Re Brother Ivo's article, where he writes, "Dr Martin Luther King Jnr spoke of the. 'paralysis of analysis' and sometimes the pressing needs of the times requires us to unite behind a less than perfect proposition."
I was cheered to be reminded of Dr. King's use of the phrase, paralysis of analysis. It fits the occasion. King also talked about what he called the "myth of time", that things will change if we just wait a hundred years or more. That seems to fit the occasion at hand as well.
I signed the letter, not because I find it a less than perfect instrument. I signed it because it allows me an opportunity, perhaps a very marginal one, to speak some truth to power in what is something an "Anglican curia", a concept that is at odds with the finer, though often messy, traditions of our polity.
The letter represents the kind of thing I would want to say on the floor of a synod dealing with our present crisis.
I'm grateful for the initiative of the authors of the letter, and for those still in harness, I'm grateful for their courage.
The Bishop of Rochester disagrees saying that the Bible and 2,000 years of Christian teaching speaks against gay sex. Not that the letter mentions gay sex...
"Not that the letter mentions gay sex..."
That's my biggest problem with it, Kate. The elephant in the room is the belief that homosexuality is inherently sinful. Until that changes, discrimination will continue, and worse, be masked by platitudes about repentance. Thing will appear to've improved when they haven't. In many ways, this insidious position's worse than open prejudice.
Welby's already expressed repentance for the church's past treatment of gay people, but, likely 'cause he's not junked the belief that homosexuality's a "salvation issue," fails to see that there's anything wrong with the church's current treatment. For him and so many others, "homophobia" is defined narrowly as violence and abuse, with the application of "traditional teaching" exempt.
Evangelicals are always careful to be specific about homosexuality, 'cause they recognize that this is what it all hinges on. Far too many in the affirming camp fudge the issue to build unity and avoid confrontation. I'd rather lose the signature of the equal marriage opposing "Brother Ivo," who talks of the "tactics" of the "LGBTI agenda," than duck confronting the root cause of the thing condemned. In a heartbeat.
Kate:Michael Nazir-Ali is the former Bishop of Rochester, not the current one -he resigned a few years ago, partly because he didn't like the way the church seemed to be going on issues like this. It is a little frustrating that the media give him such a prominent platform.
For clarity, that's the *former* Bishop of Rochester.
"The Bishop of Rochester disagrees saying that the Bible and 2,000 years of Christian teaching speaks against gay sex"
And the Bible condemns female ordination and headship.....1950 years of Christian teaching meant nothing to him ( he ordained dozens of women and appointed the first female Archdeacon in the CofE) and he was also liberal on divorce and remarriage.
So you see you can be contrary with the strictures of St Paul...and Bishop Nazir Ali is a prime example.
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.