Thursday, 9 July 2015

Reform unequivocally supports Hull vicar

We reported previously on the statement issued by the Archbishop of York in response to the remarks of a vicar in Hull.

Reform has issued this website comment, supporting the vicar and criticising York Minster:

As the Steering Group of Reform met last week, the events surrounding the blessing of the Gay Pride march in York could not be ignored.

Whilst the Reform Steering Group stands opposed to homophobia, nevertheless they were unanimously of the view that it was an offense to all bible-believing Christians for the Minster to endorse, without qualification, the activities of York Pride with the intention of “affirming the LGBT community”.

They appreciated the Archbishop of York’s statement affirming the “traditional Christian understanding of human sexuality, orientation, and behavior” and agreed with him that God loves and values all people, whatever their sexual orientation, and that that same love should be shown by Christians. They hope that the Archbishop of York is prepared to stand by the whole of Lambeth Resolution 1.10, which rejects “homosexual practice as incompatible with Scripture” and the Dromantine Conference of Anglican Communion Primates Communiqué which affirms this teaching.

Susie Leafe, Director of Reform, said “We long for all churches to model Jesus Christ’s welcome to all people – a welcome that loves us enough not only to walk with us in self-sacrificial love but also to warn us of God’s judgment and call us to repent of our rejection of God’s ways.”

They therefore wish to express their unequivocal support for the stand that Rev Melvin Tinker, a founder member of Reform, has taken and they applaud his courage in being prepared to speak graciously and clearly of the Church’s responsibility to teach and act according to biblical principles.

The Archbishop of Canterbury proposes to consecrate the Chair of Reform, The Reverend Rod Thomas, as Bishop of Maidstone at a service in Canterbury Cathedral on 23 September.

Posted by Simon Sarmiento on Thursday, 9 July 2015 at 4:03pm BST | TrackBack
You can make a Permalink to this if you like
Categorised as: Church of England
Comments

Unlike the dignified civil rights Marches of the 1960s gay pride marches (from tv and youtube)tend to have exercises in exhibitionism with some very lewd behaviour. I'm with Reform on this one.plus Melvin is a Godly man.his commentary on genesis is superb.

Posted by: robert ian williams on Thursday, 9 July 2015 at 4:39pm BST

The British National Front is a right-wing group which hates black people. REFORM is a right-wing group which hates gay people. Hatred is still hatred, no matter how many weasel words are used to support a homophobic cleric.

Posted by: FrDavidH on Thursday, 9 July 2015 at 4:44pm BST

"...an offense to all bible-believing Christians..."

Not too this one, nor, I think, to very many others. My church, and several others in Seattle,marches in the Pride parade.

If "lewd behavior" occurs, as Ian Williams says, it is a small portion of a very large crowd, which always receives great attention from the media. What I saw in Seattle was Boy Scouts, members of the military in uniform, proud parents, married couples, church groups - all celebrating equality.

Posted by: Nathaniel Brown on Thursday, 9 July 2015 at 5:52pm BST

Exhibitionism and lewd behaviour? Sounds like 2 Samuel 6 14-16 to me. Very Biblical.

Posted by: Fr Andrew on Thursday, 9 July 2015 at 7:00pm BST

Reform - out of touch still, on matters of public importance. Society recognises the rights of LGBT people - despite the reluctance of the Church to acknowledge their presence 'in the midst'.

Like most provincial cathedral congregations, that of York Minster is aware of the need to be where people are - in this case, on the street. This is precisely where Jesus wanted to meet real people in the real situation of their lives!

However, a Gay Parade is not the epitome of the life-style and predilection of most Gay people. It is an extreme event, to draw attention to the fact that there is a minority of people whose lives are different from those of the predominantly heterosexual community. The mere fact that such parades are so popular, reflects the fact that ordinary people want to identify - not so much with outrageous extremism (which is what Gay Parades so often exhibit) - but with the lives of a significant proportion of the population who want to celebrate their difference, in ways that provoke conversation and good humour.

Reform, like the Seventh Day Adventists of old, persist in not seeing the implicit humour of non-typically outrageous behaviour on the part of a newly-emancipated community group.

Posted by: Father Ron Smith on Thursday, 9 July 2015 at 7:44pm BST

"We are not homophobic, but..." always = "we are homophobic". What a load of sanctimonious clap-trap. Every time I read this sort of stuff I am reminded just how much healthier my life is away from it all

Posted by: sjh on Thursday, 9 July 2015 at 8:07pm BST

Again, no surprise there. That's how Reform rolls. Just as there's no surprise that its bossman gets a bishop's throne. Diversity must be respected. Unless it's affirming, natch.

In a warped way, this kinda thing helps the cause of justice in the church. The more theological gay-bashing gets churned out, the more the church's legions of white moderates might, just might, be pushed into taking a stand. Or, at least, lending support to those who do.

Posted by: James Byron on Thursday, 9 July 2015 at 8:52pm BST

Lewd behaviour at Pride marches has been used to shock, quite deliberately. To be as blatant, as offensive and as 'in your face' as one can be is a classic response to oppression and a well exercised tool of protest. It is the gay equivalent of suffragettes chaining themselves to railings and throwing themselves under the King's horse. How many people said of those protesters that they agreed with their cause but didn't approve of their methods? It is difficult to think of a human rights cause that has made progress that hasn't used shock and outrage as one tool among others. The moral dilemma of which shock tactics are helpful and which are not is nothing new.

Posted by: Disgraced on Friday, 10 July 2015 at 12:09am BST

"it was an offense to all bible-believing Christians for the Minster to endorse, without qualification, the activities of York Pride with the intention of “affirming the LGBT community”."

What can one say here? Obviously, it's false---I'm a "bible-believing Christian" AND affirming of my self which GOD created a member of the LGBT community. But beyond that, the LACK OF HOSPITALITY (which was the true "Sin of Sodom") is so gobsmacking, I can only wonder whether "REFORM" has ever learned of/met/fed on/modeled after Jesus Christ. Jesus? Remember him? The "Come Unto Me" guy?

[@RIW, re "lewd". You want "lewd"? Discrimination is lewd. Bigotry is lewd. Double-standards are lewd. HOMOPHOBIA IS LEWD.]

Posted by: JCF on Friday, 10 July 2015 at 1:42am BST

"Reform unequivocally supports Hull vicar." And I would want to add "Archbishop of York equivocally supports Hull Vicar."

Posted by: James A on Friday, 10 July 2015 at 7:14am BST

Robert Ian Williams, might I suggest you go and watch some Pride marches to find out what really goes on? Rather relying on the selective filtering of the Media?

Posted by: David Beadle on Friday, 10 July 2015 at 10:12am BST

"might I suggest you go and watch some Pride marches to find out what really goes on?"

Great idea! Denver's is like a big city block party where tons of churches have booths and you can get yummy street food. And people can learn about AIDS and whatnot. A handful of people do dress to shock, but the overwhelming majority seemed to be middle aged loving couples.

Posted by: Cynthia on Friday, 10 July 2015 at 6:46pm BST

What JCF says.

And let's remind ourselves, homophobia is all the talk and speech and attitudes that hurt and harm LGBT people. All the stuff that makes them hate themselves, doubt themselves, feel fear that they will not be accepted, or will be discriminated against or rejected or put out of serving in their churches. It is homophobia that makes teenagers who think they might be LGBT afraid and sometimes desperate, desperate to the point of suicide.

So gracious and nusanced conversations can go on all they like, but the homophobia of Reform needs calling out, as does the homophobia that is ever so politely uttered all round the Church of England, with all the wringing of hands that accompanies it. And so too does the homophobia of collusion by so many in the church, who don't want to frighten the horses by telling their colleagues and friends that their attitudes are no longer socially acceptable.

It is all homophobia.


Posted by: Jeremy Pemberton on Friday, 10 July 2015 at 7:24pm BST

What Jeremy P. says.

Posted by: Cynthia on Friday, 10 July 2015 at 10:28pm BST

Just throwing an oar in. I don't have a dog in the fight having joined RIW in Rome. But I read all the posts here and I find it astonishing how the conservative position is just dismissed. There are liberal contributors here whose arrogance is breathtaking. You know who you are. I'm not saying I disagree. But you won't win the hearts of the doubters with such arrogance and "I'm right you're wrong" attitudes. And the word "homophobia" is itself a dismissal. It's perfectly possible to believe something is wrong without being frightened of it.

The CofE will only truly get a grip on this by mutual listening. Don't write off conservatives. You may find that if you respect and engage there is at least some common ground to be won.

Posted by: Clive on Monday, 13 July 2015 at 4:15am BST

Homophobia doesn't necessarily imply fear - etymology is not meaning. Homophobia refers to fear, hatred, abuse and discrimination. The church has been guilty of all of these at time and is certainly guilty of the latter at present. Protesting injustice cannot be done only in ways that the unjust find comfortable. If people don't like being called homophobic then the time has come for them to stop being homophobic.

Posted by: Jo on Monday, 13 July 2015 at 1:37pm BST

Clive,
"The CofE will only truly get a grip on this by mutual listening. Don't write off conservatives. You may find that if you respect and engage there is at least some common ground to be won."

We don't. There are many forums where we engage with them constructively. But the real debate has shifted and is no longer a liberal vs. conservative (largely evangelical) one but takes place within conservative circles.

And people keep changing their minds and are becoming affirming.

And yes, we can say that the conservative view is wrong. Every one of us who has any close links with lgbt people in non affirming churches knows at first hand the harm this theology afflict on people.
We can respect the people who hold those views, but we are not going to respect the views themselves.
If they're harmful, damaging and wrong they have to be called harmful, damaging and wrong.

Posted by: Erika Baker on Monday, 13 July 2015 at 3:30pm BST

You've confused arrogance with clarity, Clive.

I follow the evidence where it leads. My views gain weight from that, not my high opinion of myself; just the opposite, I place such weight in evidence 'cause I know, full and well, how wrong I can be. My views are strongest where I have reasonable cause to believe the evidence is strongest.

Likewise, conservatives submit to sources of authority. Difference between us is, I accept new evidence; divine revelation, whether Bible or magisterium, is taken to be categorically incapable of error. This is about authority: I believe it's a fallacy; theological conservatives believe that it sweeps all before it.

Posted by: James Byron on Monday, 13 July 2015 at 8:17pm BST

I see nothing courageous about linking LGBT people with paedophiles and serial adulterers (I listened to Mr Tinker's radio interview).
As an Anglican I was appalled that a minister of the Anglican Church could say such things. To be the minister of an Anglican church which serves a university population which will include many LGBT people is even more alarming. As a teacher I would not be allowed to continue teaching in a school if I put forward such a distasteful view. Mr Tinker, who is a graduate of Hull University, should consider his position in my opinion.

Posted by: David Beddow on Wednesday, 15 July 2015 at 5:05pm BST
Post a comment









Remember personal info?

Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.