Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

The Christmas Eve evening open thread – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,219
edited December 24 in General
The Christmas Eve evening open thread – politicalbetting.com

Are Yorkshire puddings an acceptable part of a Christmas dinner?Acceptable: 83%Unacceptable: 9%https://t.co/nNv3sfrtSD pic.twitter.com/TouWEdsJOg

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,885
    I am a live and let live kind of guy as you all know, but they will not be featuring on my Christmas table. Can't think where anyone finds the space in their stomach.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,897
    No. And second.
  • novanova Posts: 700

    I am a live and let live kind of guy as you all know, but they will not be featuring on my Christmas table. Can't think where anyone finds the space in their stomach.

    I think you take the space that was pre-allocated to sprouts, and reassign it.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,173
    Third, like the Tories will be
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,003
    edited December 24
    No Yorkshire puddings are not acceptable with Christmas dinner unless having beef.

    Turkey or Goose should have stuffing not Yorkshires. Otherwise have a good Christmas PBers
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,003
    IanB2 said:

    Third, like the Tories will be

    In which case first, like future PM Farage may well be
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,509
    I'm amused that anyone could possibly think it is unacceptable. I mean, it's not as though the contents of a Christmas dinner was written as the eleventh commandment on a third stone and placed in the Ark of the Covenant.

    "Thou shalt not have Yorkshire puddings, for they art unholy in mine eyes, thou though shalt have sprouts of the brussel, as they are good. Gravy thou shalt have lots of, and the food coma thereafter is also a worthy time to venerate me."
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,288
    edited December 24
    Of course they are acceptable - as is any food... other than perhaps pineapple pizza.
    And in the spirit of Christmas, I might even countenance that.

    In the US, of course, a beef roast is a more usual Xmas repast than is turkey.

    Though oddly, they have not wholly adopted the Yorkshire pud.
  • Alphabet_SoupAlphabet_Soup Posts: 3,325


    ...and definitely don't mention Yorkshire pudding.
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 1,158
    I will accept anything the people doing the hard work of cooking see fit to put on the table :-)
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,288
    .

    I'm amused that anyone could possibly think it is unacceptable. I mean, it's not as though the contents of a Christmas dinner was written as the eleventh commandment on a third stone and placed in the Ark of the Covenant.

    "Thou shalt not have Yorkshire puddings, for they art unholy in mine eyes, thou though shalt have sprouts of the brussel, as they are good. Gravy thou shalt have lots of, and the food coma thereafter is also a worthy time to venerate me."

    That's HYUFD, that is.
  • Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,843
    HYUFD said:

    No Yorkshire puddings are not acceptable with Christmas dinner unless having beef.

    Turkey or Goose should have stuffing not Yorkshires. Otherwise have a good Christmas PBers

    Rib of beef or sirloin is infinitely better than any turkey cut.
    I had enough turkey as a child and in busi ess to last me two lifetimes.
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,508
    Nigelb said:

    Of course they are acceptable - as is any food... other than perhaps pineapple pizza.
    And in the spirit of Christmas, I might even countenance that.

    In the US, of course, a beef roast is a more usual Xmas repast than is turkey.

    Though oddly, they have not wholly adopted the Yorkshire pud.

    I did have a Christmas Dinner pizza the other week. had a gravy base rather than a tomato one...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,288
    Best way of cooking cavolo nero, anyone ?
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 3,640
    Happy Christmas all 👍

    I'm off to the pub soon! 🍺
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,547
    They’re fine for Christmas. Unlike that fungus called parsnip or those horrid little round green things that make you fart.
  • spudgfsh said:

    Nigelb said:

    Of course they are acceptable - as is any food... other than perhaps pineapple pizza.
    And in the spirit of Christmas, I might even countenance that.

    In the US, of course, a beef roast is a more usual Xmas repast than is turkey.

    Though oddly, they have not wholly adopted the Yorkshire pud.

    I did have a Christmas Dinner pizza the other week. had a gravy base rather than a tomato one...
    Twice in my life I've had pizza on Christmas Day.

    First time I was knackered from work and my parents were overseas, so I had a frozen pizza.

    Second time I was staying a hotel and everything on the dinner menu was unsuitable for a good Muslim boy like me so the chef created a nice pizza just for me.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,885

    Acceptable.
    If you like them, have them. If you don't, don't.
    There's no law mandating what is on a Christmas dinner, and it has evolved and changed hugely over the centuries.
    It's a type of roast dinner. Yorkshire puddings are an accompaniment of many roast dinners.

    Not unless it's beef.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,547
    Nigelb said:

    Best way of cooking cavolo nero, anyone ?

    Remove the leaves from the stalk and chop them. Fry in oil, with garlic, mushroom and bacon lardons.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,509
    Nigelb said:

    .

    I'm amused that anyone could possibly think it is unacceptable. I mean, it's not as though the contents of a Christmas dinner was written as the eleventh commandment on a third stone and placed in the Ark of the Covenant.

    "Thou shalt not have Yorkshire puddings, for they art unholy in mine eyes, thou though shalt have sprouts of the brussel, as they are good. Gravy thou shalt have lots of, and the food coma thereafter is also a worthy time to venerate me."

    That's HYUFD, that is.
    Nah, he'd add; "And thy Christmas Dinner must be prepared by the womenfolk, with no help from the men, who shalt be retired to the withdrawing room for port and cigars whilst the women work. They shall offer no help with food or child, and shalt not complement their womenfolk on the dinner, lest the womenfolk get uppity. For the social structures are rigid, and any woman who works at anything other than bearing children or preparing food for the menfolk are evil in mine eyes. Or possibly trans. Feminists are right out."

    :)
  • spudgfsh said:

    Nigelb said:

    Of course they are acceptable - as is any food... other than perhaps pineapple pizza.
    And in the spirit of Christmas, I might even countenance that.

    In the US, of course, a beef roast is a more usual Xmas repast than is turkey.

    Though oddly, they have not wholly adopted the Yorkshire pud.

    I did have a Christmas Dinner pizza the other week. had a gravy base rather than a tomato one...
    Twice in my life I've had pizza on Christmas Day.

    First time I was knackered from work and my parents were overseas, so I had a frozen pizza.

    Second time I was staying a hotel and everything on the dinner menu was unsuitable for a good Muslim boy like me so the chef created a nice pizza just for me.
    I once had Burger King on Christmas Day. It felt thoroughly deviant;)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,003
    edited December 24

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    No, if anything that would be a concession to conservative evangelicals and Anglo Catholics given the large concession the established church has already voted for them to make by allowing prayers for same sex couples married in English law in C of E churches. Though no sign of the Bishops or Synod agreeing to such a third province at present. Note no such province was created for conservative Anglo Catholics who opposed women priests and bishops when Synod voted for them too and a number crossed the Tiber to Rome as a result (though flying suffragen bishops were created for parishes which did not want a woman priest or bishop).

    Though note that final quote from the Alliance if 'further departure' ie same sex marriage in C of E churches which there is no sign of there being anywhere near a majority on Synod for given it would for most of them be such a departure from what the Bible and Jesus teach on marriage
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,169
    Sean_F said:

    Nigelb said:

    Best way of cooking cavolo nero, anyone ?

    Remove the leaves from the stalk and chop them. Fry in oil, with garlic, mushroom and bacon lardons.
    Then chuck em in the bin.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,753
    Yorkie puds aren't just acceptable, they're a necessity! I don't get why folk wouldn't want them as part of the Christmas meal.

    On an unrelated but similar Christmas theme and my biggest bugbear of this point of the festive period. Once upon a time the January sales were the big post-Xmas thing. Over time the relentless march of capitalism has pushed that earlier and earlier back to sales beginning Boxing Day. Now you're being pushed the same stuff you just bought everyone for Christmas at massive savings on Christmas Eve and/or the day itself: basically the minute it's too late for it to be delivered via online shopping, the retailers take the view of "now we can call our sale as being on".

    I mean I know why in a captive market situation kind of way, but come on, could retailers be a little bit more subtle about how much of a piss-take they are on over this period? From "Black Friday week" all the way till mid-January it's getting a bit ridiculous how much of a frenzy of commercialism we are supposed to want to indulge in.

    Angry middle aged man rant ends.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,169
    It’s a Wonderful Life.

    Is a wonderful film.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,547

    spudgfsh said:

    Nigelb said:

    Of course they are acceptable - as is any food... other than perhaps pineapple pizza.
    And in the spirit of Christmas, I might even countenance that.

    In the US, of course, a beef roast is a more usual Xmas repast than is turkey.

    Though oddly, they have not wholly adopted the Yorkshire pud.

    I did have a Christmas Dinner pizza the other week. had a gravy base rather than a tomato one...
    Twice in my life I've had pizza on Christmas Day.

    First time I was knackered from work and my parents were overseas, so I had a frozen pizza.

    Second time I was staying a hotel and everything on the dinner menu was unsuitable for a good Muslim boy like me so the chef created a nice pizza just for me.
    I once had Burger King on Christmas Day. It felt thoroughly deviant;)
    Rightly.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,288
    Penddu2 said:

    Spare a thought for those of us working in remote construction sites on fixed rotation cycles - which means tommorrow is just a normal working day. And dry....

    Or you can hold that thought till end of January when I will take two weeks off on a tropical beach to spend a little of my tax-free salary on a lifestyle that would make Leon blush.....

    Blimey.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,248

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    Homophobia. Dressed up as "faith".
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,731
    HYUFD said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    No, if anything that would be a concession to conservative evangelicals and Anglo Catholics given the large concession the established church has already voted for them to make by allowing prayers for same sex couples married in English law in C of E churches. Though no sign of the Bishops or Synod agreeing to such a third province at present. Note no such province was created for conservative Anglo Catholics who opposed women priests and bishops when Synod voted for them too and a number crossed the Tiber to Rome as a result (though flying suffragen bishops were created for parishes which did not want a woman priest or bishop).

    Though note that final quote from the Alliance if 'further departure' ie same sex marriage in C of E churches which there is no sign of there being anywhere near a majority on Synod for given it would for most of them be such a departure from what the Bible and Jesus teach on marriage
    With all these to-ings and fro-ings I'm increasingly glad I'm no longer describing myself as CofE.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,248
    Christmas dinner is just another roast dinner. Same as people eat every Sunday. Five hours to prepare, fifteen minutes to eat.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591

    I am a live and let live kind of guy as you all know, but they will not be featuring on my Christmas table. Can't think where anyone finds the space in their stomach.

    As some have noted it can work if they work as a kind of gravy and/or vegetable mini-bowl on your plate, but many thesedays do not fit the bill.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    spudgfsh said:

    I'll give the same answer to the one I give to people who tell me I'm making my cup of tea or coffee wrong. 'The best way to do it is for me the way I like it'.

    if that means Yorkshire puddings as part of Christmas dinner then so be it.

    That's why I am in favour of pineapple on pizza, even though I would never have it myself. Pizza is great because you can put whatever you want on it.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,003

    HYUFD said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    No, if anything that would be a concession to conservative evangelicals and Anglo Catholics given the large concession the established church has already voted for them to make by allowing prayers for same sex couples married in English law in C of E churches. Though no sign of the Bishops or Synod agreeing to such a third province at present. Note no such province was created for conservative Anglo Catholics who opposed women priests and bishops when Synod voted for them too and a number crossed the Tiber to Rome as a result (though flying suffragen bishops were created for parishes which did not want a woman priest or bishop).

    Though note that final quote from the Alliance if 'further departure' ie same sex marriage in C of E churches which there is no sign of there being anywhere near a majority on Synod for given it would for most of them be such a departure from what the Bible and Jesus teach on marriage
    With all these to-ings and fro-ings I'm increasingly glad I'm no longer describing myself as CofE.
    Well the only Christian denominations which allow same sex marriages in England their churches and places of worship are the Methodists and Quakers and both are in steep decline.

    For the truth is if you are so vehement a supporter of same sex marriages you want even churches to have to do them you are likely to secular and irreligious anyway.

    The fastest growing churches in the UK by contrast are Orthodox, Baptist and Pentecostal, none of which offer even the prayers for same sex couples the C of E now does in services let alone same sex marriages
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,663

    I am a live and let live kind of guy as you all know, but they will not be featuring on my Christmas table. Can't think where anyone finds the space in their stomach.

    My daughter makes great Yorkshire puddings, and this is her way of contributing to the Christmas lunch, so we're a yes on this.

    We shall be pairing it with both chicken and salmon. Chicken because my kids think Turkey is just for Thanksgiving, and I don't really care. Salmon, because my wife is a pescatarian.

    Vegtables will be roast potatoes, squash and brussels sprouts.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,248
    All these 18-24 folks saying "Don't know". Is that because they don't know what a Yorkshire pudding is?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,897

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    There are already two varieties of alternative bishop oversight in the Church of England, one for Anglo Catholics who take the traditional view on women priests, and one for Evangelicals ditto. This is two too many.

    This means in fact that both ACs and Evos in the CoE are split between purists with their own bishops, and moderates who take on board, however doubtfully, the new rules allowing women priests.

    Most actual parishes are just ordinary, non extreme, and contain a variety of views and accept the compromises of living with different views about everything. Alternative 'no gays' bishops would lead to there being 4 or 5 different sorts of bishops to choose from. It would split ACs, Evos and centrists into fragments.

    This would be crazy.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,663

    I'm amused that anyone could possibly think it is unacceptable. I mean, it's not as though the contents of a Christmas dinner was written as the eleventh commandment on a third stone and placed in the Ark of the Covenant.

    "Thou shalt not have Yorkshire puddings, for they art unholy in mine eyes, thou though shalt have sprouts of the brussel, as they are good. Gravy thou shalt have lots of, and the food coma thereafter is also a worthy time to venerate me."

    Errr, please, 11th is Don't Wear Green with Grey
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,248
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    No, if anything that would be a concession to conservative evangelicals and Anglo Catholics given the large concession the established church has already voted for them to make by allowing prayers for same sex couples married in English law in C of E churches. Though no sign of the Bishops or Synod agreeing to such a third province at present. Note no such province was created for conservative Anglo Catholics who opposed women priests and bishops when Synod voted for them too and a number crossed the Tiber to Rome as a result (though flying suffragen bishops were created for parishes which did not want a woman priest or bishop).

    Though note that final quote from the Alliance if 'further departure' ie same sex marriage in C of E churches which there is no sign of there being anywhere near a majority on Synod for given it would for most of them be such a departure from what the Bible and Jesus teach on marriage
    With all these to-ings and fro-ings I'm increasingly glad I'm no longer describing myself as CofE.
    Well the only Christian denominations which allow same sex marriages in England their churches and places of worship are the Methodists and Quakers and both are in steep decline.

    For the truth is if you are so vehement a supporter of same sex marriages you want even churches to have to do them you are likely to secular and irreligious anyway.

    The fastest growing churches in the UK by contrast are Orthodox, Baptist and Pentecostal, none of which offer even the prayers for same sex couples the C of E now does in services let alone same sex marriages
    Unitarian chapels also host weddings between same-sex couples.

    But I guess you don't consider Unitarianism to be a branch of Christianity.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,003
    edited December 24
    algarkirk said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    There are already two varieties of alternative bishop oversight in the Church of England, one for Anglo Catholics who take the traditional view on women priests, and one for Evangelicals ditto. This is two too many.

    This means in fact that both ACs and Evos in the CoE are split between purists with their own bishops, and moderates who take on board, however doubtfully, the new rules allowing women priests.

    Most actual parishes are just ordinary, non extreme, and contain a variety of views and accept the compromises of living with different views about everything. Alternative 'no gays' bishops would lead to there being 4 or 5 different sorts of bishops to choose from. It would split ACs, Evos and centrists into fragments.

    This would be crazy.
    I have no problem with flying bishops for Anglo Catholics and evangelicals who hold to St Paul's view that only men should be priests and bishops.

    However yes having a third province for those evangelicals who think gays should either be celibate or become heterosexual would be absurd, especially as such parishes can opt out of the prayers for same sex couples anyway
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,248
    algarkirk said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    There are already two varieties of alternative bishop oversight in the Church of England, one for Anglo Catholics who take the traditional view on women priests, and one for Evangelicals ditto. This is two too many.

    This means in fact that both ACs and Evos in the CoE are split between purists with their own bishops, and moderates who take on board, however doubtfully, the new rules allowing women priests.

    Most actual parishes are just ordinary, non extreme, and contain a variety of views and accept the compromises of living with different views about everything. Alternative 'no gays' bishops would lead to there being 4 or 5 different sorts of bishops to choose from. It would split ACs, Evos and centrists into fragments.

    This would be crazy.
    Sexists as well as homophobes. It gets better.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,288
    rcs1000 said:

    I am a live and let live kind of guy as you all know, but they will not be featuring on my Christmas table. Can't think where anyone finds the space in their stomach.

    My daughter makes great Yorkshire puddings, and this is her way of contributing to the Christmas lunch, so we're a yes on this.

    We shall be pairing it with both chicken and salmon. Chicken because my kids think Turkey is just for Thanksgiving, and I don't really care. Salmon, because my wife is a pescatarian.

    Vegtables will be roast potatoes, squash and brussels sprouts.
    They're right.
    No one would really wish to eat turkey twice in one year.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,003

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    No, if anything that would be a concession to conservative evangelicals and Anglo Catholics given the large concession the established church has already voted for them to make by allowing prayers for same sex couples married in English law in C of E churches. Though no sign of the Bishops or Synod agreeing to such a third province at present. Note no such province was created for conservative Anglo Catholics who opposed women priests and bishops when Synod voted for them too and a number crossed the Tiber to Rome as a result (though flying suffragen bishops were created for parishes which did not want a woman priest or bishop).

    Though note that final quote from the Alliance if 'further departure' ie same sex marriage in C of E churches which there is no sign of there being anywhere near a majority on Synod for given it would for most of them be such a departure from what the Bible and Jesus teach on marriage
    With all these to-ings and fro-ings I'm increasingly glad I'm no longer describing myself as CofE.
    Well the only Christian denominations which allow same sex marriages in England their churches and places of worship are the Methodists and Quakers and both are in steep decline.

    For the truth is if you are so vehement a supporter of same sex marriages you want even churches to have to do them you are likely to secular and irreligious anyway.

    The fastest growing churches in the UK by contrast are Orthodox, Baptist and Pentecostal, none of which offer even the prayers for same sex couples the C of E now does in services let alone same sex marriages
    Unitarian chapels also host weddings between same-sex couples.

    But I guess you don't consider Unitarianism to be a branch of Christianity.
    And Unitarians are in even steeper decline than the Methodists with less than 200 Unitarian churches now left in England

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,663
    Nigelb said:

    Of course they are acceptable - as is any food... other than perhaps pineapple pizza.
    And in the spirit of Christmas, I might even countenance that.

    In the US, of course, a beef roast is a more usual Xmas repast than is turkey.

    Though oddly, they have not wholly adopted the Yorkshire pud.

    In the US, they are usually called "popovers" rather than Yorkshire puddings.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,897

    Acceptable.
    If you like them, have them. If you don't, don't.
    There's no law mandating what is on a Christmas dinner, and it has evolved and changed hugely over the centuries.
    It's a type of roast dinner. Yorkshire puddings are an accompaniment of many roast dinners.

    In 1660 Pepys had undercooked turkey on 23 Dec, shoulder of mutton and chicken on 25 Dec and vomited in the middle of the night on 27 Dec.

    I blame the Yorkshire puddings.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,663
    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I am a live and let live kind of guy as you all know, but they will not be featuring on my Christmas table. Can't think where anyone finds the space in their stomach.

    My daughter makes great Yorkshire puddings, and this is her way of contributing to the Christmas lunch, so we're a yes on this.

    We shall be pairing it with both chicken and salmon. Chicken because my kids think Turkey is just for Thanksgiving, and I don't really care. Salmon, because my wife is a pescatarian.

    Vegtables will be roast potatoes, squash and brussels sprouts.
    They're right.
    No one would really wish to eat turkey twice in one year.
    I think I will have gone all year without eating turkey.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,248
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    No, if anything that would be a concession to conservative evangelicals and Anglo Catholics given the large concession the established church has already voted for them to make by allowing prayers for same sex couples married in English law in C of E churches. Though no sign of the Bishops or Synod agreeing to such a third province at present. Note no such province was created for conservative Anglo Catholics who opposed women priests and bishops when Synod voted for them too and a number crossed the Tiber to Rome as a result (though flying suffragen bishops were created for parishes which did not want a woman priest or bishop).

    Though note that final quote from the Alliance if 'further departure' ie same sex marriage in C of E churches which there is no sign of there being anywhere near a majority on Synod for given it would for most of them be such a departure from what the Bible and Jesus teach on marriage
    With all these to-ings and fro-ings I'm increasingly glad I'm no longer describing myself as CofE.
    Well the only Christian denominations which allow same sex marriages in England their churches and places of worship are the Methodists and Quakers and both are in steep decline.

    For the truth is if you are so vehement a supporter of same sex marriages you want even churches to have to do them you are likely to secular and irreligious anyway.

    The fastest growing churches in the UK by contrast are Orthodox, Baptist and Pentecostal, none of which offer even the prayers for same sex couples the C of E now does in services let alone same sex marriages
    Unitarian chapels also host weddings between same-sex couples.

    But I guess you don't consider Unitarianism to be a branch of Christianity.
    And Unitarians are in even steeper decline than the Methodists with less than 200 Unitarian churches now left in England

    So religions that embrace bigotry are on the rise. Those that are inclusive are in decline. Sad.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,897

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    No, if anything that would be a concession to conservative evangelicals and Anglo Catholics given the large concession the established church has already voted for them to make by allowing prayers for same sex couples married in English law in C of E churches. Though no sign of the Bishops or Synod agreeing to such a third province at present. Note no such province was created for conservative Anglo Catholics who opposed women priests and bishops when Synod voted for them too and a number crossed the Tiber to Rome as a result (though flying suffragen bishops were created for parishes which did not want a woman priest or bishop).

    Though note that final quote from the Alliance if 'further departure' ie same sex marriage in C of E churches which there is no sign of there being anywhere near a majority on Synod for given it would for most of them be such a departure from what the Bible and Jesus teach on marriage
    With all these to-ings and fro-ings I'm increasingly glad I'm no longer describing myself as CofE.
    Well the only Christian denominations which allow same sex marriages in England their churches and places of worship are the Methodists and Quakers and both are in steep decline.

    For the truth is if you are so vehement a supporter of same sex marriages you want even churches to have to do them you are likely to secular and irreligious anyway.

    The fastest growing churches in the UK by contrast are Orthodox, Baptist and Pentecostal, none of which offer even the prayers for same sex couples the C of E now does in services let alone same sex marriages
    Unitarian chapels also host weddings between same-sex couples.

    But I guess you don't consider Unitarianism to be a branch of Christianity.
    And Unitarians are in even steeper decline than the Methodists with less than 200 Unitarian churches now left in England

    So religions that embrace bigotry are on the rise. Those that are inclusive are in decline. Sad.
    It's all in Yeats 'The Second Coming'. Cheery stuff for the season:

    The best lack all conviction, while the worst
    Are full of passionate intensity.......

    ......The darkness drops again; but now I know
    That twenty centuries of stony sleep
    Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
    And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
    Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,517

    HYUFD said:

    No Yorkshire puddings are not acceptable with Christmas dinner unless having beef.

    Turkey or Goose should have stuffing not Yorkshires. Otherwise have a good Christmas PBers

    Rib of beef or sirloin is infinitely better than any turkey cut.
    I had enough turkey as a child and in busi ess to last me two lifetimes.
    Bah Humbug
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,099
    Good evening everyone. Just want to wish you all a very Happy Christmas whether you're a fan of Yorkshires or not.

    If you want to have them, have them. One family I know has a large pan Yorkshire pudding with the roast and another large pan Yorkshire for the children's dessert.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,517
    Nigelb said:

    Best way of cooking cavolo nero, anyone ?

    best just steamed
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,843
    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I am a live and let live kind of guy as you all know, but they will not be featuring on my Christmas table. Can't think where anyone finds the space in their stomach.

    My daughter makes great Yorkshire puddings, and this is her way of contributing to the Christmas lunch, so we're a yes on this.

    We shall be pairing it with both chicken and salmon. Chicken because my kids think Turkey is just for Thanksgiving, and I don't really care. Salmon, because my wife is a pescatarian.

    Vegtables will be roast potatoes, squash and brussels sprouts.
    They're right.
    No one would really wish to eat turkey twice in one year.
    Once is too much.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,885

    rcs1000 said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I am a live and let live kind of guy as you all know, but they will not be featuring on my Christmas table. Can't think where anyone finds the space in their stomach.

    My daughter makes great Yorkshire puddings, and this is her way of contributing to the Christmas lunch, so we're a yes on this.

    We shall be pairing it with both chicken and salmon. Chicken because my kids think Turkey is just for Thanksgiving, and I don't really care. Salmon, because my wife is a pescatarian.

    Vegtables will be roast potatoes, squash and brussels sprouts.
    They're right.
    No one would really wish to eat turkey twice in one year.
    I think I will have gone all year without eating turkey.
    So you've gone cold turkey on cold turkey.
    He's told the stuffing to get stuffed.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,517

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I am a live and let live kind of guy as you all know, but they will not be featuring on my Christmas table. Can't think where anyone finds the space in their stomach.

    My daughter makes great Yorkshire puddings, and this is her way of contributing to the Christmas lunch, so we're a yes on this.

    We shall be pairing it with both chicken and salmon. Chicken because my kids think Turkey is just for Thanksgiving, and I don't really care. Salmon, because my wife is a pescatarian.

    Vegtables will be roast potatoes, squash and brussels sprouts.
    They're right.
    No one would really wish to eat turkey twice in one year.
    Once is too much.
    Not for me, I like it
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,885
    Turkey is traditional. It's what Scrooge bought the Cratchets.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,966
    Membership numbers

    Con 131,780
    RefUK 127,238

    https://www.reformparty.uk/counter
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    edited December 24

    Turkey is traditional. It's what Scrooge bought the Cratchets.

    Only because he hadn't fully absorbed his lesson of goodness yet.

    All part of my proposed movie script 'A Christmas Carol 2: Get Scrooged'
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,885
    Andy_JS said:

    Membership numbers

    Con 131,780
    RefUK 127,238

    https://www.reformparty.uk/counter

    Come on Roger, you know you want to.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,067
    The reason for Yorkshire Pudding with any roast other than beef, is to allow chain restaurants to fill the plate with cheaper ingredients than meat.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,663
    Andy_JS said:

    Membership numbers

    Con 131,780
    RefUK 127,238

    https://www.reformparty.uk/counter

    The Conservative Party never used to actually know their membership number, so I guess this is progress.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,663

    Turkey is traditional. It's what Scrooge bought the Cratchets.

    And they are all dead.

    We're not making that mistake.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,663
    So... can I persuade my family to watch Die Hard with me tonight?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,003

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    No, if anything that would be a concession to conservative evangelicals and Anglo Catholics given the large concession the established church has already voted for them to make by allowing prayers for same sex couples married in English law in C of E churches. Though no sign of the Bishops or Synod agreeing to such a third province at present. Note no such province was created for conservative Anglo Catholics who opposed women priests and bishops when Synod voted for them too and a number crossed the Tiber to Rome as a result (though flying suffragen bishops were created for parishes which did not want a woman priest or bishop).

    Though note that final quote from the Alliance if 'further departure' ie same sex marriage in C of E churches which there is no sign of there being anywhere near a majority on Synod for given it would for most of them be such a departure from what the Bible and Jesus teach on marriage
    With all these to-ings and fro-ings I'm increasingly glad I'm no longer describing myself as CofE.
    Well the only Christian denominations which allow same sex marriages in England their churches and places of worship are the Methodists and Quakers and both are in steep decline.

    For the truth is if you are so vehement a supporter of same sex marriages you want even churches to have to do them you are likely to secular and irreligious anyway.

    The fastest growing churches in the UK by contrast are Orthodox, Baptist and Pentecostal, none of which offer even the prayers for same sex couples the C of E now does in services let alone same sex marriages
    Unitarian chapels also host weddings between same-sex couples.

    But I guess you don't consider Unitarianism to be a branch of Christianity.
    And Unitarians are in even steeper decline than the Methodists with less than 200 Unitarian churches now left in England

    So religions that embrace bigotry are on the rise. Those that are inclusive are in decline. Sad.
    Well same sex marriage supporters in the UK could start attending churches which do same sex marriages like the Methodists and Unitarians if they want to change that. Rather than telling churches to perform same sex marriages while never having any intention of attending any of their services even if they do
  • rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Membership numbers

    Con 131,780
    RefUK 127,238

    https://www.reformparty.uk/counter

    The Conservative Party never used to actually know their membership number, so I guess this is progress.
    Figures from the leadership election, perhaps?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,509

    Turkey is traditional. It's what Scrooge bought the Cratchets.

    AIUI, goose was traditional. Turkey was expensive, and for the relatively well-off - which made Scrooge gifting one all the more potent message. In fact, in the book didn't Cratchett have a small goose already for dinner?

    As turkeys became cheaper, they took over in popularity from geese. Perhaps because they were seen as a luxury.

    It's a shame, as I've never liked turkey much. It's a very dry meat.

    Now Turks... Turks I love. :)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,003
    edited December 24
    Andy_JS said:

    Membership numbers

    Con 131,780
    RefUK 127,238

    https://www.reformparty.uk/counter

    Mind you Corbyn Labour had significantly more members than May's Tories or even the Boris led Conservative Party did but it didn't help them win the 2017 or 2019 general election.

    The fact is unless you want to be a councillor or MP/MSP/AM or have a strong sense of public service most people who join UK political parties now will be ideologues so it is hardly surprising that leftwing ideologues joined Corbyn's Labour Party as members en masse and rightwing ideologues are now joining Farage's Reform Party en masse
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,509
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    No, if anything that would be a concession to conservative evangelicals and Anglo Catholics given the large concession the established church has already voted for them to make by allowing prayers for same sex couples married in English law in C of E churches. Though no sign of the Bishops or Synod agreeing to such a third province at present. Note no such province was created for conservative Anglo Catholics who opposed women priests and bishops when Synod voted for them too and a number crossed the Tiber to Rome as a result (though flying suffragen bishops were created for parishes which did not want a woman priest or bishop).

    Though note that final quote from the Alliance if 'further departure' ie same sex marriage in C of E churches which there is no sign of there being anywhere near a majority on Synod for given it would for most of them be such a departure from what the Bible and Jesus teach on marriage
    With all these to-ings and fro-ings I'm increasingly glad I'm no longer describing myself as CofE.
    Well the only Christian denominations which allow same sex marriages in England their churches and places of worship are the Methodists and Quakers and both are in steep decline.

    For the truth is if you are so vehement a supporter of same sex marriages you want even churches to have to do them you are likely to secular and irreligious anyway.

    The fastest growing churches in the UK by contrast are Orthodox, Baptist and Pentecostal, none of which offer even the prayers for same sex couples the C of E now does in services let alone same sex marriages
    Unitarian chapels also host weddings between same-sex couples.

    But I guess you don't consider Unitarianism to be a branch of Christianity.
    And Unitarians are in even steeper decline than the Methodists with less than 200 Unitarian churches now left in England

    So religions that embrace bigotry are on the rise. Those that are inclusive are in decline. Sad.
    Well same sex marriage supporters in the UK could start attending churches which do same sex marriages like the Methodists and Unitarians if they want to change that. Rather than telling churches to perform same sex marriages while never having any intention of attending any of their services even if they do
    You've banned me from your church, even if I wanted to attend. No wonder churches are having trouble with attendance figures...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,003
    edited December 24

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    No, if anything that would be a concession to conservative evangelicals and Anglo Catholics given the large concession the established church has already voted for them to make by allowing prayers for same sex couples married in English law in C of E churches. Though no sign of the Bishops or Synod agreeing to such a third province at present. Note no such province was created for conservative Anglo Catholics who opposed women priests and bishops when Synod voted for them too and a number crossed the Tiber to Rome as a result (though flying suffragen bishops were created for parishes which did not want a woman priest or bishop).

    Though note that final quote from the Alliance if 'further departure' ie same sex marriage in C of E churches which there is no sign of there being anywhere near a majority on Synod for given it would for most of them be such a departure from what the Bible and Jesus teach on marriage
    With all these to-ings and fro-ings I'm increasingly glad I'm no longer describing myself as CofE.
    Well the only Christian denominations which allow same sex marriages in England their churches and places of worship are the Methodists and Quakers and both are in steep decline.

    For the truth is if you are so vehement a supporter of same sex marriages you want even churches to have to do them you are likely to secular and irreligious anyway.

    The fastest growing churches in the UK by contrast are Orthodox, Baptist and Pentecostal, none of which offer even the prayers for same sex couples the C of E now does in services let alone same sex marriages
    Unitarian chapels also host weddings between same-sex couples.

    But I guess you don't consider Unitarianism to be a branch of Christianity.
    And Unitarians are in even steeper decline than the Methodists with less than 200 Unitarian churches now left in England

    So religions that embrace bigotry are on the rise. Those that are inclusive are in decline. Sad.
    Well same sex marriage supporters in the UK could start attending churches which do same sex marriages like the Methodists and Unitarians if they want to change that. Rather than telling churches to perform same sex marriages while never having any intention of attending any of their services even if they do
    You've banned me from your church, even if I wanted to attend. No wonder churches are having trouble with attendance figures...
    I am not a Methodist or Unitarian, as I said it is the anti gay relationship recognition churches like the Baptists, Pentecostals and Orthodox growing fastest in the UK as their true believers do attend them
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,820
    edited December 24
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    No, if anything that would be a concession to conservative evangelicals and Anglo Catholics given the large concession the established church has already voted for them to make by allowing prayers for same sex couples married in English law in C of E churches. Though no sign of the Bishops or Synod agreeing to such a third province at present. Note no such province was created for conservative Anglo Catholics who opposed women priests and bishops when Synod voted for them too and a number crossed the Tiber to Rome as a result (though flying suffragen bishops were created for parishes which did not want a woman priest or bishop).

    Though note that final quote from the Alliance if 'further departure' ie same sex marriage in C of E churches which there is no sign of there being anywhere near a majority on Synod for given it would for most of them be such a departure from what the Bible and Jesus teach on marriage
    With all these to-ings and fro-ings I'm increasingly glad I'm no longer describing myself as CofE.
    Well the only Christian denominations which allow same sex marriages in England their churches and places of worship are the Methodists and Quakers and both are in steep decline.

    For the truth is if you are so vehement a supporter of same sex marriages you want even churches to have to do them you are likely to secular and irreligious anyway.

    The fastest growing churches in the UK by contrast are Orthodox, Baptist and Pentecostal, none of which offer even the prayers for same sex couples the C of E now does in services let alone same sex marriages
    Unitarian chapels also host weddings between same-sex couples.

    But I guess you don't consider Unitarianism to be a branch of Christianity.
    And Unitarians are in even steeper decline than the Methodists with less than 200 Unitarian churches now left in England

    So religions that embrace bigotry are on the rise. Those that are inclusive are in decline. Sad.
    Well same sex marriage supporters in the UK could start attending churches which do same sex marriages like the Methodists and Unitarians if they want to change that. Rather than telling churches to perform same sex marriages while never having any intention of attending any of their services even if they do
    yes the Church is not there to perform every whim for people . Marriage was promoted through time to provide stability for bringing up of children and making the father responsible for it . It is not really a platform for expressing undying love per se like some emotional reality tv show
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,509
    rcs1000 said:

    I'm amused that anyone could possibly think it is unacceptable. I mean, it's not as though the contents of a Christmas dinner was written as the eleventh commandment on a third stone and placed in the Ark of the Covenant.

    "Thou shalt not have Yorkshire puddings, for they art unholy in mine eyes, thou though shalt have sprouts of the brussel, as they are good. Gravy thou shalt have lots of, and the food coma thereafter is also a worthy time to venerate me."

    Errr, please, 11th is Don't Wear Green with Grey
    Shall we split the difference? Thou shalt not wear green (sprouts) with gr(ey)vy. Unless thou hast insulted thy cook, in which case you may wearest them as thoust dinner is thrown at thou.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,014

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    No, if anything that would be a concession to conservative evangelicals and Anglo Catholics given the large concession the established church has already voted for them to make by allowing prayers for same sex couples married in English law in C of E churches. Though no sign of the Bishops or Synod agreeing to such a third province at present. Note no such province was created for conservative Anglo Catholics who opposed women priests and bishops when Synod voted for them too and a number crossed the Tiber to Rome as a result (though flying suffragen bishops were created for parishes which did not want a woman priest or bishop).

    Though note that final quote from the Alliance if 'further departure' ie same sex marriage in C of E churches which there is no sign of there being anywhere near a majority on Synod for given it would for most of them be such a departure from what the Bible and Jesus teach on marriage
    With all these to-ings and fro-ings I'm increasingly glad I'm no longer describing myself as CofE.
    Well the only Christian denominations which allow same sex marriages in England their churches and places of worship are the Methodists and Quakers and both are in steep decline.

    For the truth is if you are so vehement a supporter of same sex marriages you want even churches to have to do them you are likely to secular and irreligious anyway.

    The fastest growing churches in the UK by contrast are Orthodox, Baptist and Pentecostal, none of which offer even the prayers for same sex couples the C of E now does in services let alone same sex marriages
    Unitarian chapels also host weddings between same-sex couples.

    But I guess you don't consider Unitarianism to be a branch of Christianity.
    And Unitarians are in even steeper decline than the Methodists with less than 200 Unitarian churches now left in England

    So religions that embrace bigotry are on the rise. Those that are inclusive are in decline. Sad.
    This is why you need to come back to proper gods nods
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,516
    We’ve gone all European this year and had our Christmas on Christmas Eve because my girlfriend is working tomorrow. We had Yorkshire Puddings and Stuffing.

    Merry Christmas and ode to joy everyone.
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,820

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    No, if anything that would be a concession to conservative evangelicals and Anglo Catholics given the large concession the established church has already voted for them to make by allowing prayers for same sex couples married in English law in C of E churches. Though no sign of the Bishops or Synod agreeing to such a third province at present. Note no such province was created for conservative Anglo Catholics who opposed women priests and bishops when Synod voted for them too and a number crossed the Tiber to Rome as a result (though flying suffragen bishops were created for parishes which did not want a woman priest or bishop).

    Though note that final quote from the Alliance if 'further departure' ie same sex marriage in C of E churches which there is no sign of there being anywhere near a majority on Synod for given it would for most of them be such a departure from what the Bible and Jesus teach on marriage
    With all these to-ings and fro-ings I'm increasingly glad I'm no longer describing myself as CofE.
    Well the only Christian denominations which allow same sex marriages in England their churches and places of worship are the Methodists and Quakers and both are in steep decline.

    For the truth is if you are so vehement a supporter of same sex marriages you want even churches to have to do them you are likely to secular and irreligious anyway.

    The fastest growing churches in the UK by contrast are Orthodox, Baptist and Pentecostal, none of which offer even the prayers for same sex couples the C of E now does in services let alone same sex marriages
    Unitarian chapels also host weddings between same-sex couples.

    But I guess you don't consider Unitarianism to be a branch of Christianity.
    And Unitarians are in even steeper decline than the Methodists with less than 200 Unitarian churches now left in England

    So religions that embrace bigotry are on the rise. Those that are inclusive are in decline. Sad.
    Well same sex marriage supporters in the UK could start attending churches which do same sex marriages like the Methodists and Unitarians if they want to change that. Rather than telling churches to perform same sex marriages while never having any intention of attending any of their services even if they do
    You've banned me from your church, even if I wanted to attend. No wonder churches are having trouble with attendance figures...
    You are not banned at all
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,014

    We’ve gone all European this year and had our Christmas on Christmas Eve because my girlfriend is working tomorrow. We had Yorkshire Puddings and Stuffing.

    Merry Christmas and ode to joy everyone.

    Suet pudding if having fowl is better I think
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,288
    kle4 said:

    Turkey is traditional. It's what Scrooge bought the Cratchets.

    Only because he hadn't fully absorbed his lesson of goodness yet.

    All part of my proposed movie script 'A Christmas Carol 2: Get Scrooged'
    Cratchit (note the spelling, LG), bought goose*, which was traditional.
    Turkey was a Dickensian innovation.

    *see also Holmes, and the Adventure of the Blue Carbuncle.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,014

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    No, if anything that would be a concession to conservative evangelicals and Anglo Catholics given the large concession the established church has already voted for them to make by allowing prayers for same sex couples married in English law in C of E churches. Though no sign of the Bishops or Synod agreeing to such a third province at present. Note no such province was created for conservative Anglo Catholics who opposed women priests and bishops when Synod voted for them too and a number crossed the Tiber to Rome as a result (though flying suffragen bishops were created for parishes which did not want a woman priest or bishop).

    Though note that final quote from the Alliance if 'further departure' ie same sex marriage in C of E churches which there is no sign of there being anywhere near a majority on Synod for given it would for most of them be such a departure from what the Bible and Jesus teach on marriage
    With all these to-ings and fro-ings I'm increasingly glad I'm no longer describing myself as CofE.
    Well the only Christian denominations which allow same sex marriages in England their churches and places of worship are the Methodists and Quakers and both are in steep decline.

    For the truth is if you are so vehement a supporter of same sex marriages you want even churches to have to do them you are likely to secular and irreligious anyway.

    The fastest growing churches in the UK by contrast are Orthodox, Baptist and Pentecostal, none of which offer even the prayers for same sex couples the C of E now does in services let alone same sex marriages
    Unitarian chapels also host weddings between same-sex couples.

    But I guess you don't consider Unitarianism to be a branch of Christianity.
    And Unitarians are in even steeper decline than the Methodists with less than 200 Unitarian churches now left in England

    So religions that embrace bigotry are on the rise. Those that are inclusive are in decline. Sad.
    Well same sex marriage supporters in the UK could start attending churches which do same sex marriages like the Methodists and Unitarians if they want to change that. Rather than telling churches to perform same sex marriages while never having any intention of attending any of their services even if they do
    You've banned me from your church, even if I wanted to attend. No wonder churches are having trouble with attendance figures...
    You are not banned at all
    I wouldn't put to much store in what hyufd says tbh
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,509

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    No, if anything that would be a concession to conservative evangelicals and Anglo Catholics given the large concession the established church has already voted for them to make by allowing prayers for same sex couples married in English law in C of E churches. Though no sign of the Bishops or Synod agreeing to such a third province at present. Note no such province was created for conservative Anglo Catholics who opposed women priests and bishops when Synod voted for them too and a number crossed the Tiber to Rome as a result (though flying suffragen bishops were created for parishes which did not want a woman priest or bishop).

    Though note that final quote from the Alliance if 'further departure' ie same sex marriage in C of E churches which there is no sign of there being anywhere near a majority on Synod for given it would for most of them be such a departure from what the Bible and Jesus teach on marriage
    With all these to-ings and fro-ings I'm increasingly glad I'm no longer describing myself as CofE.
    Well the only Christian denominations which allow same sex marriages in England their churches and places of worship are the Methodists and Quakers and both are in steep decline.

    For the truth is if you are so vehement a supporter of same sex marriages you want even churches to have to do them you are likely to secular and irreligious anyway.

    The fastest growing churches in the UK by contrast are Orthodox, Baptist and Pentecostal, none of which offer even the prayers for same sex couples the C of E now does in services let alone same sex marriages
    Unitarian chapels also host weddings between same-sex couples.

    But I guess you don't consider Unitarianism to be a branch of Christianity.
    And Unitarians are in even steeper decline than the Methodists with less than 200 Unitarian churches now left in England

    So religions that embrace bigotry are on the rise. Those that are inclusive are in decline. Sad.
    Well same sex marriage supporters in the UK could start attending churches which do same sex marriages like the Methodists and Unitarians if they want to change that. Rather than telling churches to perform same sex marriages while never having any intention of attending any of their services even if they do
    You've banned me from your church, even if I wanted to attend. No wonder churches are having trouble with attendance figures...
    You are not banned at all
    When someone says that you're not welcome at their church, then yes, I'd say that's the case.

    Although I do wonder what his fellow parishioners would think of such an edict...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,288
    rcs1000 said:

    So... can I persuade my family to watch Die Hard with me tonight?

    Try Hard.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,248
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    No, if anything that would be a concession to conservative evangelicals and Anglo Catholics given the large concession the established church has already voted for them to make by allowing prayers for same sex couples married in English law in C of E churches. Though no sign of the Bishops or Synod agreeing to such a third province at present. Note no such province was created for conservative Anglo Catholics who opposed women priests and bishops when Synod voted for them too and a number crossed the Tiber to Rome as a result (though flying suffragen bishops were created for parishes which did not want a woman priest or bishop).

    Though note that final quote from the Alliance if 'further departure' ie same sex marriage in C of E churches which there is no sign of there being anywhere near a majority on Synod for given it would for most of them be such a departure from what the Bible and Jesus teach on marriage
    With all these to-ings and fro-ings I'm increasingly glad I'm no longer describing myself as CofE.
    Well the only Christian denominations which allow same sex marriages in England their churches and places of worship are the Methodists and Quakers and both are in steep decline.

    For the truth is if you are so vehement a supporter of same sex marriages you want even churches to have to do them you are likely to secular and irreligious anyway.

    The fastest growing churches in the UK by contrast are Orthodox, Baptist and Pentecostal, none of which offer even the prayers for same sex couples the C of E now does in services let alone same sex marriages
    Unitarian chapels also host weddings between same-sex couples.

    But I guess you don't consider Unitarianism to be a branch of Christianity.
    And Unitarians are in even steeper decline than the Methodists with less than 200 Unitarian churches now left in England

    So religions that embrace bigotry are on the rise. Those that are inclusive are in decline. Sad.
    Well same sex marriage supporters in the UK could start attending churches which do same sex marriages like the Methodists and Unitarians if they want to change that. Rather than telling churches to perform same sex marriages while never having any intention of attending any of their services even if they do
    Why should non-believers start to attend churches? Or are you thinking of CofE folk jumping ship to more enlightened denominations?
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,924
    rcs1000 said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I am a live and let live kind of guy as you all know, but they will not be featuring on my Christmas table. Can't think where anyone finds the space in their stomach.

    My daughter makes great Yorkshire puddings, and this is her way of contributing to the Christmas lunch, so we're a yes on this.

    We shall be pairing it with both chicken and salmon. Chicken because my kids think Turkey is just for Thanksgiving, and I don't really care. Salmon, because my wife is a pescatarian.

    Vegtables will be roast potatoes, squash and brussels sprouts.
    They're right.
    No one would really wish to eat turkey twice in one year.
    I think I will have gone all year without eating turkey.
    Turkey mince makes superior meatballs to beef mince, and is the best way to eat turkey is my leftfield turkey suggestion.

    Ham is simmering on the stove for tomorrow, the caramelised onions for the gratin may have stayed just the right side of being scorched. The gossip is that Richard E Grant is having Christmas Dinner at the award-winning piggery.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,663

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    No, if anything that would be a concession to conservative evangelicals and Anglo Catholics given the large concession the established church has already voted for them to make by allowing prayers for same sex couples married in English law in C of E churches. Though no sign of the Bishops or Synod agreeing to such a third province at present. Note no such province was created for conservative Anglo Catholics who opposed women priests and bishops when Synod voted for them too and a number crossed the Tiber to Rome as a result (though flying suffragen bishops were created for parishes which did not want a woman priest or bishop).

    Though note that final quote from the Alliance if 'further departure' ie same sex marriage in C of E churches which there is no sign of there being anywhere near a majority on Synod for given it would for most of them be such a departure from what the Bible and Jesus teach on marriage
    With all these to-ings and fro-ings I'm increasingly glad I'm no longer describing myself as CofE.
    Well the only Christian denominations which allow same sex marriages in England their churches and places of worship are the Methodists and Quakers and both are in steep decline.

    For the truth is if you are so vehement a supporter of same sex marriages you want even churches to have to do them you are likely to secular and irreligious anyway.

    The fastest growing churches in the UK by contrast are Orthodox, Baptist and Pentecostal, none of which offer even the prayers for same sex couples the C of E now does in services let alone same sex marriages
    Unitarian chapels also host weddings between same-sex couples.

    But I guess you don't consider Unitarianism to be a branch of Christianity.
    And Unitarians are in even steeper decline than the Methodists with less than 200 Unitarian churches now left in England

    So religions that embrace bigotry are on the rise. Those that are inclusive are in decline. Sad.
    Well same sex marriage supporters in the UK could start attending churches which do same sex marriages like the Methodists and Unitarians if they want to change that. Rather than telling churches to perform same sex marriages while never having any intention of attending any of their services even if they do
    yes the Church is not there to perform every whim for people . Marriage was promoted through time to provide stability for bringing up of children and making the father responsible for it . It is not really a platform for expressing undying love per se like some emotional reality tv show
    You have clearly never watched Love is Blind.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,014

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    No, if anything that would be a concession to conservative evangelicals and Anglo Catholics given the large concession the established church has already voted for them to make by allowing prayers for same sex couples married in English law in C of E churches. Though no sign of the Bishops or Synod agreeing to such a third province at present. Note no such province was created for conservative Anglo Catholics who opposed women priests and bishops when Synod voted for them too and a number crossed the Tiber to Rome as a result (though flying suffragen bishops were created for parishes which did not want a woman priest or bishop).

    Though note that final quote from the Alliance if 'further departure' ie same sex marriage in C of E churches which there is no sign of there being anywhere near a majority on Synod for given it would for most of them be such a departure from what the Bible and Jesus teach on marriage
    With all these to-ings and fro-ings I'm increasingly glad I'm no longer describing myself as CofE.
    Well the only Christian denominations which allow same sex marriages in England their churches and places of worship are the Methodists and Quakers and both are in steep decline.

    For the truth is if you are so vehement a supporter of same sex marriages you want even churches to have to do them you are likely to secular and irreligious anyway.

    The fastest growing churches in the UK by contrast are Orthodox, Baptist and Pentecostal, none of which offer even the prayers for same sex couples the C of E now does in services let alone same sex marriages
    Unitarian chapels also host weddings between same-sex couples.

    But I guess you don't consider Unitarianism to be a branch of Christianity.
    And Unitarians are in even steeper decline than the Methodists with less than 200 Unitarian churches now left in England

    So religions that embrace bigotry are on the rise. Those that are inclusive are in decline. Sad.
    Well same sex marriage supporters in the UK could start attending churches which do same sex marriages like the Methodists and Unitarians if they want to change that. Rather than telling churches to perform same sex marriages while never having any intention of attending any of their services even if they do
    You've banned me from your church, even if I wanted to attend. No wonder churches are having trouble with attendance figures...
    You are not banned at all
    When someone says that you're not welcome at their church, then yes, I'd say that's the case.

    Although I do wonder what his fellow parishioners would think of such an edict...
    The congregation may be a 100 strong....you say unwelcome because one person out of a 100 says you are unwelcome?
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,014
    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    So... can I persuade my family to watch Die Hard with me tonight?

    Try Hard.
    If not try anna and the apocolypse a christmas musical nods
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,897
    Nigelb said:

    kle4 said:

    Turkey is traditional. It's what Scrooge bought the Cratchets.

    Only because he hadn't fully absorbed his lesson of goodness yet.

    All part of my proposed movie script 'A Christmas Carol 2: Get Scrooged'
    Cratchit (note the spelling, LG), bought goose*, which was traditional.
    Turkey was a Dickensian innovation.

    *see also Holmes, and the Adventure of the Blue Carbuncle.
    Turkey has been around for Christmas since at least 17th century. Pepys knew it as a thing for Christmas.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,885

    Turkey is traditional. It's what Scrooge bought the Cratchets.

    AIUI, goose was traditional. Turkey was expensive, and for the relatively well-off - which made Scrooge gifting one all the more potent message. In fact, in the book didn't Cratchett have a small goose already for dinner?

    As turkeys became cheaper, they took over in popularity from geese. Perhaps because they were seen as a luxury.

    It's a shame, as I've never liked turkey much. It's a very dry meat.

    Now Turks... Turks I love. :)
    https://youtu.be/kunuXThp51E?si=qRF1Mmo9ACcViwUr

    That's because you're not pinching the Turkey skin, then reaching under and stuffing gammon ham and mushrooms under it, a la Fanny.

  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,014
    algarkirk said:

    Nigelb said:

    kle4 said:

    Turkey is traditional. It's what Scrooge bought the Cratchets.

    Only because he hadn't fully absorbed his lesson of goodness yet.

    All part of my proposed movie script 'A Christmas Carol 2: Get Scrooged'
    Cratchit (note the spelling, LG), bought goose*, which was traditional.
    Turkey was a Dickensian innovation.

    *see also Holmes, and the Adventure of the Blue Carbuncle.
    Turkey has been around for Christmas since at least 17th century. Pepys knew it as a thing for Christmas.
    Whoever brought turkeys back for the new world should have been executed for crimes against food
  • rcs1000 said:

    So... can I persuade my family to watch Die Hard with me tonight?

    Ho! Ho! Ho! Now I have a Die Hard thread! :)
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,885

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    No, if anything that would be a concession to conservative evangelicals and Anglo Catholics given the large concession the established church has already voted for them to make by allowing prayers for same sex couples married in English law in C of E churches. Though no sign of the Bishops or Synod agreeing to such a third province at present. Note no such province was created for conservative Anglo Catholics who opposed women priests and bishops when Synod voted for them too and a number crossed the Tiber to Rome as a result (though flying suffragen bishops were created for parishes which did not want a woman priest or bishop).

    Though note that final quote from the Alliance if 'further departure' ie same sex marriage in C of E churches which there is no sign of there being anywhere near a majority on Synod for given it would for most of them be such a departure from what the Bible and Jesus teach on marriage
    With all these to-ings and fro-ings I'm increasingly glad I'm no longer describing myself as CofE.
    Well the only Christian denominations which allow same sex marriages in England their churches and places of worship are the Methodists and Quakers and both are in steep decline.

    For the truth is if you are so vehement a supporter of same sex marriages you want even churches to have to do them you are likely to secular and irreligious anyway.

    The fastest growing churches in the UK by contrast are Orthodox, Baptist and Pentecostal, none of which offer even the prayers for same sex couples the C of E now does in services let alone same sex marriages
    Unitarian chapels also host weddings between same-sex couples.

    But I guess you don't consider Unitarianism to be a branch of Christianity.
    And Unitarians are in even steeper decline than the Methodists with less than 200 Unitarian churches now left in England

    So religions that embrace bigotry are on the rise. Those that are inclusive are in decline. Sad.
    Well same sex marriage supporters in the UK could start attending churches which do same sex marriages like the Methodists and Unitarians if they want to change that. Rather than telling churches to perform same sex marriages while never having any intention of attending any of their services even if they do
    Why should non-believers start to attend churches? Or are you thinking of CofE folk jumping ship to more enlightened denominations?
    Why should attendees listen to non-attendees when deciding what types of union to solemnise?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,885
    Pagan2 said:

    algarkirk said:

    Nigelb said:

    kle4 said:

    Turkey is traditional. It's what Scrooge bought the Cratchets.

    Only because he hadn't fully absorbed his lesson of goodness yet.

    All part of my proposed movie script 'A Christmas Carol 2: Get Scrooged'
    Cratchit (note the spelling, LG), bought goose*, which was traditional.
    Turkey was a Dickensian innovation.

    *see also Holmes, and the Adventure of the Blue Carbuncle.
    Turkey has been around for Christmas since at least 17th century. Pepys knew it as a thing for Christmas.
    Whoever brought turkeys back for the new world should have been executed for crimes against food
    I think he was. Though not for crimes against food afaik.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,897

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    No, if anything that would be a concession to conservative evangelicals and Anglo Catholics given the large concession the established church has already voted for them to make by allowing prayers for same sex couples married in English law in C of E churches. Though no sign of the Bishops or Synod agreeing to such a third province at present. Note no such province was created for conservative Anglo Catholics who opposed women priests and bishops when Synod voted for them too and a number crossed the Tiber to Rome as a result (though flying suffragen bishops were created for parishes which did not want a woman priest or bishop).

    Though note that final quote from the Alliance if 'further departure' ie same sex marriage in C of E churches which there is no sign of there being anywhere near a majority on Synod for given it would for most of them be such a departure from what the Bible and Jesus teach on marriage
    With all these to-ings and fro-ings I'm increasingly glad I'm no longer describing myself as CofE.
    Well the only Christian denominations which allow same sex marriages in England their churches and places of worship are the Methodists and Quakers and both are in steep decline.

    For the truth is if you are so vehement a supporter of same sex marriages you want even churches to have to do them you are likely to secular and irreligious anyway.

    The fastest growing churches in the UK by contrast are Orthodox, Baptist and Pentecostal, none of which offer even the prayers for same sex couples the C of E now does in services let alone same sex marriages
    Unitarian chapels also host weddings between same-sex couples.

    But I guess you don't consider Unitarianism to be a branch of Christianity.
    And Unitarians are in even steeper decline than the Methodists with less than 200 Unitarian churches now left in England

    So religions that embrace bigotry are on the rise. Those that are inclusive are in decline. Sad.
    Well same sex marriage supporters in the UK could start attending churches which do same sex marriages like the Methodists and Unitarians if they want to change that. Rather than telling churches to perform same sex marriages while never having any intention of attending any of their services even if they do
    yes the Church is not there to perform every whim for people . Marriage was promoted through time to provide stability for bringing up of children and making the father responsible for it . It is not really a platform for expressing undying love per se like some emotional reality tv show
    It would have been much wiser to stick at 'civil partnerships' for same sex relationships in the civil law. It is entirely rational to accept same sex relationships from a religious point of view, but also believe that they are something other than marriage.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,045
    Penddu2 said:

    Spare a thought for those of us working in remote construction sites on fixed rotation cycles - which means tommorrow is just a normal working day. And dry....

    Or you can hold that thought till end of January when I will take two weeks off on a tropical beach to spend a little of my tax-free salary on a lifestyle that would make Leon blush.....

    Enjoy your day tomorrow as much as you can, and look forward to the other side in a few weeks’ time.

    Yes it’s always weird to have to book a day’s leave for Christmas, thankfully I’m lucky enough to be in a place which isn’t dry and which has both the pub and the church close by!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,663
    Today is "Make sure all the various computers I own and administer have all the latest patches and upgrades installed" Day!
  • HYUFD said:

    algarkirk said:

    Definitely time to disestablish the Church of England.

    Church’s gay marriage opponents could get their own archbishop

    Conservative groups warn that a ‘de facto parallel province’ may have to be established within the Church of England


    The Church of England could be forced to create a new archbishop to cater to conservatives if efforts to prevent a split over the blessing of same-sex partnerships fails.

    The Rev Canon John Dunnett, director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), an influential conservative group, is among those calling for a “de facto parallel province” to be created within the church, grouping together parishes that oppose last year’s move to allow priests to bless the unions of gay couples.

    If it were legally enshrined as an official province, it “would have to have an archbishop” to oversee it, Dunnett said.

    This would be in addition to the archbishoprics of Canterbury and York, whose provinces cover southern and northern England.

    Divisions over gay rights extend to the highest levels of the church. Twelve dissenting bishops went public last year to declare they were “unable to support the collective decision” made by the House of Bishops to approve blessing gay couples who are married or are in civil partnerships.

    The CEEC forms part of a conservative umbrella group called the Alliance, which counts 2,000 priests as supporters.

    The Alliance has issued a warning that if there is “further departure from the church’s doctrine” on sex and marriage, they “will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new
    de facto ‘parallel province’ within the Church of England”, which would require “oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/religion/article/churchs-gay-marriage-opponents-could-get-their-own-archbishop-dc06fbkgx

    There are already two varieties of alternative bishop oversight in the Church of England, one for Anglo Catholics who take the traditional view on women priests, and one for Evangelicals ditto. This is two too many.

    This means in fact that both ACs and Evos in the CoE are split between purists with their own bishops, and moderates who take on board, however doubtfully, the new rules allowing women priests.

    Most actual parishes are just ordinary, non extreme, and contain a variety of views and accept the compromises of living with different views about everything. Alternative 'no gays' bishops would lead to there being 4 or 5 different sorts of bishops to choose from. It would split ACs, Evos and centrists into fragments.

    This would be crazy.
    I have no problem with flying bishops for Anglo Catholics and evangelicals who hold to St Paul's view that only men should be priests and bishops.

    However yes having a third province for those evangelicals who think gays should either be celibate or become heterosexual would be absurd, especially as such parishes can opt out of the prayers for same sex couples anyway
    Long story short, if you are asking for a cordon sanitaire between yourself and the Archbishop of Canterbury, there's not much of your Abglicanness left.
  • rcs1000 said:

    So... can I persuade my family to watch Die Hard with me tonight?

    Do it, I was never more proud as a parent when my eldest said Die Hard wasn't a Christmas film, his logic was unimpeachable.

    If a British film starring British actors and a British crew made an English speaking film in Spain we wouldn't call that a Spanish film.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,045
    rcs1000 said:

    Today is "Make sure all the various computers I own and administer have all the latest patches and upgrades installed" Day!

    That’s my New Year’s Day task!
Sign In or Register to comment.