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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
Depends what you mean by the CoE. I have recently attended two services presided over by a gay vicar, both packed out by the way. The idea that CoE people disdain him is simply untrue, and his attenders are as much CoE as anyone else. But some people think they don't matter because they are just ordinary CoE people and not intellectuals, or leaders, or powerful.
The institution of the Church discriminates against gay people, the presence of the odd gay person here and there notwithstanding. Canon law refuses to recognise gay marriage. Because of chapters of the bible that I'm sure you can quote at me.
It is institutionally prejudiced.
You say it's only the leaders, but they are the leaders. Of the Church of England.
Of the state sect, which is the official sect of a state that promotes gay marriage.
It's as if half the priests of the Roman Imperial Cult [edit] claimed that they didn't need to worship Juno because reasons.
If it was just a ceremonial arm of the state it would be called the Ceremonial Order of England NOT the Church of England.
The state doesn't actively promote gay marriage either, it has just legalised it. Adultery is legal too in the UK, it doesn't mean the C of E should actively promote and remarry adulterers in its churches, even the King couldn't get a C of E wedding with Camilla, just a blessing service much like PLF
The more I read on PB about the Church of England, the more I think they have totally lost the plot.
I have, however, realised that asking any of my CofE colleagues to describe the internal workings of their church is something I should avoid at all costs.
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
Depends what you mean by the CoE. I have recently attended two services presided over by a gay vicar, both packed out by the way. The idea that CoE people disdain him is simply untrue, and his attenders are as much CoE as anyone else. But some people think they don't matter because they are just ordinary CoE people and not intellectuals, or leaders, or powerful.
The institution of the Church discriminates against gay people, the presence of the odd gay person here and there notwithstanding. Canon law refuses to recognise gay marriage. Because of chapters of the bible that I'm sure you can quote at me.
It is institutionally prejudiced.
You say it's only the leaders, but they are the leaders. Of the Church of England.
Of the state sect, which is the official sect of a state that promotes gay marriage.
It's as if half the priests of the Roman Imperial Cult [edit] claimed that they didn't need to worship Juno because reasons.
If it was just a ceremonial arm of the state it would be called the Ceremonial Order of England NOT the Church of England
Nobody said it was ceremonial. It isn't. Which is precisely my point.
This is my suggested brain teaser for anyone with an hour or so needing to be occupied - a site where you need to remember the names of all the London Tube stations, with no Googling or outside reference work.
You get a map of London with stations and lines geographically indicated, and a search box. DLR is included.
There are around 275 stations, and give yourself 60 minutes.
Since it's Christmas all the ratings are positive.
Good: 30% Very Good: 50% Heroic: 70%
I'll struggle with some of the newer stuff, since I have not spent time in London since the Elizabeth Line opened. OTOH I lived in London for 6-7 years in 5 or 6 different places, and walked many of the central areas.
50% is one every ~30 seconds. 70% is about one every 20-22 seconds. Above 50% is really good in the time, I think.
This one takes my biscuit, a prototype replacement for the Sturmovik.
What's that? The Blackburn Blackburn Blackburn?
Between a Roc and a hard place.
This is a nice movie of an earlier type which I have just come across, doing the same job of torpedo dropping, training in what is now the John Muir Country Park/Belhaven Bay not a trillion km from here.
No food is unacceptable at anytime. Food is supposed to be enjoyed and shared, in any combination that you like or have. Food snobbery is one of PBs worst traits.
Shared??? As an only child, sharing is an alien concept to me.
I'm not an only child, and sharing is an alien concept to me!
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
Depends what you mean by the CoE. I have recently attended two services presided over by a gay vicar, both packed out by the way. The idea that CoE people disdain him is simply untrue, and his attenders are as much CoE as anyone else. But some people think they don't matter because they are just ordinary CoE people and not intellectuals, or leaders, or powerful.
The institution of the Church discriminates against gay people, the presence of the odd gay person here and there notwithstanding. Canon law refuses to recognise gay marriage. Because of chapters of the bible that I'm sure you can quote at me.
It is institutionally prejudiced.
You say it's only the leaders, but they are the leaders. Of the Church of England.
Of the state sect, which is the official sect of a state that promotes gay marriage.
It's as if half the priests of the Roman Imperial Cult [edit] claimed that they didn't need to worship Juno because reasons.
If it was just a ceremonial arm of the state it would be called the Ceremonial Order of England NOT the Church of England
Nobody said it was ceremonial. It isn't. Which is precisely my point.
No it is a Christian church too, which is also meant to take note of the Bible
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
Depends what you mean by the CoE. I have recently attended two services presided over by a gay vicar, both packed out by the way. The idea that CoE people disdain him is simply untrue, and his attenders are as much CoE as anyone else. But some people think they don't matter because they are just ordinary CoE people and not intellectuals, or leaders, or powerful.
The institution of the Church discriminates against gay people, the presence of the odd gay person here and there notwithstanding. Canon law refuses to recognise gay marriage. Because of chapters of the bible that I'm sure you can quote at me.
It is institutionally prejudiced.
You say it's only the leaders, but they are the leaders. Of the Church of England.
Of the state sect, which is the official sect of a state that promotes gay marriage.
It's as if half the priests of the Roman Imperial Cult [edit] claimed that they didn't need to worship Juno because reasons.
If it was just a ceremonial arm of the state it would be called the Ceremonial Order of England NOT the Church of England.
The state doesn't actively promote gay marriage either, it has just legalised it. Adultery is legal too in the UK, it doesn't mean the C of E should actively promote and remarry adulterers in its churches, even the King couldn't get a C of E wedding with Camilla, just a blessing service much like PLF
That's really scraping the barrel from someone whose party used to go on and on and on and on about the importance of marriage. But maybe you're too young to remember Back to Basics and the assorted illegitimate sprogs which came out from the undergrowth in that particular campaign.
This is my suggested brain teaser for anyone with an hour or so needing to be occupied - a site where you need to remember the names of all the London Tube stations, with no Googling or outside reference work.
You get a map of London with stations and lines geographically indicated, and a search box. DLR is included.
There are around 275 stations, and give yourself 60 minutes.
Since it's Christmas all the ratings are positive.
Good: 30% Very Good: 50% Heroic: 70%
I'll struggle with some of the newer stuff, since I have not spent time in London since the Elizabeth Line opened. OTOH I lived in London for 6-7 years in 5 or 6 different places, and walked many of the central areas.
50% is one every ~30 seconds. 70% is about one every 20-22 seconds. Above 50% is really good in the time, I think.
Getting central London is relatively easy... but that's only about a quarter of the stations.
Only if you've been to London a lot (or lived there or near). I've been twice in the last 20 years so would struggle to get more than a few of the obvious ones.
I do have a specific dislike of London and I'm not sure why. I've been to New York, Sydney and Tokyo are they are all nice places to be whereas London sets me off.
This one takes my biscuit, a prototype replacement for the Sturmovik.
Pretty rational design for the 1950s. Not so different from the Gannet and for much the same reasons, such as excellent forward view, only hold the sonar and its operator, and add lots of armour plate and armoured glass.
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
Depends what you mean by the CoE. I have recently attended two services presided over by a gay vicar, both packed out by the way. The idea that CoE people disdain him is simply untrue, and his attenders are as much CoE as anyone else. But some people think they don't matter because they are just ordinary CoE people and not intellectuals, or leaders, or powerful.
The institution of the Church discriminates against gay people, the presence of the odd gay person here and there notwithstanding. Canon law refuses to recognise gay marriage. Because of chapters of the bible that I'm sure you can quote at me.
It is institutionally prejudiced.
You say it's only the leaders, but they are the leaders. Of the Church of England.
Of the state sect, which is the official sect of a state that promotes gay marriage.
It's as if half the priests of the Roman Imperial Cult [edit] claimed that they didn't need to worship Juno because reasons.
If it was just a ceremonial arm of the state it would be called the Ceremonial Order of England NOT the Church of England.
The state doesn't actively promote gay marriage either, it has just legalised it. Adultery is legal too in the UK, it doesn't mean the C of E should actively promote and remarry adulterers in its churches, even the King couldn't get a C of E wedding with Camilla, just a blessing service much like PLF
That's really scraping the barrel from someone whose party used to go on and on and on and on about the importance of marriage. But maybe you're too young to remember Back to Basics and the assorted illegitimate sprogs which came out from the undergrowth in that particular campaign.
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
Depends what you mean by the CoE. I have recently attended two services presided over by a gay vicar, both packed out by the way. The idea that CoE people disdain him is simply untrue, and his attenders are as much CoE as anyone else. But some people think they don't matter because they are just ordinary CoE people and not intellectuals, or leaders, or powerful.
The institution of the Church discriminates against gay people, the presence of the odd gay person here and there notwithstanding. Canon law refuses to recognise gay marriage. Because of chapters of the bible that I'm sure you can quote at me.
It is institutionally prejudiced.
You say it's only the leaders, but they are the leaders. Of the Church of England.
Of the state sect, which is the official sect of a state that promotes gay marriage.
It's as if half the priests of the Roman Imperial Cult [edit] claimed that they didn't need to worship Juno because reasons.
If it was just a ceremonial arm of the state it would be called the Ceremonial Order of England NOT the Church of England.
The state doesn't actively promote gay marriage either, it has just legalised it. Adultery is legal too in the UK, it doesn't mean the C of E should actively promote and remarry adulterers in its churches, even the King couldn't get a C of E wedding with Camilla, just a blessing service much like PLF
That's really scraping the barrel from someone whose party used to go on and on and on and on about the importance of marriage. But maybe you're too young to remember Back to Basics and the assorted illegitimate sprogs which came out from the undergrowth in that particular campaign.
I blame the single mothers.
#portilloforleader
It's not as if the state charges any more, or less, for gay marriage, anyway. See registry office fees. So it's promoting it as much as it does the old kind.
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
Depends what you mean by the CoE. I have recently attended two services presided over by a gay vicar, both packed out by the way. The idea that CoE people disdain him is simply untrue, and his attenders are as much CoE as anyone else. But some people think they don't matter because they are just ordinary CoE people and not intellectuals, or leaders, or powerful.
The institution of the Church discriminates against gay people, the presence of the odd gay person here and there notwithstanding. Canon law refuses to recognise gay marriage. Because of chapters of the bible that I'm sure you can quote at me.
It is institutionally prejudiced.
You say it's only the leaders, but they are the leaders. Of the Church of England.
Of the state sect, which is the official sect of a state that promotes gay marriage.
It's as if half the priests of the Roman Imperial Cult [edit] claimed that they didn't need to worship Juno because reasons.
If it was just a ceremonial arm of the state it would be called the Ceremonial Order of England NOT the Church of England.
The state doesn't actively promote gay marriage either, it has just legalised it. Adultery is legal too in the UK, it doesn't mean the C of E should actively promote and remarry adulterers in its churches, even the King couldn't get a C of E wedding with Camilla, just a blessing service much like PLF
That's really scraping the barrel from someone whose party used to go on and on and on and on about the importance of marriage. But maybe you're too young to remember Back to Basics and the assorted illegitimate sprogs which came out from the undergrowth in that particular campaign.
I blame the single mothers.
#portilloforleader
That would be proper redmeat Thatcherite rightwinger Portillo circa 1995 I assume, not wet liberal handwringing 'moderniser' Portillo circa 2001?
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
Depends what you mean by the CoE. I have recently attended two services presided over by a gay vicar, both packed out by the way. The idea that CoE people disdain him is simply untrue, and his attenders are as much CoE as anyone else. But some people think they don't matter because they are just ordinary CoE people and not intellectuals, or leaders, or powerful.
The institution of the Church discriminates against gay people, the presence of the odd gay person here and there notwithstanding. Canon law refuses to recognise gay marriage. Because of chapters of the bible that I'm sure you can quote at me.
It is institutionally prejudiced.
You say it's only the leaders, but they are the leaders. Of the Church of England.
Of the state sect, which is the official sect of a state that promotes gay marriage.
It's as if half the priests of the Roman Imperial Cult [edit] claimed that they didn't need to worship Juno because reasons.
If it was just a ceremonial arm of the state it would be called the Ceremonial Order of England NOT the Church of England.
The state doesn't actively promote gay marriage either, it has just legalised it. Adultery is legal too in the UK, it doesn't mean the C of E should actively promote and remarry adulterers in its churches, even the King couldn't get a C of E wedding with Camilla, just a blessing service much like PLF
That's really scraping the barrel from someone whose party used to go on and on and on and on about the importance of marriage. But maybe you're too young to remember Back to Basics and the assorted illegitimate sprogs which came out from the undergrowth in that particular campaign.
The importance of heterosexual marriage, most Conservative MPs voted against gay marriage in 2014 remember, it was Labour and LD MPs who got it passed even if PM Cameron supported it and the Tories now won't reverse it
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
I worked out, 22 years ago, that the CoE has nothing but disdain for me. So, I left.
About 65 years ago, I experienced much the same thing in a particular Church of England church, but the lesson I drew was different. We were definitely living on the wrong side of the tracks, on a council estate. All those people treating my parents like that lived in large houses which displayed Conservative signs, hence my lifelong prejudice against Conservatives.
It's a good long while since I realised it was just prejudice but the feeling is still there.
It amuses me when I walk to the 'posh' park through the expensive houses here how there is an increase of (take your pick time-wise) Black Lives Matter, Momentum, whatever, stickers in the windows.
Where-as Scumsville, where I stay, has none. Outside the occasional fading "Vote Yes" in the window.
Guess the middle classes know how to nail their colours to the correct mast.
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
I worked out, 22 years ago, that the CoE has nothing but disdain for me. So, I left.
About 65 years ago, I experienced much the same thing in a particular Church of England church, but the lesson I drew was different. We were definitely living on the wrong side of the tracks, on a council estate. All those people treating my parents like that lived in large houses which displayed Conservative signs, hence my lifelong prejudice against Conservatives.
It's a good long while since I realised it was just prejudice but the feeling is still there.
It amuses me when I walk to the 'posh' park through the expensive houses here how there is an increase of (take your pick time-wise) Black Lives Matter, Momentum, whatever, stickers in the windows.
Where-as Scumsville, where I stay, has none. Outside the occasional fading "Vote Yes" in the window.
Guess the middle classes know how to nail their colours to the mast.
Yes, whereas the UK political class divide used to be Conservative v Labour it is now much more woke 2016 Remainer v Leaver.
In Scotland also to an extent more 2014 Unionist v Nationalist than party allegiance
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
Depends what you mean by the CoE. I have recently attended two services presided over by a gay vicar, both packed out by the way. The idea that CoE people disdain him is simply untrue, and his attenders are as much CoE as anyone else. But some people think they don't matter because they are just ordinary CoE people and not intellectuals, or leaders, or powerful.
The institution of the Church discriminates against gay people, the presence of the odd gay person here and there notwithstanding. Canon law refuses to recognise gay marriage. Because of chapters of the bible that I'm sure you can quote at me.
It is institutionally prejudiced.
You say it's only the leaders, but they are the leaders. Of the Church of England.
Of the state sect, which is the official sect of a state that promotes gay marriage.
It's as if half the priests of the Roman Imperial Cult [edit] claimed that they didn't need to worship Juno because reasons.
If it was just a ceremonial arm of the state it would be called the Ceremonial Order of England NOT the Church of England.
The state doesn't actively promote gay marriage either, it has just legalised it. Adultery is legal too in the UK, it doesn't mean the C of E should actively promote and remarry adulterers in its churches, even the King couldn't get a C of E wedding with Camilla, just a blessing service much like PLF
That's really scraping the barrel from someone whose party used to go on and on and on and on about the importance of marriage. But maybe you're too young to remember Back to Basics and the assorted illegitimate sprogs which came out from the undergrowth in that particular campaign.
I blame the single mothers.
#portilloforleader
That would be proper redmeat Thatcherite rightwinger Portillo circa 1995 I assume, not wet liberal handwringing 'moderniser' Portillo circa 2001?
I think it was the 'go with the flow, whatever furthers my profile' Portillo. So both really.
This one takes my biscuit, a prototype replacement for the Sturmovik.
What's that? The Blackburn Blackburn Blackburn?
Between a Roc and a hard place.
This is a nice movie of an earlier type which I have just come across, doing the same job of torpedo dropping, training in what is now the John Muir Country Park/Belhaven Bay not a trillion km from here.
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
Depends what you mean by the CoE. I have recently attended two services presided over by a gay vicar, both packed out by the way. The idea that CoE people disdain him is simply untrue, and his attenders are as much CoE as anyone else. But some people think they don't matter because they are just ordinary CoE people and not intellectuals, or leaders, or powerful.
The institution of the Church discriminates against gay people, the presence of the odd gay person here and there notwithstanding. Canon law refuses to recognise gay marriage. Because of chapters of the bible that I'm sure you can quote at me.
It is institutionally prejudiced.
You say it's only the leaders, but they are the leaders. Of the Church of England.
Of the state sect, which is the official sect of a state that promotes gay marriage.
It's as if half the priests of the Roman Imperial Cult [edit] claimed that they didn't need to worship Juno because reasons.
If it was just a ceremonial arm of the state it would be called the Ceremonial Order of England NOT the Church of England.
The state doesn't actively promote gay marriage either, it has just legalised it. Adultery is legal too in the UK, it doesn't mean the C of E should actively promote and remarry adulterers in its churches, even the King couldn't get a C of E wedding with Camilla, just a blessing service much like PLF
That's really scraping the barrel from someone whose party used to go on and on and on and on about the importance of marriage. But maybe you're too young to remember Back to Basics and the assorted illegitimate sprogs which came out from the undergrowth in that particular campaign.
The importance of heterosexual marriage, most Conservative MPs voted against gay marriage in 2014 remember, it was Labour and LD MPs who got it passed even if PM Cameron supported it and the Tories now won't reverse it
The same Tories who Pharisaically claimed to espouse marriage, but in reality despised and despise heterosexual *and* homosexual marriage then, in Major's time, as well as more recently? By their fruits shall ye know them.
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
I worked out, 22 years ago, that the CoE has nothing but disdain for me. So, I left.
About 65 years ago, I experienced much the same thing in a particular Church of England church, but the lesson I drew was different. We were definitely living on the wrong side of the tracks, on a council estate. All those people treating my parents like that lived in large houses which displayed Conservative signs, hence my lifelong prejudice against Conservatives.
It's a good long while since I realised it was just prejudice but the feeling is still there.
It amuses me when I walk to the 'posh' park through the expensive houses here how there is an increase of (take your pick time-wise) Black Lives Matter, Momentum, whatever, stickers in the windows.
Where-as Scumsville, where I stay, has none. Outside the occasional fading "Vote Yes" in the window.
Guess the middle classes know how to nail their colours to the mast.
Yes, whereas the UK political class divide used to be Conservative v Labour it is now much more woke 2016 Remainer v Leaver.
In Scotland also to an extent more 2014 Unionist v Nationalist than party allegiance
With you being a woke Remainer, and me being a Leaver.
This one takes my biscuit, a prototype replacement for the Sturmovik.
What's that? The Blackburn Blackburn Blackburn?
Between a Roc and a hard place.
This is a nice movie of an earlier type which I have just come across, doing the same job of torpedo dropping, training in what is now the John Muir Country Park/Belhaven Bay not a trillion km from here.
I thoroughly recommend 'The Wild Muir: Twenty-Two of John Muir's Greatest Adventures'
Indeed. As a child I had more than a few outings to the beaches he used to explore as a child. Still great for walks (either side of Dunbar, if anyone wants to know).
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
Depends what you mean by the CoE. I have recently attended two services presided over by a gay vicar, both packed out by the way. The idea that CoE people disdain him is simply untrue, and his attenders are as much CoE as anyone else. But some people think they don't matter because they are just ordinary CoE people and not intellectuals, or leaders, or powerful.
The institution of the Church discriminates against gay people, the presence of the odd gay person here and there notwithstanding. Canon law refuses to recognise gay marriage. Because of chapters of the bible that I'm sure you can quote at me.
It is institutionally prejudiced.
You say it's only the leaders, but they are the leaders. Of the Church of England.
Of the state sect, which is the official sect of a state that promotes gay marriage.
It's as if half the priests of the Roman Imperial Cult [edit] claimed that they didn't need to worship Juno because reasons.
If it was just a ceremonial arm of the state it would be called the Ceremonial Order of England NOT the Church of England.
The state doesn't actively promote gay marriage either, it has just legalised it. Adultery is legal too in the UK, it doesn't mean the C of E should actively promote and remarry adulterers in its churches, even the King couldn't get a C of E wedding with Camilla, just a blessing service much like PLF
That's really scraping the barrel from someone whose party used to go on and on and on and on about the importance of marriage. But maybe you're too young to remember Back to Basics and the assorted illegitimate sprogs which came out from the undergrowth in that particular campaign.
The importance of heterosexual marriage, most Conservative MPs voted against gay marriage in 2014 remember, it was Labour and LD MPs who got it passed even if PM Cameron supported it and the Tories now won't reverse it
The same Tories who Pharisaically claimed to espouse marriage, but in reality despised and despise heterosexual *and* homosexual marriage then, in Major's time, as well as more recently? By their fruits shall ye know them.
I was going to post a reference to Chelsea Strip's - but a quick google to double check suggests that all involved now say it was made up.
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
I worked out, 22 years ago, that the CoE has nothing but disdain for me. So, I left.
About 65 years ago, I experienced much the same thing in a particular Church of England church, but the lesson I drew was different. We were definitely living on the wrong side of the tracks, on a council estate. All those people treating my parents like that lived in large houses which displayed Conservative signs, hence my lifelong prejudice against Conservatives.
It's a good long while since I realised it was just prejudice but the feeling is still there.
It amuses me when I walk to the 'posh' park through the expensive houses here how there is an increase of (take your pick time-wise) Black Lives Matter, Momentum, whatever, stickers in the windows.
Where-as Scumsville, where I stay, has none. Outside the occasional fading "Vote Yes" in the window.
Guess the middle classes know how to nail their colours to the mast.
Yes, whereas the UK political class divide used to be Conservative v Labour it is now much more woke 2016 Remainer v Leaver.
In Scotland also to an extent more 2014 Unionist v Nationalist than party allegiance
You've just claimed, the other day, the *complete opposite* for Scotland. That Unionist vs Nationalist didn't matter at all compared with voting for Reform/Tory vs. the rest. You can't have it both ways, unless you've had a Pauline conversion on the road to Theydon Bois.
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”.
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
The vast majority don't, the Southern Baptists in the US have no recognition for same sex couples at all and are the largest Protestant Baptist denomination globally
I don't want to follow the US in religion any more than I want to follow the US in politics.
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
Depends what you mean by the CoE. I have recently attended two services presided over by a gay vicar, both packed out by the way. The idea that CoE people disdain him is simply untrue, and his attenders are as much CoE as anyone else. But some people think they don't matter because they are just ordinary CoE people and not intellectuals, or leaders, or powerful.
The institution of the Church discriminates against gay people, the presence of the odd gay person here and there notwithstanding. Canon law refuses to recognise gay marriage. Because of chapters of the bible that I'm sure you can quote at me.
It is institutionally prejudiced.
You say it's only the leaders, but they are the leaders. Of the Church of England.
Adulterers, even the King, can be refused a wedding in a C of E church too, he only had a blessing in 2005 at St George's Chapel Windsor, the marriage service was at Windsor Guildhall.
At the end of the day it is the CHURCH of England not the REGISTRY OFFICE of England and has to follow the Bible's lead
The Bible is man’s interpretation of the Word. It shouldn’t be followed literally and cannot replace a direct relationship with God.
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
Depends what you mean by the CoE. I have recently attended two services presided over by a gay vicar, both packed out by the way. The idea that CoE people disdain him is simply untrue, and his attenders are as much CoE as anyone else. But some people think they don't matter because they are just ordinary CoE people and not intellectuals, or leaders, or powerful.
The institution of the Church discriminates against gay people, the presence of the odd gay person here and there notwithstanding. Canon law refuses to recognise gay marriage. Because of chapters of the bible that I'm sure you can quote at me.
It is institutionally prejudiced.
You say it's only the leaders, but they are the leaders. Of the Church of England.
Of the state sect, which is the official sect of a state that promotes gay marriage.
It's as if half the priests of the Roman Imperial Cult [edit] claimed that they didn't need to worship Juno because reasons.
If it was just a ceremonial arm of the state it would be called the Ceremonial Order of England NOT the Church of England.
The state doesn't actively promote gay marriage either, it has just legalised it. Adultery is legal too in the UK, it doesn't mean the C of E should actively promote and remarry adulterers in its churches, even the King couldn't get a C of E wedding with Camilla, just a blessing service much like PLF
That's really scraping the barrel from someone whose party used to go on and on and on and on about the importance of marriage. But maybe you're too young to remember Back to Basics and the assorted illegitimate sprogs which came out from the undergrowth in that particular campaign.
Seeing as the church of england has been covering up homosexual and heterosexual child abuse for decades if not centuries...anyone telling us about the morality of the CofE can frankly go fuck themselves
This one takes my biscuit, a prototype replacement for the Sturmovik.
What's that? The Blackburn Blackburn Blackburn?
Between a Roc and a hard place.
This is a nice movie of an earlier type which I have just come across, doing the same job of torpedo dropping, training in what is now the John Muir Country Park/Belhaven Bay not a trillion km from here.
I thoroughly recommend 'The Wild Muir: Twenty-Two of John Muir's Greatest Adventures'
Is the Trust not having some 'issues'? I seem to remember various board members resigning, an 'independent' inquiry (surprisingly) finding senior management innocent of 'things', etc.
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
Depends what you mean by the CoE. I have recently attended two services presided over by a gay vicar, both packed out by the way. The idea that CoE people disdain him is simply untrue, and his attenders are as much CoE as anyone else. But some people think they don't matter because they are just ordinary CoE people and not intellectuals, or leaders, or powerful.
The institution of the Church discriminates against gay people, the presence of the odd gay person here and there notwithstanding. Canon law refuses to recognise gay marriage. Because of chapters of the bible that I'm sure you can quote at me.
It is institutionally prejudiced.
You say it's only the leaders, but they are the leaders. Of the Church of England.
Adulterers, even the King, can be refused a wedding in a C of E church too, he only had a blessing in 2005 at St George's Chapel Windsor, the marriage service was at Windsor Guildhall.
At the end of the day it is the CHURCH of England not the REGISTRY OFFICE of England and has to follow the Bible's lead
The Bible is man’s interpretation of the Word. It shouldn’t be followed literally and cannot replace a direct relationship with God.
Except when it conveniently aligns with your personal views. "I don't like the gays" -> Bible says. "I'd quite like a tattoo" -> Well, it's all a bit vague and open to interpretation.
Wish me luck. I'm about to use a toilet that has never been used before, in a new room. I've asked if the local mayor is coming for an official ribbon-cutting, but apparently he was unavailable.
If I'm never on PB again, assume that there's been some form of tragic toilet-related incident. Perhaps it has been wired into an alternate-dimension vortex, and I'll end up somewhere else for Christmas...
Wish me luck. I'm about to use a toilet that has never been used before, in a new room. I've asked if the local mayor is coming for an official ribbon-cutting, but apparently he was unavailable.
If I'm never on PB again, assume that there's been some form of tragic toilet-related incident. Perhaps it has been wired into an alternate-dimension vortex, and I'll end up somewhere else for Christmas...
The best of British, to you!
And now I somewhat inappropriately want to watch the old (and I'm sure rather cancelled) Peter Sellers film "The Party".
This one takes my biscuit, a prototype replacement for the Sturmovik.
Pretty rational design for the 1950s. Not so different from the Gannet and for much the same reasons, such as excellent forward view, only hold the sonar and its operator, and add lots of armour plate and armoured glass.
I’d assumed also that the engine was placed as an obstacle between the crew and ground fire, though that seems unduly tender hearted for Soviet high command. In any case it wasn’t adopted
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
Depends what you mean by the CoE. I have recently attended two services presided over by a gay vicar, both packed out by the way. The idea that CoE people disdain him is simply untrue, and his attenders are as much CoE as anyone else. But some people think they don't matter because they are just ordinary CoE people and not intellectuals, or leaders, or powerful.
The institution of the Church discriminates against gay people, the presence of the odd gay person here and there notwithstanding. Canon law refuses to recognise gay marriage. Because of chapters of the bible that I'm sure you can quote at me.
It is institutionally prejudiced.
You say it's only the leaders, but they are the leaders. Of the Church of England.
Of the state sect, which is the official sect of a state that promotes gay marriage.
It's as if half the priests of the Roman Imperial Cult [edit] claimed that they didn't need to worship Juno because reasons.
If it was just a ceremonial arm of the state it would be called the Ceremonial Order of England NOT the Church of England.
The state doesn't actively promote gay marriage either, it has just legalised it. Adultery is legal too in the UK, it doesn't mean the C of E should actively promote and remarry adulterers in its churches, even the King couldn't get a C of E wedding with Camilla, just a blessing service much like PLF
That's really scraping the barrel from someone whose party used to go on and on and on and on about the importance of marriage. But maybe you're too young to remember Back to Basics and the assorted illegitimate sprogs which came out from the undergrowth in that particular campaign.
Seeing as the church of england has been covering up homosexual and heterosexual child abuse for decades if not centuries...anyone telling us about the morality of the CofE can frankly go fuck themselves
Not really, Smyth was a barrister not a priest and it was police who didn't follow through on the Lambeth report on him to them even if Welby could have chased it up. Tudor had no criminal conviction upheld despite 2 trials, in the end it was a C of E tribunal that struck him off this year as a priest, albeit late.
Most abusers were also active pre DBS checks in the 2000s and the expanded safeguarding rules we have now, hence the BBC, boarding schools, Harrods, youth football clubs even the Scouts saw most of their abusers active from the 1960s-1990s
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
Depends what you mean by the CoE. I have recently attended two services presided over by a gay vicar, both packed out by the way. The idea that CoE people disdain him is simply untrue, and his attenders are as much CoE as anyone else. But some people think they don't matter because they are just ordinary CoE people and not intellectuals, or leaders, or powerful.
The institution of the Church discriminates against gay people, the presence of the odd gay person here and there notwithstanding. Canon law refuses to recognise gay marriage. Because of chapters of the bible that I'm sure you can quote at me.
It is institutionally prejudiced.
You say it's only the leaders, but they are the leaders. Of the Church of England.
Adulterers, even the King, can be refused a wedding in a C of E church too, he only had a blessing in 2005 at St George's Chapel Windsor, the marriage service was at Windsor Guildhall.
At the end of the day it is the CHURCH of England not the REGISTRY OFFICE of England and has to follow the Bible's lead
The Bible is man’s interpretation of the Word. It shouldn’t be followed literally and cannot replace a direct relationship with God.
Imagine being one of those people who have wrapped all their presents by July.
Never mind, all but done now.
I am sure I'll pop my head round the door tomorrow, but in case not I wish everyone on PB a very Merry Christmas & Happy New Year.
Next year will be an opportunity for me personally to be a (slightly) more positive and less scornful poster. I've enjoyed tearing strips off Sir Deadloss, and I'm sure there will be more cock ups to enrage us all, but I will also be more open to when the Government might do something good (like the weathering project wrapped up in Ed's crazy carbon capture caper).
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
I worked out, 22 years ago, that the CoE has nothing but disdain for me. So, I left.
About 65 years ago, I experienced much the same thing in a particular Church of England church, but the lesson I drew was different. We were definitely living on the wrong side of the tracks, on a council estate. All those people treating my parents like that lived in large houses which displayed Conservative signs, hence my lifelong prejudice against Conservatives.
It's a good long while since I realised it was just prejudice but the feeling is still there.
It amuses me when I walk to the 'posh' park through the expensive houses here how there is an increase of (take your pick time-wise) Black Lives Matter, Momentum, whatever, stickers in the windows.
Where-as Scumsville, where I stay, has none. Outside the occasional fading "Vote Yes" in the window.
Guess the middle classes know how to nail their colours to the mast.
Yes, whereas the UK political class divide used to be Conservative v Labour it is now much more woke 2016 Remainer v Leaver.
In Scotland also to an extent more 2014 Unionist v Nationalist than party allegiance
You've just claimed, the other day, the *complete opposite* for Scotland. That Unionist vs Nationalist didn't matter at all compared with voting for Reform/Tory vs. the rest. You can't have it both ways, unless you've had a Pauline conversion on the road to Theydon Bois.
No, most Unionists vote Tory, Labour or LD in Scotland ie the old establishment parties with a few for the SNP and Reform.
Most Nationalists vote SNP with a few for Green or Alba but also a growing number for Reform.
What kind of monster doesn't think Yorkshire puddings are an acceptable part of a roast dinner?
I don't eat them myself normally due to my diet but I always make them for the family and would eat them if it weren't for my diet (which I suspend for Christmas Day).
We're hosting Christmas this year and I've volunteered to do the cooking myself, besides my wife's signature Devilled Eggs and Mustard Sauce which she made tonight. I might have gone a bit overboard in what we're preparing.
This one takes my biscuit, a prototype replacement for the Sturmovik.
What's that? The Blackburn Blackburn Blackburn?
Between a Roc and a hard place.
This is a nice movie of an earlier type which I have just come across, doing the same job of torpedo dropping, training in what is now the John Muir Country Park/Belhaven Bay not a trillion km from here.
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
I worked out, 22 years ago, that the CoE has nothing but disdain for me. So, I left.
About 65 years ago, I experienced much the same thing in a particular Church of England church, but the lesson I drew was different. We were definitely living on the wrong side of the tracks, on a council estate. All those people treating my parents like that lived in large houses which displayed Conservative signs, hence my lifelong prejudice against Conservatives.
It's a good long while since I realised it was just prejudice but the feeling is still there.
It amuses me when I walk to the 'posh' park through the expensive houses here how there is an increase of (take your pick time-wise) Black Lives Matter, Momentum, whatever, stickers in the windows.
Where-as Scumsville, where I stay, has none. Outside the occasional fading "Vote Yes" in the window.
Guess the middle classes know how to nail their colours to the mast.
Yes, whereas the UK political class divide used to be Conservative v Labour it is now much more woke 2016 Remainer v Leaver.
In Scotland also to an extent more 2014 Unionist v Nationalist than party allegiance
You've just claimed, the other day, the *complete opposite* for Scotland. That Unionist vs Nationalist didn't matter at all compared with voting for Reform/Tory vs. the rest. You can't have it both ways, unless you've had a Pauline conversion on the road to Theydon Bois.
No, most Unionists vote Tory, Labour or LD in Scotland ie the old establishment parties with a few for the SNP and Reform.
Most Nationalists vote SNP with a few for Green or Alba but also a growing number for Reform.
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
I worked out, 22 years ago, that the CoE has nothing but disdain for me. So, I left.
About 65 years ago, I experienced much the same thing in a particular Church of England church, but the lesson I drew was different. We were definitely living on the wrong side of the tracks, on a council estate. All those people treating my parents like that lived in large houses which displayed Conservative signs, hence my lifelong prejudice against Conservatives.
It's a good long while since I realised it was just prejudice but the feeling is still there.
It amuses me when I walk to the 'posh' park through the expensive houses here how there is an increase of (take your pick time-wise) Black Lives Matter, Momentum, whatever, stickers in the windows.
Where-as Scumsville, where I stay, has none. Outside the occasional fading "Vote Yes" in the window.
Guess the middle classes know how to nail their colours to the mast.
Yes, whereas the UK political class divide used to be Conservative v Labour it is now much more woke 2016 Remainer v Leaver.
In Scotland also to an extent more 2014 Unionist v Nationalist than party allegiance
With you being a woke Remainer, and me being a Leaver.
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
I worked out, 22 years ago, that the CoE has nothing but disdain for me. So, I left.
About 65 years ago, I experienced much the same thing in a particular Church of England church, but the lesson I drew was different. We were definitely living on the wrong side of the tracks, on a council estate. All those people treating my parents like that lived in large houses which displayed Conservative signs, hence my lifelong prejudice against Conservatives.
It's a good long while since I realised it was just prejudice but the feeling is still there.
It amuses me when I walk to the 'posh' park through the expensive houses here how there is an increase of (take your pick time-wise) Black Lives Matter, Momentum, whatever, stickers in the windows.
Where-as Scumsville, where I stay, has none. Outside the occasional fading "Vote Yes" in the window.
Guess the middle classes know how to nail their colours to the mast.
Yes, whereas the UK political class divide used to be Conservative v Labour it is now much more woke 2016 Remainer v Leaver.
In Scotland also to an extent more 2014 Unionist v Nationalist than party allegiance
With you being a woke Remainer, and me being a Leaver.
Well if you recognise your class superior fair enough. The poshest voters tend to be Remainer Tories albeit a declining breed
What kind of monster doesn't think Yorkshire puddings are an acceptable part of a roast dinner?
I don't eat them myself normally due to my diet but I always make them for the family and would eat them if it weren't for my diet (which I suspend for Christmas Day).
We're hosting Christmas this year and I've volunteered to do the cooking myself, besides my wife's signature Devilled Eggs and Mustard Sauce which she made tonight. I might have gone a bit overboard in what we're preparing.
It's actually a little sad, in a way: my parents are getting older, so they've converted the garage into a little granny flat for my mum if she gets more infirm. The idea being that it's better done now than in a hurry if it happens. (*) It was only finished last week, and I'm the first person to stay in it.
The room is another sad sign of my parents' increasing fragility as they zoom through their eighties.
(*) Or alternatively, they just wanted another project.
What kind of monster doesn't think Yorkshire puddings are an acceptable part of a roast dinner?
I don't eat them myself normally due to my diet but I always make them for the family and would eat them if it weren't for my diet (which I suspend for Christmas Day).
We're hosting Christmas this year and I've volunteered to do the cooking myself, besides my wife's signature Devilled Eggs and Mustard Sauce which she made tonight. I might have gone a bit overboard in what we're preparing.
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
I worked out, 22 years ago, that the CoE has nothing but disdain for me. So, I left.
About 65 years ago, I experienced much the same thing in a particular Church of England church, but the lesson I drew was different. We were definitely living on the wrong side of the tracks, on a council estate. All those people treating my parents like that lived in large houses which displayed Conservative signs, hence my lifelong prejudice against Conservatives.
It's a good long while since I realised it was just prejudice but the feeling is still there.
It amuses me when I walk to the 'posh' park through the expensive houses here how there is an increase of (take your pick time-wise) Black Lives Matter, Momentum, whatever, stickers in the windows.
Where-as Scumsville, where I stay, has none. Outside the occasional fading "Vote Yes" in the window.
Guess the middle classes know how to nail their colours to the mast.
Yes, whereas the UK political class divide used to be Conservative v Labour it is now much more woke 2016 Remainer v Leaver.
In Scotland also to an extent more 2014 Unionist v Nationalist than party allegiance
You've just claimed, the other day, the *complete opposite* for Scotland. That Unionist vs Nationalist didn't matter at all compared with voting for Reform/Tory vs. the rest. You can't have it both ways, unless you've had a Pauline conversion on the road to Theydon Bois.
No, most Unionists vote Tory, Labour or LD in Scotland ie the old establishment parties with a few for the SNP and Reform.
Most Nationalists vote SNP with a few for Green or Alba but also a growing number for Reform.
Not what you said!
I am getting dizzy with HY tonight. But this came to mind from Douglas Adams on the Babel Fish.
---
Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mind-bogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as the final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God.
The argument goes something like this: "I refuse to prove that I exist,'" says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."
"But," says Man, "The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED."
"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.
"Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.
---
Anyway - time to go watch some late 70s Sci-fi before Christmas. Have a lovely night everyone! I hope Santa is good to you all!
Incidentally, on presents: Mrs J and I decided years ago only to get each other trinkets for Christmas and birthdays; cheap little things. Instead, we buy each other things we need during the rest of the year.
I think it works quite well, and stops us buying a load of stuff we don't really need.
What kind of monster doesn't think Yorkshire puddings are an acceptable part of a roast dinner?
I don't eat them myself normally due to my diet but I always make them for the family and would eat them if it weren't for my diet (which I suspend for Christmas Day).
We're hosting Christmas this year and I've volunteered to do the cooking myself, besides my wife's signature Devilled Eggs and Mustard Sauce which she made tonight. I might have gone a bit overboard in what we're preparing.
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
I worked out, 22 years ago, that the CoE has nothing but disdain for me. So, I left.
About 65 years ago, I experienced much the same thing in a particular Church of England church, but the lesson I drew was different. We were definitely living on the wrong side of the tracks, on a council estate. All those people treating my parents like that lived in large houses which displayed Conservative signs, hence my lifelong prejudice against Conservatives.
It's a good long while since I realised it was just prejudice but the feeling is still there.
It amuses me when I walk to the 'posh' park through the expensive houses here how there is an increase of (take your pick time-wise) Black Lives Matter, Momentum, whatever, stickers in the windows.
Where-as Scumsville, where I stay, has none. Outside the occasional fading "Vote Yes" in the window.
Guess the middle classes know how to nail their colours to the mast.
Yes, whereas the UK political class divide used to be Conservative v Labour it is now much more woke 2016 Remainer v Leaver.
In Scotland also to an extent more 2014 Unionist v Nationalist than party allegiance
With you being a woke Remainer, and me being a Leaver.
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
I worked out, 22 years ago, that the CoE has nothing but disdain for me. So, I left.
About 65 years ago, I experienced much the same thing in a particular Church of England church, but the lesson I drew was different. We were definitely living on the wrong side of the tracks, on a council estate. All those people treating my parents like that lived in large houses which displayed Conservative signs, hence my lifelong prejudice against Conservatives.
It's a good long while since I realised it was just prejudice but the feeling is still there.
It amuses me when I walk to the 'posh' park through the expensive houses here how there is an increase of (take your pick time-wise) Black Lives Matter, Momentum, whatever, stickers in the windows.
Where-as Scumsville, where I stay, has none. Outside the occasional fading "Vote Yes" in the window.
Guess the middle classes know how to nail their colours to the mast.
Yes, whereas the UK political class divide used to be Conservative v Labour it is now much more woke 2016 Remainer v Leaver.
In Scotland also to an extent more 2014 Unionist v Nationalist than party allegiance
With you being a woke Remainer, and me being a Leaver.
Well if you recognise your class superior fair enough. The poshest voters tend to be Remainer Tories albeit a declining breed
Not my first Christmas Day in the sun but my first down with the 15%.
Merry Christmas to all on PB, whether regular daily bores like me or the occasional lurker who pops in with an insightful reference.
Thanks in particular to @TSE and @rcs1000 who keep this place teetering on the right side of civility and absurdity (most of the time).
Whatever your plans for tomorrow (or today or even yesterday if you’re from the future), I hope they come to fruition without excessive stress or anguish and whatever repast you have planned goes well and you leave space for both the crossword and Boxing Day racing form study.
I’ve been on here a fair while, seen them come, seen them go, endured the multiple manifestations, damascene conversions and flounces.
There are only two rules in this place:
1) Your first post is your best and the quality declines as the quantity increases.
2) If you post between 8am and 4pm (whether GMT, BST or your local time zone is immaterial) you are sad. If you post between 4pm and midnight you are mad and if you post between midnight and 8am you are bad.
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
I worked out, 22 years ago, that the CoE has nothing but disdain for me. So, I left.
About 65 years ago, I experienced much the same thing in a particular Church of England church, but the lesson I drew was different. We were definitely living on the wrong side of the tracks, on a council estate. All those people treating my parents like that lived in large houses which displayed Conservative signs, hence my lifelong prejudice against Conservatives.
It's a good long while since I realised it was just prejudice but the feeling is still there.
It amuses me when I walk to the 'posh' park through the expensive houses here how there is an increase of (take your pick time-wise) Black Lives Matter, Momentum, whatever, stickers in the windows.
Where-as Scumsville, where I stay, has none. Outside the occasional fading "Vote Yes" in the window.
Guess the middle classes know how to nail their colours to the mast.
Yes, whereas the UK political class divide used to be Conservative v Labour it is now much more woke 2016 Remainer v Leaver.
In Scotland also to an extent more 2014 Unionist v Nationalist than party allegiance
With you being a woke Remainer, and me being a Leaver.
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”.
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.
The new Archbishop's province could be called the province of Bigots. They could cover the churches that don't like women priests as well.
Does any of it matter?
If you don’t like the club rules, don’t join the club.
Very good point. It amazes me how eg gay couples want to be a part of the CoE when it is so obvious that the CoE has nothing but disdain for them.
I worked out, 22 years ago, that the CoE has nothing but disdain for me. So, I left.
About 65 years ago, I experienced much the same thing in a particular Church of England church, but the lesson I drew was different. We were definitely living on the wrong side of the tracks, on a council estate. All those people treating my parents like that lived in large houses which displayed Conservative signs, hence my lifelong prejudice against Conservatives.
It's a good long while since I realised it was just prejudice but the feeling is still there.
It amuses me when I walk to the 'posh' park through the expensive houses here how there is an increase of (take your pick time-wise) Black Lives Matter, Momentum, whatever, stickers in the windows.
Where-as Scumsville, where I stay, has none. Outside the occasional fading "Vote Yes" in the window.
Guess the middle classes know how to nail their colours to the mast.
Yes, whereas the UK political class divide used to be Conservative v Labour it is now much more woke 2016 Remainer v Leaver.
In Scotland also to an extent more 2014 Unionist v Nationalist than party allegiance
With you being a woke Remainer, and me being a Leaver.
Well if you recognise your class superior fair enough. The poshest voters tend to be Remainer Tories albeit a declining breed
What kind of monster doesn't think Yorkshire puddings are an acceptable part of a roast dinner?
I don't eat them myself normally due to my diet but I always make them for the family and would eat them if it weren't for my diet (which I suspend for Christmas Day).
We're hosting Christmas this year and I've volunteered to do the cooking myself, besides my wife's signature Devilled Eggs and Mustard Sauce which she made tonight. I might have gone a bit overboard in what we're preparing.
What kind of monster doesn't think Yorkshire puddings are an acceptable part of a roast dinner?
I don't eat them myself normally due to my diet but I always make them for the family and would eat them if it weren't for my diet (which I suspend for Christmas Day).
We're hosting Christmas this year and I've volunteered to do the cooking myself, besides my wife's signature Devilled Eggs and Mustard Sauce which she made tonight. I might have gone a bit overboard in what we're preparing.
What kind of monster doesn't think Yorkshire puddings are an acceptable part of a roast dinner?
I don't eat them myself normally due to my diet but I always make them for the family and would eat them if it weren't for my diet (which I suspend for Christmas Day).
We're hosting Christmas this year and I've volunteered to do the cooking myself, besides my wife's signature Devilled Eggs and Mustard Sauce which she made tonight. I might have gone a bit overboard in what we're preparing.
What kind of monster doesn't think Yorkshire puddings are an acceptable part of a roast dinner?
I don't eat them myself normally due to my diet but I always make them for the family and would eat them if it weren't for my diet (which I suspend for Christmas Day).
We're hosting Christmas this year and I've volunteered to do the cooking myself, besides my wife's signature Devilled Eggs and Mustard Sauce which she made tonight. I might have gone a bit overboard in what we're preparing.
This one takes my biscuit, a prototype replacement for the Sturmovik.
What's that? The Blackburn Blackburn Blackburn?
Between a Roc and a hard place.
This is a nice movie of an earlier type which I have just come across, doing the same job of torpedo dropping, training in what is now the John Muir Country Park/Belhaven Bay not a trillion km from here.
I thoroughly recommend 'The Wild Muir: Twenty-Two of John Muir's Greatest Adventures'
Is the Trust not having some 'issues'? I seem to remember various board members resigning, an 'independent' inquiry (surprisingly) finding senior management innocent of 'things', etc.
If Mrs Flatlander and I went under a bus tomorrow, they'd get a fair amount of money.
When I wrote a will many years ago they appeared to be in decent shape.
Worth a rewrite? The Wildlife Trust here has had the odd problem but nothing on this scale. It might be recoverable but there's a good chance it isn't:
What kind of monster doesn't think Yorkshire puddings are an acceptable part of a roast dinner?
I don't eat them myself normally due to my diet but I always make them for the family and would eat them if it weren't for my diet (which I suspend for Christmas Day).
We're hosting Christmas this year and I've volunteered to do the cooking myself, besides my wife's signature Devilled Eggs and Mustard Sauce which she made tonight. I might have gone a bit overboard in what we're preparing.
Incidentally, on presents: Mrs J and I decided years ago only to get each other trinkets for Christmas and birthdays; cheap little things. Instead, we buy each other things we need during the rest of the year.
I think it works quite well, and stops us buying a load of stuff we don't really need.
A friend told me his Christmas present list: he doesn't need anything and doesn't want just 'stuff', so he tells his (adult) children just to give him money for Christmas. Then, at the end of January when they need loans to tide them over, he gives the money back to them. Genius!
What kind of monster doesn't think Yorkshire puddings are an acceptable part of a roast dinner?
I don't eat them myself normally due to my diet but I always make them for the family and would eat them if it weren't for my diet (which I suspend for Christmas Day).
We're hosting Christmas this year and I've volunteered to do the cooking myself, besides my wife's signature Devilled Eggs and Mustard Sauce which she made tonight. I might have gone a bit overboard in what we're preparing.
Not my first Christmas Day in the sun but my first down with the 15%.
Merry Christmas to all on PB, whether regular daily bores like me or the occasional lurker who pops in with an insightful reference.
Thanks in particular to @TSE and @rcs1000 who keep this place teetering on the right side of civility and absurdity (most of the time).
Whatever your plans for tomorrow (or today or even yesterday if you’re from the future), I hope they come to fruition without excessive stress or anguish and whatever repast you have planned goes well and you leave space for both the crossword and Boxing Day racing form study.
I’ve been on here a fair while, seen them come, seen them go, endured the multiple manifestations, damascene conversions and flounces.
There are only two rules in this place:
1) Your first post is your best and the quality declines as the quantity increases.
2) If you post between 8am and 4pm (whether GMT, BST or your local time zone is immaterial) you are sad. If you post between 4pm and midnight you are mad and if you post between midnight and 8am you are bad.
You may know our eldest emigrated to NZ in 2003 and was then caught up in the terrible Christchurch earthquake in 2011, which eventually lost him his job , his relationship, and PTSD from attending ground zero where so many lives were lost
He is now happily married to a Canadian living in Vancouver and of course we visited him several times at this time of year
If you don't mind me asking, are you visiting family or holidaying or on business?
What kind of monster doesn't think Yorkshire puddings are an acceptable part of a roast dinner?
I don't eat them myself normally due to my diet but I always make them for the family and would eat them if it weren't for my diet (which I suspend for Christmas Day).
We're hosting Christmas this year and I've volunteered to do the cooking myself, besides my wife's signature Devilled Eggs and Mustard Sauce which she made tonight. I might have gone a bit overboard in what we're preparing.
What kind of monster doesn't think Yorkshire puddings are an acceptable part of a roast dinner?
I don't eat them myself normally due to my diet but I always make them for the family and would eat them if it weren't for my diet (which I suspend for Christmas Day).
We're hosting Christmas this year and I've volunteered to do the cooking myself, besides my wife's signature Devilled Eggs and Mustard Sauce which she made tonight. I might have gone a bit overboard in what we're preparing.
What kind of monster doesn't think Yorkshire puddings are an acceptable part of a roast dinner?
I don't eat them myself normally due to my diet but I always make them for the family and would eat them if it weren't for my diet (which I suspend for Christmas Day).
We're hosting Christmas this year and I've volunteered to do the cooking myself, besides my wife's signature Devilled Eggs and Mustard Sauce which she made tonight. I might have gone a bit overboard in what we're preparing.
Our daughter is trying to explain why the killer of Luigi Mangione should be released. Really not getting it to be honest but it’s clearly a generational thing and there is a huge anger amongst the young generation, especially after Trump’s win.
Our daughter is trying to explain why the killer of Luigi Mangione should be released. Really not getting it to be honest but it’s clearly a generational thing and there is a huge anger amongst the young generation, especially after Trump’s win.
That must be difficult and just affirms the mess the US is in
Our daughter is trying to explain why the killer of Luigi Mangione should be released. Really not getting it to be honest but it’s clearly a generational thing and there is a huge anger amongst the young generation, especially after Trump’s win.
Mangione was the killer of the insurance ceo. Has he himself been killed?
Our daughter is trying to explain why the killer of Luigi Mangione should be released. Really not getting it to be honest but it’s clearly a generational thing and there is a huge anger amongst the young generation, especially after Trump’s win.
That must be difficult and just affirms the mess the US is in
Yes but it’s not just a US problem. Our society is disintegrating.
Our daughter is trying to explain why the killer of Luigi Mangione should be released. Really not getting it to be honest but it’s clearly a generational thing and there is a huge anger amongst the young generation, especially after Trump’s win.
Mangione was the killer of the insurance ceo. Has he himself been killed?
Yes you’re right I have got that the wrong way around. But I hope you got the point.
Our daughter is trying to explain why the killer of Luigi Mangione should be released. Really not getting it to be honest but it’s clearly a generational thing and there is a huge anger amongst the young generation, especially after Trump’s win.
Mangione was the killer of the insurance ceo. Has he himself been killed?
Yes you’re right I have got that the wrong way around. But I hope you got the point.
I'll be meeting the yoofs in our family tomorrow so perhaps I'll be better informed about whether our society is disintegrating
Our daughter is trying to explain why the (alleged) killer Luigi Mangione should be released. Really not getting it to be honest but it’s clearly a generational thing and there is a huge anger amongst the young generation, especially after Trump’s win.
I’m glad you weren’t convinced. I’m all for liberal judges, but that would be pushing it.
I'm not doing anything in particular tomorrow but there are a whole lot of films on the telly box which needs watching.
I saw I Used to be Funny on the plane back from NY this week and it was excellent. I note that It's a Wonderful Life is on a terrestrial channel which definitely needs watching again.
Our daughter is trying to explain why the killer of Luigi Mangione should be released. Really not getting it to be honest but it’s clearly a generational thing and there is a huge anger amongst the young generation, especially after Trump’s win.
Mangione was the killer of the insurance ceo. Has he himself been killed?
Yes you’re right I have got that the wrong way around. But I hope you got the point.
I'll be meeting the yoofs in our family tomorrow so perhaps I'll be better informed about whether our society is disintegrating
... This suggests we are coming together: Farage: I’m willing to help Mandelson secure free trade deals with Trump
Our daughter is trying to explain why the killer of Luigi Mangione should be released. Really not getting it to be honest but it’s clearly a generational thing and there is a huge anger amongst the young generation, especially after Trump’s win.
Mangione was the killer of the insurance ceo. Has he himself been killed?
Yes you’re right I have got that the wrong way around. But I hope you got the point.
I'll be meeting the yoofs in our family tomorrow so perhaps I'll be better informed about whether our society is disintegrating
... This suggests we are coming together: Farage: I’m willing to help Mandelson secure free trade deals with Trump
Maybe, but if this country's last hope for prosperity rests on Trump, Farage and Mandelson we're in even worse shape than I thought ...
I'm not doing anything in particular tomorrow but there are a whole lot of films on the telly box which needs watching.
I saw I Used to be Funny on the plane back from NY this week and it was excellent. I note that It's a Wonderful Life is on a terrestrial channel which definitely needs watching again.
Don't get the joy of It's a Wonderful Life. Maybe I'm just a miserable scrote. Merry Christmas fellow miserable scrotes.
What kind of monster doesn't think Yorkshire puddings are an acceptable part of a roast dinner?
I don't eat them myself normally due to my diet but I always make them for the family and would eat them if it weren't for my diet (which I suspend for Christmas Day).
We're hosting Christmas this year and I've volunteered to do the cooking myself, besides my wife's signature Devilled Eggs and Mustard Sauce which she made tonight. I might have gone a bit overboard in what we're preparing.
- Italian antipasti: burrata, salamis, cooked ham, Parma ham, sun dried tomatoes & artichokes in oil - rib of beef with roast potatoes, roast parsnips, mash, caramelised carrots, spinach, pigs in blankets (have never had or cooked these before) & Yorkshire puddings - cheeseboard with grapes & fig & apricot chutney - apple crumble and ice cream
Then later - tea/coffee + Panettone for anyone still able to swallow
It looks like a huge effort but, cunningly, the 1st, 3rd & last courses need next to no effort and even the main one and pudding largely involve switching an oven on and putting food in it.
I'm not doing anything in particular tomorrow but there are a whole lot of films on the telly box which needs watching.
I saw I Used to be Funny on the plane back from NY this week and it was excellent. I note that It's a Wonderful Life is on a terrestrial channel which definitely needs watching again.
Don't get the joy of It's a Wonderful Life. Maybe I'm just a miserable scrote. Merry Christmas fellow miserable scrotes.
I think its quality (apart from the immaculate acting) lies in the bleakness leavening the vision of a golden America. Ironically I’m pretty sure lots of those voting for Trump yearned for a return to Bedford Falls while Pottersville is entirely Trumpian.
Our daughter is trying to explain why the (alleged) killer Luigi Mangione should be released. Really not getting it to be honest but it’s clearly a generational thing and there is a huge anger amongst the young generation, especially after Trump’s win.
I’m glad you weren’t convinced. I’m all for liberal judges, but that would be pushing it.
- Italian antipasti: burrata, salamis, cooked ham, Parma ham, sun dried tomatoes & artichokes in oil - rib of beef with roast potatoes, roast parsnips, mash, caramelised carrots, spinach, pigs in blankets (have never had or cooked these before) & Yorkshire puddings - cheeseboard with grapes & fig & apricot chutney - apple crumble and ice cream
Then later - tea/coffee + Panettone for anyone still able to swallow
It looks like a huge effort but, cunningly, the 1st, 3rd & last courses need next to no effort and even the main one and pudding largely involve switching an oven on and putting food in it.
Comments
The state doesn't actively promote gay marriage either, it has just legalised it. Adultery is legal too in the UK, it doesn't mean the C of E should actively promote and remarry adulterers in its churches, even the King couldn't get a C of E wedding with Camilla, just a blessing service much like PLF
I have, however, realised that asking any of my CofE colleagues to describe the internal workings of their church is something I should avoid at all costs.
https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/1060023165
She managed to transcend the usual platitudes when talking about the recent tragedy in Magdeburg:
https://x.com/alice_weidel/status/1871304696125923742
I do have a specific dislike of London and I'm not sure why. I've been to New York, Sydney and Tokyo are they are all nice places to be whereas London sets me off.
#portilloforleader
Where-as Scumsville, where I stay, has none. Outside the occasional fading "Vote Yes" in the window.
Guess the middle classes know how to nail their colours to the correct mast.
In Scotland also to an extent more 2014 Unionist v Nationalist than party allegiance
I thoroughly recommend 'The Wild Muir: Twenty-Two of John Muir's Greatest Adventures'
Maybe they made that up though.
In any case, I blame Keir. And Portillo.
Ah :
https://www.scotsman.com/hays-way/john-muir-trust-charity-redundancies-trustees-4749320
If I'm never on PB again, assume that there's been some form of tragic toilet-related incident. Perhaps it has been wired into an alternate-dimension vortex, and I'll end up somewhere else for Christmas...
And now I somewhat inappropriately want to watch the old (and I'm sure rather cancelled) Peter Sellers film "The Party".
Most abusers were also active pre DBS checks in the 2000s and the expanded safeguarding rules we have now, hence the BBC, boarding schools, Harrods, youth football clubs even the Scouts saw most of their abusers active from the 1960s-1990s
Never mind, all but done now.
I am sure I'll pop my head round the door tomorrow, but in case not I wish everyone on PB a very Merry Christmas & Happy New Year.
Next year will be an opportunity for me personally to be a (slightly) more positive and less scornful poster. I've enjoyed tearing strips off Sir Deadloss, and I'm sure there will be more cock ups to enrage us all, but I will also be more open to when the Government might do something good (like the weathering project wrapped up in Ed's crazy carbon capture caper).
Whatever happens politically, it won't be dull.
Most Nationalists vote SNP with a few for Green or Alba but also a growing number for Reform.
I don't eat them myself normally due to my diet but I always make them for the family and would eat them if it weren't for my diet (which I suspend for Christmas Day).
We're hosting Christmas this year and I've volunteered to do the cooking myself, besides my wife's signature Devilled Eggs and Mustard Sauce which she made tonight. I might have gone a bit overboard in what we're preparing.
Slow cooked gammon
Rotisserie chicken
Roast beef
Devilled eggs
Roast potatoes
Honey roast parsnips
Roasted shallots, carrots and Brussels sprouts
Yorkshire Puddings
Mustard sauce
Gravy
It's actually a little sad, in a way: my parents are getting older, so they've converted the garage into a little granny flat for my mum if she gets more infirm. The idea being that it's better done now than in a hurry if it happens. (*) It was only finished last week, and I'm the first person to stay in it.
The room is another sad sign of my parents' increasing fragility as they zoom through their eighties.
(*) Or alternatively, they just wanted another project.
---
Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mind-bogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as the final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God.
The argument goes something like this: "I refuse to prove that I exist,'" says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."
"But," says Man, "The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED."
"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.
"Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.
---
Anyway - time to go watch some late 70s Sci-fi before Christmas. Have a lovely night everyone! I hope Santa is good to you all!
I think it works quite well, and stops us buying a load of stuff we don't really need.
The key is the roast, not the beef.
Not my first Christmas Day in the sun but my first down with the 15%.
Merry Christmas to all on PB, whether regular daily bores like me or the occasional lurker who pops in with an insightful reference.
Thanks in particular to @TSE and @rcs1000 who keep this place teetering on the right side of civility and absurdity (most of the time).
Whatever your plans for tomorrow (or today or even yesterday if you’re from the future), I hope they come to fruition without excessive stress or anguish and whatever repast you have planned goes well and you leave space for both the crossword and Boxing Day racing form study.
I’ve been on here a fair while, seen them come, seen them go, endured the multiple manifestations, damascene conversions and flounces.
There are only two rules in this place:
1) Your first post is your best and the quality declines as the quantity increases.
2) If you post between 8am and 4pm (whether GMT, BST or your local time zone is immaterial) you are sad. If you post between 4pm and midnight you are mad and if you post between midnight and 8am you are bad.
https://bake-eat-repeat.com/mustard-sauce-recipe/
The rest of us have whatever we want.
When I wrote a will many years ago they appeared to be in decent shape.
Worth a rewrite? The Wildlife Trust here has had the odd problem but nothing on this scale. It might be recoverable but there's a good chance it isn't:
https://tfn.scot/news/exclusive-the-downward-spiral-of-a-scots-conservation-charity
You may know our eldest emigrated to NZ in 2003 and was then caught up in the terrible Christchurch earthquake in 2011, which eventually lost him his job , his relationship, and PTSD from attending ground zero where so many lives were lost
He is now happily married to a Canadian living in Vancouver and of course we visited him several times at this time of year
If you don't mind me asking, are you visiting family or holidaying or on business?
I couldn't resist - Happy Christmas @Roger
I’m all for liberal judges, but that would be pushing it.
There’s a second controversy in the case.
https://x.com/dieworkwear/status/1871595254006313237
I saw I Used to be Funny on the plane back from NY this week and it was excellent. I note that It's a Wonderful Life is on a terrestrial channel which definitely needs watching again.
Farage: I’m willing to help Mandelson secure free trade deals with Trump
It's OK McLane had a plan.
https://x.com/Aviation_Intel/status/1871616211588628668
Or if you do, go full MAGA and say you have it with a pineapple ring.
- Italian antipasti: burrata, salamis, cooked ham, Parma ham, sun dried tomatoes & artichokes in oil
- rib of beef with roast potatoes, roast parsnips, mash, caramelised carrots, spinach, pigs in blankets (have never had or cooked these before) & Yorkshire puddings
- cheeseboard with grapes & fig & apricot chutney
- apple crumble and ice cream
Then later
- tea/coffee + Panettone for anyone still able to swallow
It looks like a huge effort but, cunningly, the 1st, 3rd & last courses need next to no effort and even the main one and pudding largely involve switching an oven on and putting food in it.
Can't be having that. We're British.
Truly, civilisation is nearing its end.