You are here . on the pale blue dot


Please note that 'Anonymous' comments without a pseudonym are not published.

Comments for publication should be 'on topic' and not involve third parties please.
If pseudonyms are linked to commercial sites the comments will be removed as spam.

Wednesday, 26 July 2017

Keeping up


Secretary of State for Education and Minister for Women and Equalities

It has been reported in the Mirror and elsewhere that the Equalities Minister Justine Greening has urged faith leaders to "keep up" with 21st Century attitudes as she "piled pressure" to let gay couples marry in church. With that attitude she could be a bishop in the Church of England. They need no encouragement from Cabinet Ministers to follow a secular agenda.

As the first openly gay woman in the Conservative cabinet perhaps the Minister of Equalities feels it incumbent upon her to promote the LGBT lifestyle of 1.7% of the population over the interests of the majority 98% . This trend has been evident in the church when gay conference delegates and Synod members have taken a decision to vote 'as a gay person' instead of representing the views of their congregations when they have voted.

In April this year the BBC announced a major new season, Gay Britannia, marking the 50th anniversary of The Sexual Offences Act and heralded as "Bold and provocative stories celebrate the LGBTQ community". A change from the usual TV diet of murder and mayhem but many of these programmes have become more promotional than informative, encouraging people to celebrate diversity rather than simply accept difference or, as Ms Greening would have it,  'keep up with 21st Century attitudes'.

'Keeping up' has, step by step, led to an eight-month-old Canadian baby being issued with a health card that does not specify the child's sex at the request of parent Kori Doty, a non-binary transgender parent who identifies as neither male nor female.

The Equalities Minister has also announced that she wants to reform the 2004 Gender Recognition Act to make the transgender process less intrusive. Currently people must be diagnosed with gender dysphoria, a condition where a person's biological sex and identity does not match, so the UK government is considering plans to make the process of changing legal gender easier.

No longer capable of coping with the obvious, at a High School in Connecticut, a 15-year-old boy with a moustache recently crushed female competitors in track and field, "to the great dismay of the girls who had spent many intense days training so hard".

The boy identifies a girl in his self-proclaimed “gender identity” which is regarded as fair in the bizarre universe of modern-day LGBTQ liberalism. The equality movement has inspired transgender athletes to join teams of their preferred gender which often means biological males are competing against biological females on women’s teams.

When the BBC announced that Dr Who is to be transgendered in the name of 'equality', former Doctor Who, Peter Davison, said that casting a woman means another loss of a 'role model' for boys, part of a wider problem for boys in their formative years now that school teachers are predominantly women.

In an article for the BBC, Katie Price poses the question, "Jobs for the boys? - The top roles women have never had", complaining that there has not yet been a woman archbishop. She may be unaware that there has been one in the United States in the person of former Presiding Bishop and Primate of the Episcopal Church, Katharine Jefferts Schori, who continues to be held as a role model despite her disastrous tenure in office suggesting that the church is being used as a means of advancing secular causes.

But to what end? According to a recent report in "significant parts of the United States, TEC has ceased or will soon cease to have a meaningful presence" and "there is much for wider Anglicanism to learn from the U.S. experience". It has been estimated the the Church in Wales will become extinct in a generation.

Nevertheless, in her enthronement sermon the new bishop of Llandaff claimed her dear friend the former Presiding Bishop as an 'episcopal mentor' when she said:

 "Well, I have under God just been anointed for the work of Bishop of Llandaff and it’s very special that it was Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori who commissioned me for that task.  I am proud to call her a dear friend and now an episcopal mentor. Her time as Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church took her around the Anglican family worldwide and so to be anointed by her is a very great privilege. She brings with her that experience of the universal church, socially and culturally diverse, and our call to share God’s desire for a reconciled creation and transformed world."

Step by step the church has "kept up" resulting disunity and a possible split between liberal progressives and orthodox traditionalists.

Ms Greening would do well to look to the difficulties of running the country and keep her secular nose out of matters of faith which clearly she does not understand.

30 comments:

  1. If Schori is her inspiration what on earth has the bench done?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What would Jesus say?27 July 2017 at 08:28

      "Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do."

      Delete
    2. Forgive me, but I am more than a little puzzled by this additional anointing. It could be argued that Dr Jefferts Shori’s action flagged up approval by the whole Anglican Communion, including and especially TEC, but surely just her laying on of hands along with the other consecrating bishops sufficiently expressed that collegiality? Given that June Osborne was anointed by the senior bishop at her consecration at Brecon the week previously, why the need to be re-anointed? Was +John’s anointing insufficient, and needed additional unction? Are we into an inverse ‘tainted hands’ principle here, where a woman can only be commissioned by woman and a man’s commissioning is inadequate? Was the oil used that which was consecrated by +John at the Chrism Mass, or was fresh oil consecrated by Dr Jefferts Shori? What permission was granted to the former presiding bishop of TEC to perform an episcopal function in the Church in Wales? Can bishops from other provinces (such as English PEVs or bishops from GAFCON or the Continuing Church ) also perform such episcopal functions? What checks had been undertaken on Dr Jefferts Shori prior to her undertaking such a function - in line with Church in Wales safeguarding procedures, did she have a clear DBS, along with clearance from USA criminal agencies, and a Safe-to-Receive from her sending diocese? Given the three-year sanctions imposed on TEC following the Anglican Primates’ Meeting in January 2016 (expressed in Addendum A7 of the Communiqué Walking Together in the Service of God and the World), what is the view of the Primate of the Anglican Communion in regard to Dr Jefferts Shori performing an episcopal function in the UK?

      Delete
  2. As it was with Henry V111, so it will be in the age of post Darth Vader, Ancient Briton. A small remnant of priests will be able to trace their origins to the pre transgender, homosexual, lesbian and female period of what was the Anglican Catholic episcopate and priesthood. The 'Dissolution' of the Anglican male bishop and priest is at hand. Come in number 2, your time is up.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I hope the equality minister also called for gay marriage in Mosques? Why only Churches? That is not equal surely?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I have a possible solution : the two female Bishops could opt for a 'trans job' ! Problem solved !

    (Just add with my tongue in cheek, I do not believe that it is possible to change one's given sex).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It might be more realistic than what you suggest. Simple Soul is not as simple as what he/she purports to be.

      Delete
  5. AB, I noted that the BBC are marking the 50th anniversary of the decriminalisation of homosexuality saying that it was basically illegal for being in love with another member of your sex.

    Of course this is patently untrue, not since the Catholic Relief Act 1829 has anyone been unfavourably treated by the law simply for their feelings, beliefs and thoughts. Gay sex was illegal not being in love per se - another instance of this preposterous (ill-)liberal elitist obsession to promote homosexuality on the same par as traditional family life.

    N.b. Written under the protection of the Public Order Act 1986 as amended:

    “any discussion or criticism of marriage which concerns the
    sex of the parties to marriage shall not be taken of itself to be threatening or
    intended to stir up hatred”

    I reserve the right to my anonymity in fear of persecution for my beliefs.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your words are unkind: "....Gay sex was illegal not being in love per se - another instance of this preposterous (ill-)liberal elitist obsession to promote homosexuality on the same par as traditional family life" - why does being gay have to be "less" than equal or not on the same par? Your sentiment is unkind though you do not mean it to be. You are saying that to be gay is "less" than what you call "traditional family life". That is unkind if not unjust - don't you see that?

      Delete
  6. You'll all be very pleased then with Trumps latest tweet on transgender and the military. You're a very sad and bitter crowd of people. I grant you your anonymity not because I fear your persecution but rarher, you are to be pitied.

    ReplyDelete
  7. How dare you Scapegoat, you know nothing about me. I disagree with your point of view and I genuinely feel I need to say that I feel unable to express it publicly as I will be vilified as you just did.

    Is there no room in your church for me? I treat homosexuals exactly the same as anybody else with respect and kindness, but you have just judged me and written me off. Actually, I am not bitter at all just concerned that I am fair game for your hatred.

    ReplyDelete
  8. All I know is that what you genuinely share as simply a "point of view" is the basis of actual vilification and persecution of those who find themselves LGBT. I'd respect you more if you traded in your point of view for a commitment to the equal humanity and justice of others. As I say, that's not to villify or persecute you, it's to appeal to you to take a stand for simple justice. No I don't know you whatsoever but I merely appeal to what appears to be your humanity. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Scapegoat I don't agree with the vilification of anyone save maybe the violent oppressor. What I object too most is how easily you lumped me in with the homophobes who inhabit this blog. I worry you believe that to hold a traditional view of family life is to be homophobic by definition?

    Check back on the 2 dozen blogs I've commented on and you will not find an instance where I have used insulting language about gay people. Where I've disagreed I've always tried to be robust but respectful.

    Pity me if you like as you hold the upper hand now and need not fear anyone unlike people like me who believe a traditional interpretation of the bible. One day soon, maybe we'll endure the injustice of being criminalised for our sincerely held beliefs and we'll know what gay people felt like 50+ years ago.

    ReplyDelete
  10. My apologise as I see how my comment has rarher hurt you; genuinely apologise for that. I also believe you are humane and have found your previous comments have a kindness about them. I don't think traditional family life and being gay are different entities. I'm gay and belong to a traditional family - the two are not opposites and one is certainly not superior to the other. We don't need them set up opposites and you and I do not need to be opposed. So my so sincere good wishes to you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Scapegoat, and for in response to your other comment, I am sorry for the clumsy way I put my views originally. I do accept many of the concessions made just I can't intellectually accept that same sex marriage is sanctioned by scripture. This is an impasse especially as it is so easily becoming emotional.

      I do worry that people like me can't hold an evangelical view of things without being slated though and that's what I was trying to express. I do see that my wording was provocative so if I hurt your feelings I do again apologise as you have to me.

      Maybe one day we can have a coffee by that lovely cathedral in Llandaff? The Lord be with you.

      Delete
  11. American Atheist28 July 2017 at 02:59

    https://www.therebel.media/london_police_ask_ex_muslims_at_pride_parade_to_remove_allah_is_gay_sign_but_allow_jesus_is_gay_sign_to_stay

    "London police ask ex-Muslims at Pride parade to remove “Allah is gay” sign but allow “Jesus is gay” sign to stay"

    Superstitious idiots arguing over whose imaginary friend is best and strongest.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. American Atheist, don't you have any original thoughts of your own? It seems to me that all atheists use this term "imaginary friend", to denigrate the beliefs of others.
      Jesus was not, and is not, "imaginary". He walked this earth just like you and I. His disciples spread his story, and were prepared even to die for it. If atheism was a capital offence, would you put your head above the parapet, and insist God does not exist? I doubt it, and I doubt whether many other atheists would either. Yet Jesus' disciples preferred death to denying their Lord, and proclaiming his Gospel. I think it is fascinating, knowing human nature, that not one of the apostles broke ranks to expose their deception - which tells me that the story of Jesus they proclaimed, even to the point of death, has to have some validity to it. Who in their right minds would die for a lie, and stay silent to the end?
      Nevertheless, thank you for exposing the hypocrisy of the British Police.

      Tomas de Torquamada

      Delete
    2. American Atheist28 July 2017 at 21:31

      A man did walk this earth, just like you and me but you can't even call him by his correct name, which wasn't Jesus.
      Not one of the apostles broke rank - Judas?
      Who in their right minds would die for a lie?
      Plenty of gullible fools.
      Greeks.
      Romans.
      Druids.
      Nazis.
      Kamikaze pilots.
      Communists.
      Suicide bombers thinking they'll get 72 virgins.
      Blind ignorant zealots of all sorts.
      History is littered with their bones.

      Delete
    3. You forgot a group on the your list.

      militant atheists.

      Whose bones are as the bones of anyone.

      Delete
    4. American Atheist29 July 2017 at 01:37

      I know of no atheists (militant or otherwise) who have died for a lie.
      Do you?

      Delete
    5. Once again, American Atheist, you demonstrate you ignorance.
      Judas died before the day of Pentecost, and therefore the Gospel was not entrusted to him for transmission. Up until the death of Jesus (Yeshua - ישוע, if that pleases you), the task of the apostles was to prepare the towns and villages for Jesus' arrival. The disciples themselves were clueless, often asking Jesus to explain his words or actions. With the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, the group are empowered to go out into the world. If you knew the Gospel story well enough, you would know that Judas even took the betrayal money back and tried to undo what he had done. Realizing his guilt in this travesty, he committed suicide.
      The groups you mention died for an ideology or on the orders of their political masters, however deluded that ideology or their political masters were: the apostles died because they would not retract their story. It is as simple as that.
      You cannot simply say Greeks died for a lie. What Greeks are you talking about, and what lies did they die for? Which Romans died, and what lie did they die for? Name for me these druids who died for a lie, and what lie did they die for?
      As for Nazis, Kamikaze pilots, communists and suicide bombers; they did not go out to die in order to bring hope to the world, they died on the orders of their political masters. You should not confuse the two things.
      The Christian Church calls its adherents to live the life that God intended for us; and that is what the apostles proclaimed; and that is what they died for.

      Tomas de Torquamada

      Delete
    6. Truth and lies are subjective thought processes in the brains of organic 'creatures' you should know that AA. It's all meaningless ultimately isn't it?

      Delete
  12. Sad to see that certain recent posts have taken the form of "girlie ping pong"
    Bitchery bitchery, sorry sorry.
    In his excellent book the 8th Lord Stanley of Alderley tells of his uncle Algernon, a Bishop in the Vatican who declared that since a certain family member had lived like a dog then he should be buried like a dog. AMCD Publications page 8.
    That is what we have long had need of in the Anglican church. Robust, red blooded, fearless arse kicking bishops not the feeble lot who have allowed the drift into our present malaise.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Always think the tone of your messages has a rarher spiteful edge to it Wham.

      The Bishop you refer to sounds equally spiteful and lacking in humane kindness never mind Christian grace.

      Just my views and I may be wrong

      Delete
    2. And you're as I expected - arrogant

      Delete
  13. Evans the Song28 July 2017 at 17:08

    It might be worth reflecting, after Justine Greening's comments, and the media coverage surrounding the 50th anniversary of the passing of the 1967 Sexual Offences Act, that Archbishop Michael Ramsey fully supported the decriminalisation of homosexuality. The Archbishops of Canterbury and York issued a spectacularly inept statement to coincide with this anniversary, yesterday. Significantly, Bishop June has been silent. It is a sign, perhaps, that if nothing unifying can be said, don't say it at all. A pity her predecessor never learnt that lesson.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. From The Watchman. Apologies for deleting this in error in another senior moment (AB):

      But the charlady from Sarum Cleansing Services has not been silent Mr Evans. She has amply demonstrated her secularism.Firstly by urging the church to "move on" when there are wounds that need binding. Jesus gave us the model of the Good Samaritan to follow in such situations. A Levite if ever I saw one. Secondly she resolves to build on Bazza's foundations of sand and finally after two invalid ceremonies she buggers off on holiday. God help the Church in Wales.

      Delete
  14. Evans the Song30 July 2017 at 06:46

    OK. I get it. This blog is not just about accountability, which makes it hugely valuable in a Church whose hierarchy has, for too long, been contemptuous towards the 'poor bloody infantry.' But it is also a honey-pot for mindless bigotry, and that completely undoes all the good it serves and .

    ReplyDelete
  15. There will have to be amendments to the Welsh Language Acts because there are masculine nouns and feminine nouns in Welsh and those that are deemed somehow neuter are automatically feminine.. Now unless we can keep the masculines and feminines as we know them, then this would be the death of the Welsh language as we know her.
    She is so beautiful. Ask Hedd Wyn. "A Duw ar drai ar orwel pell." As true in 2017 as they were in 1917.

    ReplyDelete