Comments: REFORM issues statement about "threat to marriage"

"The Council of Reform today urged the Church of England not to focus exclusively on perpetuating misogyny, but to focus on the much more pressing and significant issue of the threat to homophobia."

Posted by Newfred at Friday, 7 December 2012 at 4:49pm GMT

Ha ha how Very Predictable !

They got in quick and seem to have nothing to contribute about famine, warfare and abuse world wide - but in they come now quick as a flash.

In the providence of the Lord, the whole WB fiasco has paved and smoothed the way for this new news, wonderfully ! Who in the British public and national media will listen to Reform now ? Their homophobic utterance so drowned out by their sexism.

They could just give being mean, for once, and 'rejoice with them that rejoice' !

Posted by Laurence Roberts at Friday, 7 December 2012 at 4:49pm GMT

Whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad.

Posted by Iain McLean at Friday, 7 December 2012 at 5:01pm GMT

On January 1 1863 (almost 100 years ago) the Emancipation Proclamation went into effect. It gave USA citizenship to black Americans whose ancestors had been brought from Africa as chattel. When President Obama's parents married, inter-racial marriage was against the law in half of the states of the USA. In 1967(45 years ago) the supreme court decision in Loving vs Virginia eliminated racial difference as a bar to marriage in all of the states. I have never understood how anyone can hold that to increase the civil rights of some, diminishes those of others. To increase civil rights to those who are marginalized can only be good for everyone. Civil rights regard our civil status of course - then religious bodies can set their own standards for religious recognition and blessings. I'm from the state of Maine, and proud of it, at least on this just past election day. Alleluia.

Posted by Sara MacVane at Friday, 7 December 2012 at 5:11pm GMT

"Significantly, it appears that parliament will leave the crucial and delicate task of defining same-sex consummation to the judiciary. However, when consummation is redefined, marriage and marital breakdown are themselves redefined and accordingly the meaning of marriage will be fundamentally altered for all."

What impressive rhetorical legerdemain! Note how the statement takes "same-sex consummation" and --presto! changes it to redefinition of consummation for ALL couples.

Posted by Bill Dilworth at Friday, 7 December 2012 at 5:17pm GMT

Did it really take them 24 hours to come up with this?

Posted by Richard Ashby at Friday, 7 December 2012 at 5:18pm GMT

I shall be so glad when this legislation is passed (a) so that I can marry my partner and (b) we will no longer be subjected to these nasty little Henny-Penny pronouncements.

Posted by Laurence Cunnington at Friday, 7 December 2012 at 5:22pm GMT

So at the moment, you have to have had full-blown heterosexual sex for adultery to count, but mere oral or anal sex don't count as adultery? No, comrades, we must preserve the right for people to have oral and anal sex outside marriage without it counting as adultery! This will preserve the traditional understanding of marriage for the betterment of our culture.

What a bizarre, weird and sex-obsessed response to gay marriage! My marriage will not be affected in any way by gay couples being allowed to be married. And anyway, isn't this Reform, who don't actually believe in divorce?

Surreal. And as for 'the preservation of marriage as it has been traditionally understood throughout history and across cultures' presumably that means that we'll be back to 12-year olds, women as property, no cross-cultural marriage, and all the other things that we had to 're-define' marriage to get rid of?

Posted by JF at Friday, 7 December 2012 at 5:28pm GMT

I find the obsession with the mechanics and necessity of 'consummation' profoundly distasteful and have to ask whether this reflects the obsession with sexual functions observed so often in those who preach and agitate against gay people and their civil rights.

The next few months are going to be really nasty as the conservative evangelicals fight their loosing battle, the looser will not be gltb people but the churches who will be tarred with their homophobia as they have been charged with misogyny after the women bishops fiasco.

Posted by Richard Ashby at Friday, 7 December 2012 at 5:29pm GMT

If you can't scare 'em with women bishops, scare 'em with the thought of gay marriage. Horrors!

"In law, marriage is a sexual relationship." -- REFORM statement

Once again, conservatives see gay people solely in terms of genitalia. In law, marriage is far more than a sexual relationship between two people. At first, I thought REFORM was confused about the meaning of consummating a marriage, as in the old joke "the marriage was consummated at the altar". But then I realized they did know what they were talking about.
To conservative Christians: When you see women or gay people as more than their sexual organs, as full human beings, and react accordingly, maybe us liberals will treat you likewise.
To paraphrase my local now-retired US congressional representative, people who think two men or two women getting married threatens their marriage don't need more church canons or secular laws -- they need counseling!

Posted by peterpi - Peter Gross at Friday, 7 December 2012 at 5:30pm GMT

Wow. The theological illogic is matched by the strategic stupidity.

People who fail to pick their battles run the risk of losing them all.

Posted by Jeremy at Friday, 7 December 2012 at 5:49pm GMT

History and cultures? How many wives and what methods of divorce are they choosing, I wonder, as the norm.

Posted by Commentator at Friday, 7 December 2012 at 6:00pm GMT

It's always the same. Racism, misogyny, homophobia. Each one can be supported and debunked by the Bible...

In the 1860's in the US, an Episcopal priest wrote a polemic showing the Bible's support for slavery, another Episcopal priest wrote a polemic debunking the other. While TEC was arguing theology, the Quakers were smuggling slaves out of the South to freedom via the Underground Railroad that they set up.

While the CoE works out whether or not to institutionalize misogyny (and make itself irrelevant on social justice), or to support homophobia in its churches (making itself further irrelevant), the Quakers, the Unitarians, liberal Jews, will be marrying LGBT people.

In our diocese, the bishop allows each parish to discern whether or not to do same sex blessings. This may not be a perfect solution, but people can choose where to worship, and it gives people time.

I pray for the CoE as it wrestles with these issues.

Posted by Cynthia at Friday, 7 December 2012 at 8:43pm GMT

"The Council of Reform today urged the Church of England not to focus exclusively on perpetuating misogyny, but to focus on the much more pressing and significant issue of the threat to homophobia." Bravo/Brava! Well Said! I am ashamed to be associated with a church that makes provision for the perpetuation of this sort of blot on the Gospel.

Posted by James at Friday, 7 December 2012 at 10:23pm GMT

The Reform Covenant states.....

"The rightness of sexual intercourse in heterosexual marriage, and the wrongness of such activity both outside it and in all its homosexual forms."

Please note how they leave out divorce and re-marriage. That is because they cannot agree what the Bible means on this!

So how can they tell gays what to do, when they have no coherent teaching for heterosexuals?

Posted by Robert Ian Williams at Saturday, 8 December 2012 at 7:39am GMT

If their proposed national day of prayer is as effective as the decade of evangelism, bring it on!

Posted by Richard Ashby at Saturday, 8 December 2012 at 10:45am GMT
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.