Thinking Anglicans

a range of opinions

Naftali Brawer writes in The Times that There are no easy answers in interfaith dialogue.

Ruth Gledhill writes on Articles of Faith about Gays and flat-earthers: Jack Spong attacks Pope, Archbishop of Canterbury et al.

Gary Wilton wrote in last week’s Church Times that [the Lisbon] Treaty will make the EU more accountable.

John Hall the Dean of Westminster wrote The Abbey has its neighbours round.

Timothy Seidel wrote at Ekklesia Looking at what truly makes for a just peace.

Anna Hartnell wrote at Cif belief about The rise of the religious left.

22
Leave a Reply

avatar
3000
22 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
14 Comment authors
Pat O'NeillFord ElmsErika BakerFather Ron SmithDavid | Dah•veed Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify of
JPM
Guest
JPM

Simon, the Gledhill link is incorrectly formatted.

Pat O'Neill
Guest
Pat O'Neill

The link to the Gledhill piece is missing the “:” after “http”

Pat O'Neill
Guest
Pat O'Neill

The link to the Gledhill piece is missing the “:” after “http”

Simon Sarmiento
Guest

fixed, sorry.

Rev L Roberts
Guest
Rev L Roberts

I was sorry to see Ruth Gledhill abusing Bishop Spong and one of the commentators looking forward to his death, in The Times. A disgrace to the Faith they profess-so different to Jack, who has been such an evanglist through his ministry of writing, and beyond.

I find Spong’s words very wise.

peterpi
Guest
peterpi

“I will no longer listen to […] ‘we love the sinner but hate the sin.’ That statement is, I have concluded, nothing more than a self-serving lie designed to cover the fact that these people hate homosexual persons and fear homosexuality itself, but somehow know that hatred is incompatible with the Christ they claim to profess, so they adopt this face-saving and absolutely false statement.” ===== Thank you, Bishop Spong!!! It is also condescending and smug: “Oh, look at those disgusting homosexuals! I can’t stand such perverse sinners, but I’ll show love anyway. Ain’t I grand?” Bishop Spong can make… Read more »

Spirit of Vatican II
Guest
Spirit of Vatican II

Spong is right. We do not entertain listening processes of racists and antisemites, so why for homophobes? When Windsor talked of a listening process wasn’t the idea to listen to the experience of gay Christians?

In many of the responses Spong gets one need only substitute the word Jewish for homosexual and you can see why they do not deserve to be listened to.
Rev. Cockshaw of Lichfield claims that Spong is inconsistent in protesting intolerance of gays while himself being intolerant of gay-haters. Just substitute Jew for gay in that sentence.

JCF
Guest
JCF

In many respects, Spong is an unlikeable prophet (but then, aren’t they usually? :-/)

As the Ultimate Bete Noir, if Spong didn’t exist, I think GAFCONians might well invent him [Certainly, it’s unsurprising that it’s Our Ruth who raises his spectre—not unlike Saul w/ the Witch of Endor! (I Samuel 28)]

Spirit of Vatican II
Guest
Spirit of Vatican II

For a revealing Gledhill and Spong episode of 1998 see: http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~lcrew/lambeth98/lambeth82.html

Rosemary Hannah
Guest
Rosemary Hannah

I don’t warm to Spong, and certainly do not always agree with him – generally, here I do. I think that there was a time when the arguments were not understood, when people did not realise that queer folk had relationships like everybody else, but I think that time is past. I still engage with those who are troubled over ways of engaging with the Bible, because I think that is a broader and more easily mis-understood issue. It does not help to have those in the pews thinking everybody reading it with no regard to cultural context. But I’ve… Read more »

Father Ron Smith
Guest
Father Ron Smith

” I will no longer discuss with them or listen to them tell me how homosexuality is “an abomination to God,” about how homosexuality is a “chosen lifestyle,” or about how through prayer and “spiritual counseling” homosexual persons can be “cured.” – Jack Spong (on Ruth’s blog) I think Bishop Spong is at least right in this particular determination – that he will not seek to discuss any further with institutionalised homophobes, who insist that homosexualty is a *Chosen life-style* which can be *cured* by *spiritual counselling*. It has been manifestly proven that, to even try to reason with determined… Read more »

Charlotte
Guest
Charlotte

Somewhat related to the Gledhill-and-Spong matter: Over at the Fulcrum Forums, Andrew Goddard and Glynn Harrison attack the American Psychiatric Association for saying that attempts to turn gays straight are hurtful: http://www.fulcrum-anglican.org.uk/page.cfm?ID=475 According to Goddard and Harrison, the APA’s science is bad. Reason? It doesn’t give them the answer they want: “To every theory, however, [the Church] must put the question whether it is adequate to the understanding of human nature and its redemption that the Gospel proclaims.” (Which Church, which Gospel, you might well ask — well, theirs, of course!) Is there any difference between the British evos and… Read more »

Cynthia Gilliatt
Guest
Cynthia Gilliatt

“As the Ultimate Bete Noir, if Spong didn’t exist, I think GAFCONians might well invent him [Certainly, it’s unsurprising that it’s Our Ruth who raises his spectre—not unlike Saul w/ the Witch of Endor! (I Samuel 28)]”

If they get tired of beating up on Spong, they can always reach back and bring back poor old Bishop Pike.

Spirit of Vatican II
Guest
Spirit of Vatican II

Once you dabble in lies and evil you cannot limit their spread. Now the African fundamentalists are into torturing children: http://www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatches/episode-guide/series-8/episode-1/
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/15/world/africa/15witches.html

Father Ron Smith
Guest
Father Ron Smith

The ‘Fulcrum’ article (mentioned, above, by Charlotte) by Messrs Andrew Goddard and Glynn Harrison appears to be a quasi-scientific and circumlocutious attempt to discredit serious research, undertaken by professional psychiatric institutions of both the UK and the USA, on the unsatisfactory outcome of attempts by so-called Christian ‘therapists’ to change sexual orientation. What they still cannot, or are unwilling, to understand about sexual identity is that it really is not a matter of choice – whether to be homo- hetero- or bisexual. They seem so desperate to prove that gays can be ‘cured’ by spiritual manipulation, that they are willing… Read more »

Simon Sarmiento
Guest

Before comments on this Fulcrum article go any further, I will start a new thread just for this purpose, as it really has nothing to do with the articles listed above.

david | Dah•veed
Guest
david | Dah•veed

I think some folks are over reacting to the good bishop. I think that is often the case. He does like to rattle folk’s cages. But I cannot subscribe to calling clear, concise language a rant. Nor do I read the bishop as cutting off conversation, as this is being interpreted by Viagraville. To me what he is saying is that for him personally, which is why the “I” language, there are now well established facts about sexual minorities which are no longer up for grabs. They are settled. They are no longer debatable. Period. And he published this on… Read more »

Erika Baker
Guest
Erika Baker

David

The only difficulty I have with your view is that I know there are millions and millions of straight and gay Christians out there who feel exactly alike, who have therefore kept out of this inane debate, and have effectively left the field clear for the anti-brigade to march in and dictate the terms of the conversation and, increasingly, of church policy.

How can we prevent that if we don’t get involved at the level the public debate is sadly still happening?

David | Dah•veed
Guest
David | Dah•veed

“have effectively left the field clear for the anti-brigade to march in and dictate the terms of the conversation and, increasingly, of church policy.”

That is pretty much an issue in other provinces Erika, such as the CoE. Here in the Americas the majority of provinces have not allowed them to do that, so they have been unsuccessful, which is why they have all taken their balls and gone home to play by themselves.

Father Ron Smith
Guest
Father Ron Smith

Erika, much as I agree with your thesis – on the fact that there are still many Christians who need to join in the debate – with views that are antithetical to those of the anti-gay, anti-women school, who ought, perhaps to make themselves heard on these issues – I also agree with David Dahveed; who is rapidly tiring of the effort involved in speaking to those whose ears are stopped, because otf their unwillignness to hear “What the Spirit is saying to the Church”.

Erika Baker
Guest
Erika Baker

David
Wasn’t it the anti gay religious groups that stopped gay marriage in many US States?
At least here, we have full civil rights. For me, joining in the debate is a luxury not a personal necessity.

Fr Ron
Exactly. We need to stand above the fray as well as engage – that precisely is my problem.

Ford Elms
Guest
Ford Elms

“Just substitute Jew for gay in that sentence.” And when you do, ask yourself what makes someone hate Jews. Or gay people. What makes someone hate any group? An effect of the Fall, perhaps? Isn’t the Gospel supposed to heal the effects fo the Fall? How do we bring the Gospel to these people if we don’t talk to them? We don’t talk to neoNazi antisemites? Perhaps we’re wrong in that. Perhaps not. And this definitely idealistic, but I don’t think we can refuse to bring the Gospel to the world’s brokenness just because some of those broken people are… Read more »