Sandi Toksvig v Justin Welby

[cookiemonster]

Brilliant from Sandi.

 

[Ian H]

It's not essentially a religious pronouncement, it's a political one, an attempt to keep the world-wide Anglican church from splitting down the middle.
And it's a shame.

 

[mudsticks]

Brilliant from Sandi.

View attachment 1860

View attachment 1861

It's not essentially a religious pronouncement, it's a political one, an attempt to keep the world-wide Anglican church from splitting down the middle.
And it's a shame.

Yes aiui this is about keeping the Anglican churches in some African countries on board..

Really points up how homophobia is such an entrenched position in some cultures .

And how religious 'doctrine' or rather entrenched interpretation.of such, really isn't helping with that .

Sad, that Justin and his brothers can't take a more progressive public stance on this, to avoid violence and oppression of minorities, being 'religiously justified' in less enlightened parts of the world.

When it would seem obv to us, that this is what is is so clearly needed from them.

 

[winjim]

Yikes, it's a tricky business. People are free to believe whatever they want and I think explaining to the head of a church how they should interpret their own religious texts is asking for trouble. Personally I think it's easy to find a passage in the bible which can be interpreted as Jesus condemning gay sex as a sin, but I also understand that the specific passage I'm thinking of is a later addition to the gospels and is not in the earlier texts, but there are allusions to similar things elsewhere, but there are also gay Jews etc etc so as an atheist I should really keep my nose out of it and not tell people what to believe.

So, the problem is not one of theology but one of politics, and power, and influence. The Anglican church is, as Ian alludes to, hugely influential around the world. Ironically perhaps less so in this country than in other places. We should perhaps be asking our religious leaders to explain to people that this is what they believe but that others are not obliged to believe the same things nor to be governed by those beliefs, and that religious belief and secular governance should be kept separate.

 

[cookiemonster]

Yes aiui this is about keeping the Anglican churches in some African countries on board..

Really points up how homophobia is such an entrenched position in some cultures .

Speaking of which -

https://www.theguardian.com/global-...na-anti-lgbtq-bill-blamed-for-rise-in-attacks

 

[BoldonLad]

Don't disagree with the sentiments, but, I do wonder, why address this to Welby?, he is head of an organisation with approximately 85million followers (according to Google), the Roman Catholic Church has approximately 1.2Billion followers (Google)......, not to mention various other Religious groups. To get immediate large scale improvement, it would seem to make sense to target the largest groups first?

 

[BoldonLad]

Yikes, it's a tricky business. People are free to believe whatever they want and I think explaining to the head of a church how they should interpret their own religious texts is asking for trouble. Personally I think it's easy to find a passage in the bible which can be interpreted as Jesus condemning gay sex as a sin, but I also understand that the specific passage I'm thinking of is a later addition to the gospels and is not in the earlier texts, but there are allusions to similar things elsewhere, but there are also gay Jews etc etc so as an atheist I should really keep my nose out of it and not tell people what to believe.

So, the problem is not one of theology but one of politics, and power, and influence. The Anglican church is, as Ian alludes to, hugely influential around the world. Ironically perhaps less so in this country than in other places. We should perhaps be asking our religious leaders to explain to people that this is what they believe but that others are not obliged to believe the same things nor to be governed by those beliefs, and that religious belief and secular governance should be kept separate.

+1 to this! Maybe Welby, and the other Bishops should not be sitting in the House of Lords, unelected, except for their Religious connection ?

 

[Ian H]

Don't disagree with the sentiments, but, I do wonder, why address this to Welby?,...

Because he's just made a pronouncement, and because it runs counter to the general towards liberalisation in the CofE.
Roman Catholicism is probably a lost cause. Strait is the lace.

 

[All uphill]

It's not essentially a religious pronouncement, it's a political one, an attempt to keep the world-wide Anglican church from splitting down the middle.
And it's a shame.

I've never doubted that successful organisations are largely about power and control over others; the welfare of the organisation comes ahead of principle and the individual.

I thought we all became fascists in old age; I seem to be becoming an anarchist!

 

[mudsticks]

Yikes, it's a tricky business. People are free to believe whatever they want and I think explaining to the head of a church how they should interpret their own religious texts is asking for trouble. Personally I think it's easy to find a passage in the bible which can be interpreted as Jesus condemning gay sex as a sin, but I also understand that the specific passage I'm thinking of is a later addition to the gospels and is not in the earlier texts, but there are allusions to similar things elsewhere, but there are also gay Jews etc etc so as an atheist I should really keep my nose out of it and not tell people what to believe.

So, the problem is not one of theology but one of politics, and power, and influence. The Anglican church is, as Ian alludes to, hugely influential around the world. Ironically perhaps less so in this country than in other places. We should perhaps be asking our religious leaders to explain to people that this is what they believe but that others are not obliged to believe the same things nor to be governed by those beliefs, and that religious belief and secular governance should be kept separate.

 

[Beebo]

The African and American Bishops hold huge power over the Lambeth Conference.
The CofE is a very small part of the Anglican community.

 

[Salty seadog]

View attachment 1862

 

[The Crofted Crest]

Strait is the lace.

and narrow is the habit.

 

[AuroraSaab]

I agree, it's about not causing a schism with the African/US churches. There has been quite a growth in the number of independent and 'house' churches in the UK, most of whom have very conservative views on these type of issues and perhaps Welby is conscious that a liberal approach won't attract new inherently conservative adherents to the C of E.

In reality, there are plenty of vicars/churches who welcome gay Christians, but this new pronouncement does send a message that, officially anyway, they are still seen as lesser rather than equal.

Ironically, only a few weeks ago the C of E was saying it didn't know what a woman was.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.lbc.co.uk/news/church-of-england-doesnt-have-definition-of-a-woman/

Now it seems they do know, because if two women ask for a church wedding the answer will be 'Jog on'.

 

[matticus]

In reality, there are plenty of vicars/churches who welcome gay Christians, but this new pronouncement does send a message that, officially anyway, they are still seen as lesser rather than equal.

I genuinely, honestly don't think this [bolded] will change. The history of C-of-E is of taking a pragmatic view on such matters e.g. in theory casual twice-a-year churchgoers are lesser members of the church, but most vicars welcome them as equals.