It's Friday, and that's Ruth Gledhill for ya.

(+Chelmsford can take comfort, that if Ms. Gledhill had been around to cover one "Jesus of Nazareth", she'd dismiss him as a “far-left liberal activist” also! ;-/)

The _Times_ article seems to be little more than story-creation for the sake of it. Call someone an `activist' - twice - and all you're doing is seeking to tarnish their name.

Me, I'm rather worried that the term "gay and lesbian club" has gone uncorrected.

If you're going to point the finger at him, do it on grounds of inconsistency, if such is applicable.

Ruth does fantastic work on her blog and then .... this piffle! If she and I and the Lambeth Conference are all spared maybe I will introduce her to Bishop Emmanuel Chukwuma - and duck.

Writes the London Times: "Now Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, has intervened, sending over a special envoy to mediate."

Why should the Primate of the Kenyan 'purists' heed ++Rowan Williams and his envoy? Cantuar, as bishop of Monmouth, Wales, has as bad a track record as +Chelmsford. Hasn't he knowingly ordained a non-celibate gay man to the priesthood? At least he did, according to his biographer, Rupert Shortt.

I seem to recall first meeting "far-left liberal activist" John Gladwin at the National Evangelical Anglican Congress in 1977.

It is the end of Ruth's story that reveals why she has such an animus against him. He is seen by her as anti-Israel. This story is liitle to do with gay people, and everything to do with Zionism. At the end of her story she quotes Irene Lancaster as saying that Gladwin has done more to put enmity between Jews and Christians than anyone else in the country, a somewhat over the top claim.
Irene Lancaster comments on Ruth's blog as follows:
"My own view is that the good Bishop has received his just deserts. I recently gave a well-attended lecture on the future of Christian-Jewish relations in Chelmsford's diocese to which he was invited, and he didn't even send along his representative, or if he did, they did not even bother to introduce themselves."
The words "sour" and "grapes" come to mind.

If Gladwin is an opponent of Christian Zionism and the illegal occupation of Palestine, then that means he goes up in my estimation.

No, Doug. It is not sour grapes. It is just sadness. People with the Bishop of Chelmsford's views just do not wish to engage with the Jewish community, even when the talk is about Anglican-Jewish relations.

And it is certainly not I who said this at the time, but my hosts in his diocese, the Council of Christians and Jews.

It is too easy to make assumptions without knowing all the facts, which in my view you have also done about Ruth Gledhill's motivations as well.

I hope you don't mind me saying this.