar thing happened to me once, Spike. A female cousin stayed overnight at my flat - which had a spare room - en route for a job interview in another part of the country.

The church I was in said I shouldn't have put her up or, at the very least, I should have gone round to my neighbours' flats - I lived in a tower block - and explained to them that it was my cousin who was staying over ...

They made no such stipulation when male friends of relatives came to stay ...

[Roll Eyes]

I can't remember now, but I think I may have knocked on a few doors and explained that I had my cousin staying ... it wouldn't surprise me if I had back in those days ...

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768

 - Posted      Profile for Penny S     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
On "Sunday" this morning - and I have to apologise for not having full details, but since the BBC Radio 4 moved it from 8 am to 7 am I have never been able to hear all the details, because I keep dropping off back to sleep - a personage from the CofE was elucidating on the issue. He explained that as a lay reader was in the business of expressing the teachings of the church, a lay reader should abide by the church's teaching on this very major element of doctrine, that marriage was unchangeably a matter of heterosexual partnership. Which doesn't seem to fit the actual rulings from Synod, does it, though it sounds vaguely reasonable?

Except that the nature of marriage was never presented to me, either in preparation for Congregational Church membership, or confirmation in the CofE, as a major element of doctrine.

Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009  |  IP: Logged
orfeo

Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878

 - Posted      Profile for orfeo   Author's homepage   Email orfeo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
[Some years ago a friend of mine rented out his spare room to a female lodger. His church came down on him like a ton of bricks, telling him he shouldn't have done this because of the "message" this would sending out to his neighbours.

Yes, the message that women are people too, not merely convenient sex toys for men, is still one that is far too radical for many to cope with.

--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.

Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
Curiosity killed ...

Ship's Mug
# 11770

 - Posted      Profile for Curiosity killed ...   Email Curiosity killed ...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The BBC Radio 4 Sunday programme had an an interview with Jeremy Timms - link is to the programme on line.

--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat

Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768

 - Posted      Profile for Penny S     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
[Some years ago a friend of mine rented out his spare room to a female lodger. His church came down on him like a ton of bricks, telling him he shouldn't have done this because of the "message" this would sending out to his neighbours.

Yes, the message that women are people too, not merely convenient sex toys for men, is still one that is far too radical for many to cope with.
A piece this morning - late enough for me to be awake - had a quote from Lawrence Durrell, whose one-time home in Alexandria is due for demolition, in which he opined (and this a was a recording of his own voice) that women had no souls. He repeated this. Men have souls, women do not.

And don't you think "sex toys" is too polite? Toys are things cherished by children. When I heard about the leader of Isis having women to rape yesterday, it occurred to me that such malign entities (I won't call them men, that's for real people with engaged minds - and souls) are simply using women as a convenient receptacle for bodily fluids. Woman as toilet.

[ 16. August 2015, 09:15: Message edited by: Penny S ]

Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009  |  IP: Logged
leo
Shipmate
# 1458

 - Posted      Profile for leo   Author's homepage   Email leo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
It's happened (and happened now) because:

2. The Lay Reader concerned is a leading member of a pressure group aiming for full acceptance

Which the church allows him to be - the Pilling Report said that clergy (let alone Readers) are allowed to campaign for a change of view

--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com

Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
Why is it the church or anyone else's business what the appearance is?

I suppose if you join a strict church then you have to expect that your private life isn't exactly your own. There's surely not much advantage to being there if you want the other members to mind their own business!

The problem for many such churches in recent times, I imagine, is that 'sexual sin' is such a prominent part of our secular culture that they have a heightened sensitivity to it. They can't help but see it everywhere. In the past, a culture of discretion perhaps made it less apparent and less threatening.

Of course, mainstream congregations pay relatively little attention to what worshippers do in their own time, so long as the activities concerned are not presented to them as some sort of problem that needs to be sorted out.

[ 16. August 2015, 18:04: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well yes, although I'd suggest that most people who join 'strict' churches tend not to appreciate initially just how strict they can be until they find themselves on the wrong side of whatever dispute it happens to be ...

There are advantages and disadvantages - pros and cons. Bright sides and shadow sides ... same as with any other aspect of life.

I don't think people consciously weigh all these aspects up when they drift or gravitate into a 'strict' church setting ... they certainly experience a certain amount of 'cognitive dissonance' initially - I know I did - but it's a bit like young love ... you don't always see the downsides until you've got in deep.

By the time I had the real heeby-geeby WTF! moments, I was already in too deeply to get out so easily - I'd invested a lot in it in terms of time, money, commitment - even living location ...

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It's rather like girls who fall in love with bad boys and leave the good boys alone! They're looking for fun and excitement, when what they really need in the long run is something calm and moderate!

Can't see much of a solution to either problem.

[ 16. August 2015, 18:23: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175

 - Posted      Profile for Pomona   Email Pomona   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:

1. I can assure you that there are plenty of co-habiting clergy in civil partnerships who ARE celibate.

2. It is not nice or fair to accuse people of lying about their level of sexual activity.

1. But you don't know, do you?

2. No it's not fair and everyone should be encouraged to be honest about it, even if it isn't the easy path to take. Honesty trumps hypocrisy any day

1. Yes I do know, because the people in question are asexual.

2. You're not someone put in a very difficult position so you have zero room to judge.

--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]

Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012  |  IP: Logged
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175

 - Posted      Profile for Pomona   Email Pomona   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Also EM, even if I didn't know, what the fuck is wrong with Christians like you who assume gay Christians are incapable of celibacy? What's wrong with people like you who can't do the decent human thing of taking people at their word?

In case you hadn't noticed, many gay people are indeed celibate, whether in celibate relationships or not.

--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]

Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012  |  IP: Logged
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338

 - Posted      Profile for L'organist   Author's homepage   Email L'organist   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
In any case, why do we consider it in any way reasonable for the church - in the person of its bishops - to demand the right to know about and dictate the sex life (or not) of some of its members, whether they be clergy or not.

This is nothing more than shabby prurience and should be challenged.

Whenever I encounter two particular bishops of my cognisance (2 who are anti SSM) I make a point of enquiring after their sex life. I have to say neither seems particularly comfortable about it (!) but as I've told them, sauce for the goose ... [Snigger]

--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet

Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012  |  IP: Logged
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768

 - Posted      Profile for Penny S     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I suppose this concern for the private activities of church people could be related to what I was reading about the sudden change in the concerns of the Icelandic Thing with the coming of the Lutheran Church. From being concerned with issues like theft and murder, the court transferred its attentions to adultery and fornication, beheading men and drowning women convicted of these offences. The reason seems to have been a conviction among the powers that be that God would punish the whole of society if such offences were not dealt with severely, and in Iceland, divine punishment would be seen as very possible.

Possible those who wish to make windows into folk's bedrooms share this fear that sulphurous fire and earthquakes will tear apart the nation if unspeakable things are permitted within the church.

Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:

Possible those who wish to make windows into folk's bedrooms share this fear that sulphurous fire and earthquakes will tear apart the nation if unspeakable things are permitted within the church.

I believe flooding is the prescribed punishment for protecting the rights of gay people, according to CofE bishops.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
In any case, why do we consider it in any way reasonable for the church - in the person of its bishops - to demand the right to know about and dictate the sex life (or not) of some of its members, whether they be clergy or not.

In theory there's no point in a church having 'teachings' about sexual behaviour if there's no interest in monitoring - or indeed, censuring - the sexual behaviour of its members at any point.

In reality, though, the desire for a quiet life plus the Christian emphasis on forgiveness probably makes it easy for churches simply to pay lip service to whichever ancient liturgy or rule book it is that gives them their identity, while the members do their own thing, discreetly or not, depending on the context.

AFAICS, the CofE as an institution seems to swing from turning a blind eye to making a big censorious fuss. In this case, though, the defiance was too blatant. If the 'rule' against SSM had been made centuries ago perhaps the archbishop wouldn't have taken much notice. But to get married only a few years after the CofE had publicly rejected these marriages was too much.

[ 17. August 2015, 22:03: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
[QUOTE]
AFAICS, the CofE as an institution seems to swing from turning a blind eye to making a big censorious fuss. In this case, though, the defiance was too blatant. If the 'rule' against SSM had been made centuries ago perhaps the archbishop wouldn't have taken much notice. But to get married only a few years after the CofE had publicly rejected these marriages was too much.

Has the CofE (i.e. General Synod, the governing body of the Church) actually offered an opinion, let alone stated that the opinion was binding on lay people? We know the Bishops issued a rather ill-advised policy document off their own bat which laid out rules for clergy but it explicitly gave very different guidance for how lay people should be treated. Finally, the CofE last approved a version of the Catechism less than 20 years ago. Are we going to see clergy and readers have PTO withdrawn for failing to adhere to it in their teaching? Are we, for example, going to go after those who insist on breaking 24.4 and fail "to keep the Lord's day for worship, prayer and rest from work"?
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Stephen
Shipmate
# 40

 - Posted      Profile for Stephen   Email Stephen   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I don't actually know what the official Welsh line is, although my personal view would be to live and let live as long as one isn't doing anything illegal, but then my personal views on a whole raft of things have shifted over the years and in fact part of that is from a particularly subversive site, the ship of fools

I don't know if Albertus knows the official position if there is one ( I'm a nobody, really!) but there's

this article

which admittedly is some years old

--------------------
Best Wishes
Stephen

'Be still,then, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the nations and I will be exalted in the earth' Ps46 v10

Posts: 3954 | From: Alto C Clef Country | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Qoheleth.

Semi-Sagacious One
# 9265

 - Posted      Profile for Qoheleth.   Email Qoheleth.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
In theory there's no point in a church having 'teachings' about sexual behaviour if there's no interest in monitoring - or indeed, censuring - the sexual behaviour of its members at any point.

Hmm... I wonder whether it's true, even theoretically, that moral auditing is part of being the ecclesia. It might be part of the pastoral role of nominated and reciprocally acknowledged individuals (confessors, spiritual directors etc) but in what sense am I accountable to the institution for my moral behaviour?

--------------------
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
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It depends on what you think the institution is for. If you think of church as a community of mutual support of whatever kind then it's hard to argue that what you do from Monday to Saturday is none of the church's business.

In reality, though, I suppose we opt in and opt out at will, expecting church support sometimes yet wanting the church to butt out at others. The problem is that this is all very arbitrary. There's plenty of room for the individual and the institution to disagree.

With strict religious groups at least the level nature of interference is clearer. Over time, though, there's a tendency for the institution to interfere less and less. You see this clearly in Methodism.

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
It's rather like girls who fall in love with bad boys and leave the good boys alone! They're looking for fun and excitement, when what they really need in the long run is something calm and moderate!

Can't see much of a solution to either problem.

Be a bad boy and then turn good [Biased]
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Stephen:
I don't actually know what the official Welsh line is, although my personal view would be to live and let live as long as one isn't doing anything illegal, but then my personal views on a whole raft of things have shifted over the years and in fact part of that is from a particularly subversive site, the ship of fools

I don't know if Albertus knows the official position if there is one ( I'm a nobody, really!) but there's

this article

which admittedly is some years old

Oh, I'm a nobody too! The CinW Governing Body has been consulting the dioceses in advance of debating the matter quite soon. Here in Llandaff the Diocesan Conference voted by I think about 3-2 for SSM; Monmouth voted marginally against, but it was very nearly an even split; St David's voted more heavily against. Don't know about the others- they seem not to be publicising the votes, which I can understand as not wanting things to go off at half-cock, but I think I heard someone say that Bangor was in favour.
At Pride Cymru on Saturday, where our shack was leading a worship session in the faith tent, I heard a cleric say that all six diocesans supported SSM. Don't know how true this is but I think ++Barry is pretty certainly in favour, though he's too wise and experienced to say so in so many words, not because he wants to appease opponents, but because part of his style is to minimise the fusss about things so that they can get through with less opposition. I reckon there's a good chance that we'll get at least blessing of SSMs and possibly celebration of them before long.
You can find the CinW Doctrinal Commission's papers on the subject here .

[ 18. August 2015, 13:59: Message edited by: Albertus ]

--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.

Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
It's rather like girls who fall in love with bad boys and leave the good boys alone! They're looking for fun and excitement, when what they really need in the long run is something calm and moderate!

Can't see much of a solution to either problem.

Be a bad boy and then turn good [Biased]
Lots of people on the Ship seem to have started of in lively but prescriptive churches of some kind, then moved in a calmer and more moderate direction. It seems that maintaining relationships with the evangelicals seems to be a good long-term growth strategy for the other churches....

However, this doesn't help the preacher mentioned in the OP, because although he might have been happy in his tolerant congregation, upsetting the more conservative denominational CofE leaders was never going to end well.

Is he likely to join another denomination? Evangelicals from outside often end up in the CofE, but my impression is that more moderate Anglicans don't really join other denominations when they leave Anglicanism. I suppose Methodist and URC worship just seems too bland if you have very traditional Anglican tastes. And the Quakers and Unitarians offer community, but nothing else that you might be used to.

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Ah- hadn't meant my flippant response to be taken seriously!
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
John Holding

Coffee and Cognac
# 158

 - Posted      Profile for John Holding   Email John Holding   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Bit of a tangent, really, but...

SvitlanaV2 -- it seems to me that you consistently (not just on this thread) ignore the importance of beliefs when commenting on individuals who have difficulty with those in authority over them, or who are in uncomfortable situations. If, as an Anglican (for which read CofE) I believe in the Real Presence (however defined and leaving aside any attempt to define how it happens), and actually value the three-fold ministry and apostolic succession (again, leaving definition and process aside), it's simply not a matter of switching to another denomination because your own church is wrong (in your opinion) about a single issue.

Beliefs matter -- and different churches have different beliefs. For some people specific beliefs matter less than worship style or fellowship or what we in my groups call "warm fuzzy feelings" -- but for many people they don't. And when good things (worship style I like, community I like) come into conflict with beliefs, then it's not just a matter of saying "Oh well, I guess I'll go off to join x church, because really we all believe the same thing." Because in some -- many? -- cases, we don't all believe the same thing.

John

[ 18. August 2015, 19:28: Message edited by: John Holding ]

Posts: 5929 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
You're right about me in the sense that I don't really see any one church as the repository of right beliefs. For me, church is primarily the body of believers. Shared beliefs are developed over time, but the sands of doctrine and theology are always shifting, so what holds churches and denominations together appears to be quite complex.

I obviously don't think that all churches are the same, though, because if that were so, what would be the point of switching from one to another?? You switch because another church suits your beliefs or your understanding of the world better. That's the Protestant way....

The practical problem with the doctrine you mention, ISTM, is that individuals may be at serious odds with their church (due to its teachings on SSM, or anything else) yet believe it's the only place where salvation may be gained. They then either put up with the whole thing unhappily or have to reject Christianity entirely. To me, this seems spiritually wasteful and psychologically destructive. But others see it differently, true. Each to his own.

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715

 - Posted      Profile for ExclamationMark   Email ExclamationMark   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
Also EM, even if I didn't know, what the fuck is wrong with Christians like you who assume gay Christians are incapable of celibacy? What's wrong with people like you who can't do the decent human thing of taking people at their word?

In case you hadn't noticed, many gay people are indeed celibate, whether in celibate relationships or not.

I've never claimed that gay Christians are incapable of celibacy. I'm happy to take people at their word - but like everything else it is still open to interpretation.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715

 - Posted      Profile for ExclamationMark   Email ExclamationMark   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
You're not someone put in a very difficult position so you have zero room to judge.

Not in that particular position, I agree. But you should not assume that I don't know anything about being in a difficult position - it's actually far from the case.

I'm not judging either. I can see from various posts the hurt that LGBT Christians have suffered over the years as well as LGBT's in general. But doesn't it better help the cause of change to make one's position totally clear, instead of living in dread? [I don't know - I'm just trying to seek a way of understanding].

The biggest issue I have is the dual standards reflected by OK for laity and not OK for clergy. I'd have more respect - although i may not agree - with a change that says SSM is ok for all.

Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
The biggest issue I have is the dual standards reflected by OK for laity and not OK for clergy.

I don't know the niceties of the Anglican position. But isn't one of the difficulties in this case caused by the fact that the gentleman in question is a Lay Reader which, in a sense, means that he has got caught in the crack between "Lay" and "Clergy"?

On the one hand, he's not ordained. On the other hand, he's seen as a "leader" in the Church. So he's "neither fish nor fowl", and that's a position the Anglican powers-that-be don't appear to have considered. Hence the tension of knowing how he should be treated. ++ Sentamu appears to have virtually lumped him in with clergy as far as the "rules" are concerned ... others clearly differ.

(NB I'm not saying whether the "rules" are right or wrong, that's a different question. Here I'm merely questioning their application).

[ 19. August 2015, 07:41: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]

Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Ethne Alba
Shipmate
# 5804

 - Posted      Profile for Ethne Alba     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
There is absolutely no difficulty ( with Anglicanism anyway) with differentiating between 'Lay' and 'Clergy'.

there is no fish nor fowl dilemma.

It is Lay.
Or Clergy.

Everyone, from Archbishops to PCC members to mostly every paid up member of a parish church, knows the difference.

Leo was right at his first comment

Posts: 3126 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
MarsmanTJ
Shipmate
# 8689

 - Posted      Profile for MarsmanTJ   Email MarsmanTJ   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
++ Sentamu appears to have virtually lumped him in with clergy as far as the "rules" are concerned ... others clearly differ.

Based on my experience, many within the Evangelical tradition (which Sentamu is more or less within) would say that all church leaders should be held to whatever standards are set for clergy. What posts are considered 'leadership' are up for debate, but I suspect for the vast majority of them, Readers would definitely be included in that list... But then, some Evangelical clergy of my acquaintance think that the post of Reader is a stupid one and all readers should be ordained into Non-Stipendiary Ministry, since they see the preaching as the primary duty of the Clergy.
Posts: 238 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
leo
Shipmate
# 1458

 - Posted      Profile for leo   Author's homepage   Email leo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by MarsmanTJ:
some Evangelical clergy of my acquaintance think that the post of Reader is a stupid one and all readers should be ordained into Non-Stipendiary Ministry, since they see the preaching as the primary duty of the Clergy.

and they say anglo-catholics are over-clericalised!

--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com

Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338

 - Posted      Profile for L'organist   Author's homepage   Email L'organist   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
And we probably have another 4 years of Sentamu to come.

Of course, he could always decide to go and join his brother Robert at the Miracle Centre Cathedral in Kampala; John obviously doesn't have a problem with prosperity theology, given that he's already preached there.

--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet

Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012  |  IP: Logged
leo
Shipmate
# 1458

 - Posted      Profile for leo   Author's homepage   Email leo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The letters page of today's Church Times is full of opprobrium for Sentamu.

Also, a suggestion that other laity could be for the chop too - churchwardens PCC members.

--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com

Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
PCC members, surely not- I don't think that Bishops have any particular authority over them, do they? But Churchwardens AIUI are officers of the Bishop.
What absolute stinkers Sentamu and his kind are.

--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.

Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
MarsmanTJ
Shipmate
# 8689

 - Posted      Profile for MarsmanTJ   Email MarsmanTJ   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by MarsmanTJ:
some Evangelical clergy of my acquaintance think that the post of Reader is a stupid one and all readers should be ordained into Non-Stipendiary Ministry, since they see the preaching as the primary duty of the Clergy.

and they say anglo-catholics are over-clericalised!
Depends on the church in question, and the question of who has more people involved in clerical roles in an Evangelical church vs. Anglo-Catholic High Mass is an interesting diversion, I think it would probably get me garotted with a dull fish knife by the Hell Hosts if I tried to continue it here...
Posts: 238 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Spike

Mostly Harmless
# 36

 - Posted      Profile for Spike   Email Spike   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by MarsmanTJ:
I think it would probably get me garotted with a dull fish knife by the Hell Hosts if I tried to continue it here...

Im curious to know how garotting could be performed with any type of knife, blunt or otherwise.

[ 21. August 2015, 12:37: Message edited by: Spike ]

--------------------
"May you get to heaven before the devil knows you're dead" - Irish blessing

Posts: 12860 | From: The Valley of Crocuses | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools