If language is the primary battleground in culture wars. Together for the Church of England appears to be engaged in a full on assault on the mainstream Christian Church and any possibility of unity. But I guess we already knew that. The English language however evolved out of the everyday use of the English bible, translated using everyday language, so perhaps that’s the place to start discussions about human sexuality. It’s really not that difficult to understand.
“The English language however evolved out of the everyday use of the English bible, translated using everyday language”
Really? I always thought that the AV (which I presume is the English Bible to which AC refers) was written in somewhat self-consciously archaic language. I wouldn’t want to underplay its cultural significance, but there’s a lot of English language – some of it religious – developing before 1611. I know St Paul used the AV, but….
English discourse was and still is certainly very much influenced by the AV, though some of the famous phrases – ‘powers that be’/ ‘my cup runneth over’ – come, I understand, from the earlier work of Tyndale and Coverdale
Your characterisation of Together for the Church of England is wide of the mark. The organisation works for the unity of the church and the full inclusion of all. It does not encourage church’s to limit their parish share so that those it disagrees with cannot be financially supported. It does not promote irregular ordinations. It does not seek alternative forms of episcopal oversight. These are all policies and actions of The Alliance, which looks increasingly like a church within a church that cannot tolerate any deviation from its own particular worldview. In July 2026 Helen King, Vice-Chair of Together,… Read more »
When you say “believing and faithful persons” and apply that to a requirement that church members must “live with difference”, I can see a very pertinent issue there, what is a “believing and faithful person”? I think you will find that from a conservative point of view, if people do not believe that all sexual relationships outside of marriage between one man and one woman are contrary to God’s will, then those people are not “believing and faithful”. Where I personally start to struggle following the discussions on this subject is that first of all the liberal perspective is that… Read more »
since feelings of love and mutual consent can occur without marriage for anyone, what then makes marriage relevant for anyone? I feel I am extremely unqualified to respond to this question (I am but a survivor of divorce!), but here goes: From a Biblical POV, I would start with “it is not good for [a human being] to live alone”: that God made MOST of us to bond with another (a bonding that goes beyond mere feelings of love and mutual consent in any particular interpersonal action). This bonding is variously adapted over time and cultures (some might argue that… Read more »
Thank you, for the interesting reply. However, I was not really asking what marriage is per se. I was asking why, if mutual consent and desirable feelings between two people are the definition of a non-sinful sexually involved relationship, and this applies regardless of male/female or both men/both women in the pairing, therefore marriage is unecessary to avoid sexual sin, then why would anybody get married? It appears to become an unecessary, stressful, expensive move, probably not worth the hassle. Personally, I think this way of thinking is far too removed from what the church used to believe about the… Read more »
Respectfully, perhaps you’re overly focused, Miss CR, on the mere “avoidance of sin”?
I believe God made us for our mutual JOY, not merely to “avoid sin”!
I think this way of thinking is far too removed from what the church used to believe about the significance of marriage for Christians, and too close to modern secular ideas about the matter.
Hmm. Is this where we get into qualifications for our “ways of thinking”? [Life-long Episcopalian here, Masters and Doctorate from a theological seminary . . . but I’m sure I’m one of the less accredited commenters on TA! ;-/]
By The way Nic, the person you are responding to is not the Adrian Clarke from General Synod, I am. I’m not sure who this Adrian Clarke is but I keep bringing these comments to the attention of the moderators of this site
My goodness we live in strange times. Open debate about public scandals are shut down on the grounds of impropriety.
Yet we are apparently happy to engage in public discussion on matters of intimacy which every previous generation would have recognised as a subject that should be the entirely private concern of couples who are married.
I find myself echoing the words of Rowland in a previous thread. Not words I ever expected to say !
Is this topic really a matter for public comment ?
Purely in interests of accuracy, I don’t recall using those words. A better summary would be Lord Asquith’s “wait and see”. You will be relieved to know that I’m not commenting about Helen King’s articles! I have read both.
My recollection is that you were perhaps a little more emphatic than you suggest, but your general point is well made.
I do not presume to know your vintage but I guess, like me, you recall the days when the social goods of decorum and discretion were understand.
Back then people made all the same mistakes, of course. However I doubt the vulgarisation of culture and discourse since those days is really progress.
Since apparently it’s OK to return to this topic, I do not believe you understood the objections being raised. They had nothing to do with innocence or guilt about the tragic death of a man; or ‘wait and see’ just what is said about that.
No, they had to do with facts already in the public domain for which there was no need for waiting about something else.
And, I too abstain from commenting on essays on the proper language to use about this or that sex act — as if this would move the needle somehow.
The facts may be in the public domain, but the elephants remain in shadows. i am hoping those elephants come into the light following various investigations (including Ghent).
It is not looking to control the press.The ‘free press’ has failed. I once clicked on a nasty social media post about the case, and I have since been flooded with similar recommendations.What are you suggestions for action following Savi’s recent article about the far right?My main concern is for truth.My least concern is arguing with you.Of course a national independent enquiry may be redundant given all the other inquiries, but so be it.The voice of the majority needs to be heard. Paticularly the voice of the Black community. Of course, it is strange for you to defend the so-called… Read more »
I’m afraid we must ‘wait and see’. ‘Facts’ in the public domain must be factually accurate to merit respect and serious consideration. We now have to respect the editors’ decision to close this debate. I have no doubt that it will reopen in due course, although not necessarily in a religious context, nor hence on TA.
Just to be clear, you did not judge the matter “closed” as you yourself re-entered with: “Purely in interests of accuracy, I don’t recall using those words. A better summary would be Lord Asquith’s “wait and see”. You will be relieved to know that I’m not commenting about Helen King’s articles! I have read both.” And of course whether facts in the public domain are “factually accurate or not” is not for you to foreclose on, by fiat. Let us respect the generous flow of discourse without any hindrance or declarations from on high. TA has generally been good at… Read more »
I’m afraid that I don’t accept this, or the sophistry employed based on my very mild correction of what I am claimed to have said on the previous, now closed, thread. It was not I who reopened that matter. This had ceased to be primarily a subject for TA which I tookto be the reason for Simon Sarmiento’s decision.
You are of course entitled to your opinion, which is why a free flow of comments and positions is better than calling for moratoria. In this instance and more generally.
Do you really believe that until “this generation” discussion on “matters of intimacy” was reckoned properly to take place only between married couples? Perhaps I’ve misunderstood you – perhaps you mean that what consenting adults “get up to” is no concern of anyone else’s, and the Church should mind its own business. In which case I’m inclined to agree. But once the Church sets out to legislate for what kind of hanky-panky, and between whom, is acceptable, some agreement on the terms of the debate is surely vital? I am currently reading the splendid new book on Babylon by Lloyd… Read more »
as you linked this issue as part of your argument in the previous post this is the best rebuttal of Biggar and your other fellow travellers arguments I could find.
Thanks for this link.
A discussion on Project Spire deserves its own thread. I will set up a separate article for this purpose early next week, so that comments about that are not intermingled with comments on the two items linked in this article.
Matters of moral principle are rarely, even if they concern the principles of individual behaviour, out of season for discussion. Matters of actual individual conduct or behaviour are sometimes thought to benefit from a moment of reflection and discretion. There isn’t a paradox there, I think
I was replying to your remarks about the permission of open public discussion of intimacy, a term of abstract moral discussion, vs the closure of debate on matters of individual behaviour in the name of awaiting more information
The Kikuyu also practised clitoridectomy, so maybe not the greatest of role models for the C of E…! But the training in ngweko is indeed a strong contrast with talking about cake icing.
What an extraordinary question? Is FGM one of those things which nice Anglicans shouldn’t think about, let alone (perhaps because God did forbid), talk about?
I do not understand what you are objecting to, Peter. Are you saying I am ‘allowed’ to use the word clitoridectomy but not to mention Mike Pilavachi’s much-mentioned cake icing image? In the original blog posts, I am quoting from published documents. Anything in “ “ quotes is a direct quotation rather than a use of ‘ ‘ scare quotes. I am quoting from documents published on church websites.
Yes, it is shocking to see Kenyatta’s advcacy of clitoridectomy – it was not that long ago. It maybe brings some balance to discussions on colonialism and the benefits of Christain ideals. There were other tribes (Ibeso) which did not practise that, but still had similar practices. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/cd6d/1a5e7dcfa34930f5c7eb018781024bcf3c76.pdf It is all a bit gruesome. But there is clarity over the language. There seems to be little mention of homosexual men or women, but I regard talk that they did not exist as being a bit fanciful. In my era of growing up, nothing below the waist was ever mentioned. Maybe… Read more »
Last edited 20 days ago by Nigel Goodwin
Gareth
20 days ago
I honestly don’t know what Helen realistically expects to get out of this.
Conservatives aren’t going to accept her position this side of heaven.
It doesn’t look like the deadlock in Synod is going to be broken any time soon.
So isn’t a negotiated settlement to split a better way forward where both sides can move forward?
Flesh this out a bit more. I wonder which raison d’etre could possibly mean that it’s better to duck heads in the sand than face reality both on this issue and on the place of the CofE in modern England. If it’s some idea that the CofE is meant to be a national church that ship sailed a very long time ago with 700k attending weekly. If we really must argue that the CofE is a national church despite this, the CofE should be a church that encourages people to turn from sin and trust in Christ rather than a… Read more »
At some point what you write will become so blindingly obvious that the ever shrinking population worshipping in the Church of England will have to face reality. It was one thing to hammer home the idea of a national church under the monarch in Elizabeth’s day, with parties at theological distance from one another obliged to trim their sails. We are in an entirely different universe at present. Numerically, culturally, theologically, practically.
The raison d’être I had in mind was the holding together of warring factions within the church, for the sake of unity, which, imperfect as it may be, may be understood firstly in spiritual terms of the third part of Jesus’ High Priestly prayer in John 17:20-23, and secondly in historical terms of the wars of the Reformation, with the Church of England maintaining an identity (again, imperfect as it may be) as both catholic and reformed. This identity has been maintained to this day by Anglicans who, while they may personally be more catholic, or reformed, or indeed liberal,… Read more »
I don’t think anyone thinks the CofE should encourage people to continue in sin, there are just disagreements about what things are sinful, as there have been throughout Christian history and about matters as weighty as taking up arms, executing criminals or enslaving people. Somehow the church managed to hold together through disagreements on all of these yet somehow some in the church recognising that in Christ there is neither male nor female is a deal breaker.
The text is crystal clear on this, it’s also clear it’s a salvation issue.
The arguments haven’t changed at all since J.I Packer left the Anglican Church of Canada in 2002.
No matter how much Helen wants to dwell on unimportant matters like what the word intimacy means, that reality remains unchanged in the mind of traditionalists and conservatives.
Surely the choice is keep banging heads against the same brick wall or go separate ways.
Like every single other church split right down the middle on this has.
Crystal clear? Let me offer you a few quotes from a leading conservative theologian on this issue from a book published twelve years ago. ‘The question of homosexuality defies simple answers. [Furthermore] we all have biases and presuppositions that we bring to the text. There is no such thing as an unbiased reading of the Bible.” (pp10,19) ‘You may find it shocking, but most scholars who have written books about homosexuality in the last forty years have concluded that the Bible does not condemn consensual, monogamous, same-sex relations.” (p23) (Preston Sprinkle. People to Be Loved: Why Homosexuality is Not Just an… Read more »
Gareth, I spent the best part of two years posting regularly on this site making regular appeals for a settlement through differentiation. It must have been wearisome for the moderators and with the benefit of hindsight a waste of my time. What became obvious was that the bishops will not entertain any such meaningful structural accommodation because they look back on the settlement over the ordination of women as a fundamental strategic and moral failure. They have no intention of repeating what they see as that mistake. An orderly parting of the ways is just not going to happen, Gareth.… Read more »
It’s not “every single other church” though, is it? There remain Presbyterians and Episcopalians in Scotland (and indeed congregations) who don’t agree with equal marriage or having clergy who are gay (or indeed female) yet have somehow managed to accept that others in their church disagree.
Stamping your feet and insisting that it’s “clear” you’re right is pretty meaningless. If you insist that the only way forward is schism then I’m sure someone can show you the door.
It’s pretty much every church with a 50/50 down the middle split. You can find no shortage of examples on the other side of the pond. Irrespective of characterising it as stamping feet ultimately the numbers don’t seem to be massively shifting to permit significant change. A clear way where that can happen is if there’s a parting of ways and both sides get to move forward. Otherwise it just looks like people have fun banging their heads against the same brick wall. Repeating the same thing and expecting different results seems to be the definition of foolishness to me.… Read more »
“ Repeating the same thing and expecting different results seems to be the definition of foolishness to me.”
As famously said Voltaire, Albert Einstein, Mahatma Gandhi, Mae West etc. etc.
I see little evidence of a 50-50 split though. I see something more like a 90-10 division! My personal experience across a number of churches in the Church of England and a wide range of churchmanship is that the overwhelming majority support the “progressive”, “inclusive” position. That may well not reflect the position of the leaders of their churches, and consequently they may be wary of speaking out. But in private, or in other forums their views are clear. Even I was personally somewhat surprised, for example, that the PCC of which I am a member unanimously voted recently to… Read more »
I specifically said across “a wide range of churchmanship”, probably outside my own parish they would mostly be described as conservative evangelical in e.g. their theology of the atonement. I accept your criticism of anecdotal evidence. However, my point is perhaps that numbers in synod reflect a level of commitment and organization (and that’s true on all sides) over and above that of ordinary churchgoers who have better things to do in life that stand for their deanery synod! Another anecdote: the parish of which I am a member was a “resolution parish”, prohibiting women from exercising any priestly ministry… Read more »
I had a similar experience when helping to draft our parish profile. I suggested a rather vague wording about being willing to explore the possibilities offered by PLF. To my surprise, the PCC adopted it unanimously.
Gareth, you asked me to ‘flesh this out a bit more’, which I did. While you have not acknowledged my response to your request, you have responded to Jo B’s comment on the same subject, so I am replying to that instead. Jo refers to Galatians 3.28, and you reply that ‘The text is crystal clear on this, it’s also clear it’s a salvation issue.’ If you are referring to the same text, I would concur that it clearly states ‘there is no longer male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.’ I might also agree that… Read more »
‘This Synod recognises that there is a range of legitimate views on the issue of slave-holding in the contemporary church. These include views holding that slave-holding is compatible with Christian discipleship, and views holding that it is incompatible.’ Would such a motion be acceptable today? Would it have been acceptable in the C18/19 had the Synod existed then? If the C of E had formalised any such position at any stage, might it not have become a membership deal-breaker for some Anglicans, at some point in time? All sorts of views, opinions and errors can co-exist ‘on the ground’ within… Read more »
the CofE should be a church that encourages people to turn from sin and trust in Christ rather than a church that encourages people to continue in sin.
To turn from the sin of homophobic judgment? COME LORD JESUS!
Tony Bellows
20 days ago
Helen writes: In these reports, the language of intimacy also features in regard to friendship, but the line is a thin one; sharing a bed when a person has night terrors can be part of an “intimate friendship” but not if this is done “repeatedly” It is interesting that she sees sharing a bed continually (but no more than that is seen as “intimacy”, because a look at historical poverty, or for that matter with poverty in other countries, sharing a bed to sleep in is a necessity because there is no room for separate beds. I hate to say… Read more »
Couldn’t agree more, Tony. But that sentence starts ‘In these reports’. It’s not what I think, it’s what the current position, as expressed in tribunal reports/abuse case reviews, appears to be. You are right that this is a very recent feature of some societies!
You are so right, Tony Bellows, about the “modern, middle-class, luxury”. My father (who fought in the Second World War as a very young man) had lived with his mother, brother and sister, in two rooms of a small house. I lived till I was 17 in a house with no bathroom and as a small child regularly shared a bed with my Welsh grandmother and aunts when visiting their houses. Can still remember how cosy and safe it felt even though I was invariably too hot sinking in to a squishy feather mattress with scratchy blankets.
Brenda
20 days ago
I would have preferred it if the PMM had stood as originally worded, but without obfuscation as to the meaning of ‘intimacy’. This is not a matter of culture wars for me; it is a matter of knowing where I stand with the Church. In some ways, I wish Synod could have an honest discussion about same sex ‘sex’ and sin, as that’s what lies at the heart of the matter. Instead, we tiptoe through the tulips, leaving those of us who long for a word of acceptance hanging on for that one little crumb. It’s a lonely old place… Read more »
Savi Hensman
20 days ago
Perhaps the level of ‘intimacy’ and whether it might be appropriate depends to some extent on the context of words or actions, including the relationship between (or among) the people involved? So what might seem unexceptional between two single people in their 20s on a dancefloor, surrounded by others, might be far more questionable if a teacher or youth leader is in a room alone with a young person in their care? Likewise siblings sharing a bed if there are several people trying to get a night’s rest in a house or flat with not many beds, or two friends… Read more »
Fr Dean
19 days ago
Heavens! Professor King is willing to go where others fear to tread. As an academic she uses a lot of words to describe the absurdity of the CofE’s position on hanky panky. We all know that the bishops don’t expect civil partners to conclude the evening with a chaste kiss as they switch off the television and retire to separate bedrooms. There’s that famous video clip of a young cleric live streaming himself saying Morning Prayer in his study during the pandemic, when suddenly his civil partner strides into the room not wearing so much as a stitch of clothing.… Read more »
David Runcorn
19 days ago
Thank you for these two frank, articulate and intelligent reflections on the use and mis-sue of language when discussing expressions of human love and desire.
Mark Bennet
19 days ago
The main problem with ambiguous or euphemistic language is when it is used to conceal a double standard or power play. For example, male pronouns for the generic human, which revert to referring to male human (male God) more often than is warranted by the sources, and in accord with the interpreter’s inherited norms (one might even say prejudices). This is also in play in the discourse around sexuality, sexual expression, affection, close friendship and intimacy. We end up having dishonest and unhelpful conversations which avoid us having to face our self-deceptions because we will not be clear. We can… Read more »
Naughtius Maximus
18 days ago
O dear! I thought this area of the internet might not be continually going back to homosexuality. I was clearly due to be disappointed. I had thought what St Paul had told us about it in 1 Corinthians 6 vs 9, and that was pretty clear. But then he basically said that women in the church should sit and shut up. We seem to have advanced from there. I do find it strange that “The love that dare not speak its name” has for 40 years or so been screaming it from the rooftops. But there we are. There is… Read more »
Naughtius Maximus. Your prostitute comment is perceptive. Yes, these people were often not regarded negatively within their contemporary culture. Perhaps because the word commonly translated as “prostitute” in our modern English Christian bible is often “kedeshim” or “kedesher”, with a meaning of holy man or woman. It refers to the widespread cult practise of the erotic or sexual being used within a religious context to facilitate transcendence and connection with the divine. This was accepted practise in many of the cultures represented in much of the early Hebrew scriptures, but later Christian scholars rejected such a thing, and choose to… Read more »
NRSV I Kings 15.12 and II Kings 23.7 ‘Male Temple Prostitutes’
NRSVUE ‘Illicit Priests’
I don’t think it was ‘later scholars’ who found the practices of the Kedeshim problematic.
I think it was Asa, Josiah and the writer of Kings.
Albanian, thanks for the response. You are right that the NRSVUE (UE=Updated Edition) has updated the translation, but I would still challenge the use of “illicit” which does not appear in the Hebrew text. You are also right that Asa, Josiah etc found these customs to be problematic, which is why I wrote “much of the EARLY Hebrew scriptures”. I would argue that we have in the early Hebrew Scriptures, texts from less patriarchal times when gender variance and eroticism within worship were widely accepted. And we have echoes of those customs in the text if we pay attention, and… Read more »
Thanks Simon, I think I disagree with your hermeneutical approach to scripture so profoundly that taking discussion further on that front will be tiresome to us both. But I am interested in the implications of our assessments of the Kedeshim for our current discontents. It seems that your positive view of the practices of the Kedeshim (as you understand their activities) rather undermines the proposed limiting of affirmation of same-sex sexual relationships to those which are monogamous, faithful and permanent. If the OT (properly understood, according to your lights) does teach us that transient, widespread and perhaps commercial same-sex erotic… Read more »
Hi Albanian, Thanks for the response. I agree, perhaps we are so far apart in our understanding that further debate on this platform would be frustrating, but I suspect we would enjoy a conversation face-to-face over a coffee or a pint of beer. But just one final point, have a look at the paper posted by Nigel Goodwin below, especially the section labelled “Spiritually driven same-sex relationships”. https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/34452 It is exactly the same issue as we were discussing. Gender variant or same-sex active men being involved in spiritual practises such as healing, shamanship, divination etc But these traditional practises sometimes… Read more »
What Judah actually tells Hirah isn’t recorded. Meanings of kdesha and zonah overlap, the words appearing together in Hosea 4.14. Hirah is a Canaanite, so he’s familiar with kdeshot. Perhaps the same woman could be a zonah on the street and a kdesha in the cult. In any case all the references are critical of both forms of conduct, and the men who make use of them. It’s more than a stretch to claim some kind of scriptural endorsement for these roles. Actually it’s calling evil good, and claiming that the good opponents (kings, prophets etc.) of kdeshic abomination are… Read more »
“I do find it strange that “The love that dare not speak its name” has for 40 years or so been screaming it from the rooftops.”
Screaming, “Get off our necks.” Ending the latter ends the former, see?
Naughtius Maximus
18 days ago
Final bit before I ran out of space:-
I think there is no easy answer- is there ever? But maybe one is that the church, armed with our CURRENT knowledge, should politely and humbly withdraw from this area? Maybe we should say, “It’s up to the individual, their make up, their relationship to God” and not for us to pontificate, censure, make rules, induce guilt.
And let’s just follow Jesus’s summary of the Law. We can’t go far wrong then- surely?
Kate Keates
18 days ago
I think the main point is being lost: if people use euphemisms and evasions in church communities they are being predisposed to using euphemisms and evasions in prayer – or worse, avoiding the subject entirely. I say that because it was something God recently taught me: my prayers were exemplar in their respectability. I was sanitising things for God, which is the sin of pride. I take – and took in my confession – full responsibility for my actions but I was aware it happened because church communities, liturgy, worship and sermons, sanitise language, and in so doing attempt to… Read more »
Simon Dawson
18 days ago
Helen King is right to try to move the debate away from sex towards intimacy and love. It might help is we paid attention to what gay scholars have been saying. For over 150 years now gay scholars have been arguing that there is more to homosexuality than the sex. Karl Ulrichs has been described as the world’s first out gay campaigner, and the first man to write academically about homosexuality (in 1860s Germany). He rejected the word “homosexual” precisely because it risked linking gayness only to the sexual act. He preferred the term “Uranian” or “Uranism”, derived from Greek… Read more »
hidden sister
18 days ago
I cannot agree with Helen more when she observes the variety of expressions that may be applied to the term intimacy. It’s too complex to be pinned down as if everyone expresses intimacy the same. In our sadly over-sexualised cultures, I feel we can lose sight of romantic love and tender care. It is entirely possible to be a devoted wife, and a sexual woman, and yet – like Elena Duglioli – to express intimacy through physical closeness, kissing, sleeping arm in arm… without any desire for insertion, erotic climax, or genital love-making. Devotion is what matters.
It is entirely possible to be a devoted wife, and a sexual woman, and yet – like Elena Duglioli – to express intimacy through physical closeness, kissing, sleeping arm in arm… without any desire for insertion, erotic climax, or genital love-making.
Absolutely! But the shared expressions of intimacy—and whether or not they include any of the latter aspects listed—should be up to the spouses involved, and no one else (least of all a synod!).
hidden sister
18 days ago
Two wonderful articles. They just go to show how we should not try to police one another’s expressions of intimacy, but to look to the love and devotion inherent in them, and pray God for grace and flourishing.
hidden sister
18 days ago
Professor King wrote: “It’s interesting how ‘ambiguous’ can become a dirty word when used in a Synod debate. The history of Christianity demonstrates instead that ambiguity has often been a deliberate choice, made in order to keep the maximum number of sheep within the fold… Is the Eucharist a commemoration or a sacrifice? The English Reformation found ways around the question; the first Prayer Book has famously been described as a “masterpiece … in studied ambiguity”, with both conservatives and reformers being able to use it. Like it or not, our current liturgy continues to hold this ambiguity, allowing worshippers to believe different… Read more »
I agree but would go further. One of the effects of Jesus teaching in parables is that the approach inherently embeds ambiguity. Also, as believers, we don’t all have the same calling and what is appropriate for some of us may be inappropriate for others. I would prefer a greater emphasis on teaching people how to exercise choice than a rules based faith some prefer.
How absolutely beautiful. Thank you, hidden sister.
Naughtius Maximus
18 days ago
“Would love your thoughts. Please comment”. Well, I’ve tried to but someone clearly doesn’t like them. Unless they disappeared into the luminiferous ether. But as it said they (for there were two) were awaiting approval and now have gone, it seems not all thoughts are welcome. And mine contained no profanity. No point in staying here for a reasoned debate, but I shall be at church as normal tomorrow am. And at 6pm too.
It is my common experience that posts will often be processed quickly during the week, but there will often be significantly longer delays over the weekend.
I would imagine that such a state is entirely understandable.
The level of control here is positively Soviet. Contrast Psephizo where comments appear at once and all comers are welcome. The censorship here is the chief problem.
James, I have been reading TA for a number of years now for both research and for my own interest. I cannot recall a time where comments were closed , perhaps during ICSA to avoid legal issues but never in the last few years. Having looked at the comment section attached to the Biggar article on the Arday allegations many long term posters found the tone of the comments from the Neo Conservative side incredibly troubling. That the admins closed down that thread was both necessary and deeply needed as the death of Jason Arday was a tragedy. Some of… Read more »
All comers are not welcome at Psephizo. Yes, comments are open, but anyone even slightly progressive who comments there risks immediately being flocked by a dozen people, each firing twelve rounds of scripture from the hip. I stopped commenting there because, frankly, I had enough stress in my life. What’s that line from Burns about being able to ‘see ourselves as others see us’? Of course conservatives see Psephizo as a welcoming site; they’re welcome there. Reminds me of something a friend of mine used to say: When churches claim ‘we’re a friendly church’, the question you need to ask… Read more »
If a church website has a mass of happy smiling faces, I know it is not for me! I’m trying to remember the verse ‘Jesus smiled’. Just been checking churches associated with the primary school my grandson is about to attend tomorrow – shock horror, one is Gafcon associated, apparently the ministry of women is to make tea and support the family. or, as the website says, women’s ministry is “To realise the potential of the Mothers Union as a global ministry to promote patterns of biblical marriage and family life.” They are a Renew church under the Bishop of… Read more »
Maybe I am an oldie, but I expect school teachers, politicians and clergy to look serious. But I also expect sermons to have one good joke somewhere.
Unfortunately, photos of clergy seem to be of smiley faces and there are no jokes.
I am being slightly serious.
In my day jobs in private businesses, it is those with a smiley charming exterior who harbour the most vicious inclinations. Stern but fair bosses are fine. Is it different in the church?
‘Tears and smiles like us He knew’ is the verse that comes to mind.
Oh, I see, not that kind of verse. But a Jesus who never smiled – or laughed at one of Peter’s jokes – would have been a strange fellow indeed.
Indeed. Some here may not realise that some of my comments are to provoke laughter or prick pomposity. Maybe we also take Jesus’ parables too seriously – the accountant who wrote off all his master’s debts? Rolling in the aisles. The rich man told to sell everything? Waiting for a beating by his wife?
I must check which verses Matthew Henry classified as jokes.
The Mothers’ Union is especially important in the African Anglican Church, which is predominantly Gafcon now. I had a friend who was active in the leadership of the Mothers’ Union in England. I don’t know how strong that organisation is now; perhaps it has declined because there are far fewer children in Church of England congregations than there used to be.
There is an important distinction to be made. Ian Paul is a courageous and intelligent commentator and he publishes much serious theological reflection on Psephizo.
The comments section is obviously a different matter.
My advice would be visit the site and read his articles but steer well clear of the comments
I don’t find Ian’s pugnacious style very helpful. I’m also aware that there may be some cultural and temperamental differences between us. For instance, when he posts links to provocative articles on his Facebook page and then tags people he wants to argue with, I just find that rude (especially since, if people don’t have their privacy settings ramped up, those tagged articles will then appear on their own Facebook pages whether they want them there or not).
If newcomers tell me that their last church was very friendly, I reply that they’ll probably find it the same here. When they tell me they’re trying somewhere new because their last congregation wasn’t welcoming to them, I wonder, but don’t say so, whether their experience will be repeated.
Tim,
Do you think we evangelicals are ‘welcome’ in TA? Of course we’re not. I was referring to the heavy moderation and delay in posting comments from evangelicals. Some of mine have never appeared although I have never defamed anyone or used offensive language, while standard liberal views are quickly approved. That’s why Psephizo is far better in encouraging debate, through an open comments policy. You don’t like being challenged? Nobody does. But liberals are also free to comment there and are *never censored. That’s the difference.
Perhaps you Tim are the kind of ‘evangelical’ whom James does not think to actually be an evangelical, but whom the TA community (in general) are keen to welcome as an evangelical.
You are more liberal than James. (I know you will object to the label). You are saying you are never censored. James’ point is that liberals are not censored on this site. Hence you prove his point.
To be clear, I don’t think censorship is the right term, but we know what James means.
Forgive me, Tim, but I am not “going round the houses” again over who is and is not evangelical. James’ meaning is, again, clear
My TA experience is similar to yours, however I think the editors are entitled to have a “general view” on matters.
They are clearly not conservative evangelicals, but they will post comments from other perspectives.
They give considerable amounts of time on a voluntary basis to running the site. It would be a bit much to expect them to be simply neutral administrators without opinion or perspective.
Mostly, you criticise us for being happy, clapping, wearing jeans, playing guitars and using abbreviated names – all of which you could find by going to an Ed Sheeran concert.
Exactly! Why should people listen to the fundamentalist ramblings of a grinning minister called Rick when they could be better entertained by a guitarist called Ed.
Singer-songwriter. That’s his forte. Even Wikipedia gets that right; it barely mentions his guitar playing, but its very first sentence is ‘Edward Christopher Sheeran (/ˈʃɪərən/SHEER-ən; born 17 February 1991) is an English singer-songwriter.’
If you’re going to use pop culture references, at least bother to get them right.
It’s worth pointing out that I don’t feel particularly censored here despite coming here with a particularly conservative evangelical bent.
I find that people are pretty patient with me particularly given I’m not attending a CofE church at this point and I’m very much looking in from the outside.
I can’t imagine anything more inappropriate or incorrect about TA which has an extraordinarily generous and tolerant editorship. They aren’t, of course, obliged to publish anything which is potentially libellous, and are wise not to, but reading practically any thread shows extremes of opinions (sometimes expressed in quite offensive language) freely published here.
Martin Hughes
18 days ago
I think that intimacy is the opposite of reserve. Someone intimate with me mentally or intellectually knows my thoughts without concealment on my part and is, if having interest in the relevant matters, free to discuss them. Someone intimate with me physically knows my body without concealment and is, if sexual feelings are present, drawn to caress me – such is common usage, I think. Of course anyone in any discussion is permitted, if being clear about it, to state a personal definition of any word in use. I don’t see that we are able to solve moral or factual… Read more »
My thinking on a Monday morning? I agree with much of what Maximus said, which surprised me. I kind of assume Helen wrote the articles with a smile, partly to show how ridiculous we all are, and also how ridiculous sex is – a kind of reductio ab adsurbum. Isn;t the important part respect rather than physical acts? I had a friend a very long time ago who went to confession because he felt he had sinned by touching (consensually) a female friend’s private parts (being euphemistic again). It seems so ridiculous looking back. I don’t think he ever went… Read more »
What a strange article. Most of what it describes as ‘same-sex marriage between females’ has nothing to do with sexual intimacy but is about procuring a second wife when the first can’t bear children. And I didn’t see anything on the most famous (or notorious) instance of African homosexuality, the Kabaka and the page boys of Uganda. A serious lack of critical judgment in this article.
It was just something I came across, there is no doubt other literature which provides different or wider perspectives. I saw it more as a myth-busting and showing how complex and hetergenous it all is. i was aware of Kabaka, king of Buganda, there were many martyrs who were burnt, I hadn’t noticed it wasn’t mentioned in the article. So, at certain times and in certain places, people were killed for not carrying out homosexual acts (or maybe strictly not renoucing their Christianity), in other times and places people are killed for carrying out homosexual acts. Plus there was some… Read more »
It’s not a very accurate article, though, Nigel. Buganda isn’t ‘now Uganda’, it’s the largest of the four kingdoms that make up Uganda. The idea that Mwanga was viewed as an African hero post-independence in 1962 is to miss the point that the post-independence Obote I regime exiled the Kabaka of the day, Edward Mutesa II, Mwanga’s grandson; and the kabaka and kingdom of Buganda were eventually restored by Musevoni in 1993 following the overthrow of Obote II. There are no roads in Kampala named after Mwanga, but Apollo Kaggwar Road is still there, together with roads named after Ugandan… Read more »
Thanks. I know nothing about the topic, as is obvious, just trying to expose the complexities. What I do not like is the idea of Africa and African opinion and African culture being a homogenous whole. ‘White people think this’ is as bad as ‘African people think that’.
And as in Europe, ethical and religious developments are bound up in the tide of human history and difficult to separate out. Ingrams’ 1960 book ‘Uganda’ concludes
‘the moment of truth will come when the people of Uganda feel they have a unity of purpose and can be a nation together. That will be the beginning of another story and neither they nor we can tell what it will be‘.
It doesn’t look remotely ‘happy clappy’ to me. Not a drum-kit in sight, and I bet that not a single member of that great throng is named ‘Dave’ or ‘Andy’.
In fact one of the Uganda martyrs, St Andrew Kaggwa, is the patron saint of drummers, and Namirembe Cathedral used to have drums rather than bells to announce services.
This might provide a bit more detail about what was going on. It is an article by the anthropologist Evans Pritchard about the “Boy Wives” culture of the Azande, not a long way from Uganda in time or geographic distance. https://www.greek-love.com/index.php/sub-saharan-africa/boy-wives-azande-sudan-pederasty In a culture where women were scarce it was common and accepted for young men to form companionship relationships which would have many benefits: companionship, sexual satisfaction, mutual assistance etc. This was widespread across the world. Sometimes these were informal “friends with benefits ” relationships (Marsh Arabs as described by Wilfred Thesiger, or late Victorian working class Britain as… Read more »
Edward Carpenter is a hero of mine. I think someone said in a recent thread that we gay people have been banging on about gay issues for forty years. In fact the first gay campaigns started in 1864 with Karl Ulrichs, and Edward Carpenter did his writing 1894-1911. He had a lot of good things to say, which are still relevant
It was Carpenter who first pointed out the homophobic translation problem, and we have still not put that right over 100 years later.
Thanks Simon, I don’t know much about Sudan, but it’s useful to consider Nigel’s point that Africa is not homogeneous. Buganda lies in the South of Uganda, above and to the East of Lake Victoria. The Sudan border lies about 300 miles north of Kampala. The Baganda are a Bantu people who probably migrated from Central Africa. The population of northern Uganda is Nilotic and may be more connected to Sudan.
Also worth bearing in mind that finding women hasn’t been a problem for kabakas: Mwanga had 16 wives.
Thanks Rerum novarum. You are correct that each culture or indigenous nation may be different, This makes it is hugely complex, and so I struggle to make things simple enough to understand in a blog post and yet deal with that complexity. But there are some common patterns to be seen if you look across a wide range of cultures. Those common patterns extend not just across Africa, but can be seen in other continents and in other time frames. The “lack of women” argument is valid, easily understood, and matched the Evans-Pritchard essay, which is why I mentioned it.… Read more »
Yes, I’m not disagreeing – the point I was making was that people were martyred, and regardless of the specifics, Mwanga may not have been a particularly great guy. The current Kabaka is Ronald Mutebi II, a son of Edward Mutesa II, a statesman who the British ludicrously exiled from his own kingdom. He was allowed to return after a strike shut down Uganda, only to be exiled again by Obote. In turn Mutesa II was a grandson of Mwanga – so this is not all stuff that happened in a distant galaxy a long time ago – it’s living… Read more »
“so this is not all stuff that happened in a distant galaxy a long time ago – it’s living history.” Absolutely correct, and that is what makes this so fascinating. The Christian colonial suppression of these same-sex active/gender variant supporting cultures across the world peaked in the late 19th/early 20th Century. It’s fascinating what various indigenous groups and individuals are now doing to recover their past history from such suppression. All they have to do is chat to their grandmothers. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/20/the-trans-queen-mother-reclaiming-fijis-third-gender-photo-essay And it’s not just LGBTQ people reclaiming their past – many African women are going back to their own… Read more »
I always wonder when people talk about Christian colonial suppression, how much of it was Christian, how much a product of the culture and times? The slaughter of Australian indigenous people was nothing to do with (true) Christianity. I also fully appreciate the benefits which colonialism, and of course Christianity, brought. Some Guardian readers may differ!
Some practices, such as FGM, are well forgotten.
Carpenter maybe also demolishes the myths of Victorian society.
Nigel, you wrote “I always wonder when people talk about Christian colonial suppression, how much of it was Christian, how much a product of the culture and times?” That is a very fair question and worth paying attention to. As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, each culture or society is different and will have its own history, the answer will vary hugely from place to place. But I think is possible to argue that Christianity bears much responsibility for this suppression. It may have happened in two different ways. Firstly the colonial powers enforced their understanding of morality and ethics… Read more »
Thank you. Maybe I ought to clarify? There may have been mission schools etc., maybe a certain sexual morality, but these have little to do with what I regard as Christianity. ‘Suffer little children’ etc. In a similar way, I do not regard Smyth (and many others) as following Jesus. Until or unless he repented, which I don’t think he ever did. Mattew 7:16-20 I don’t think Jesus ever said ‘by their theology you shall know them’. Evangelicals will talk about salvation by grace, but they will also say that good works are an outpouring of grace, and without good… Read more »
Although some changes might be viewed as progressive: Mwanga had 17 wives; Mutesa II had one primary wife, twelve others and 23 children; Mutebi II has one wife and 5 children.
In the cases you speak about, presumably we are talking about concrete evidence for sexual activity between men. I’m afraid–though it is generous to make the David-Jonathon look like us–we have no real evidence for same sex activity between them. To honor cultures is also to deal with them on their own terms. And in OT terms, we know what the cultural realities were, esp vis-a-vis Canaanite culture, when it comes to sex between men. David and Jonathan having sex? We’d need more than conjecture, as fun as that is. Or, “fascinating’ –as you put it. A word with a… Read more »
Anglican priest, Thanks for the comments. I totally agree with you that we need to deal with these cultures on their own terms. Sadly that is a thing which we in the West struggle to do. We tend to focus only on the sex, and define homosexuality only as men having sex with each other, but that is a very unhelpful definition. They do things differently in many other cultures by widening the definition to include love. We should follow them Please see my response to Helen King about halfway down this thread above. In many of these cultures it… Read more »
Peter, Prof Diarmaid MacCulloch is Emeritus Professor of the History of the Church University of Oxford, so it’s a bold man who suggests he needs to take some instruction in the rudiments of exegesis. Nevertheless I am happy to respond to your suggestion. I would argue that this single verse is not an isolated case. In the mass the Hebrew Scriptures are often very strange, very sexual, and very “queer”. But the distorted translation issue hides that from us. I only have time for two examples. In 1 Samuel 20.30 (just before the episode reported above) an angry Saul says to… Read more »
DOH!
IF Ham and Jonathan did do what you say they did – and this is contested, ideologically motivated conjecture being dressed up as fact – the scriptural witness is that IT WAS BAD STUFF FOR THEM TO BE DOING.
Everything oozing from the ground up isn’t divine. That is precisely what it means for God to lovingly rescue us, starting with the beach-head of Israel’s election and purpose and culminating in the Israel, Jesus Christ, God’s only Son. I’m not sure what is wrong with this very basic statement about where truth and life live.
Do you have any actual Hebrew language training? I ask with innocence. You seem to be relying on secondary literature, and on an historian who is not a Hebraist.
Anglican Priest. That is a valid question, thank you, and one I am well aware of. I am not a trained Hebrew scholar. I have been careful to mitigate that risk by discussing these issues of Hebrew translation in one-to-one conversations with a Rabbi and Hebrew scholar, who has told me that my understandings of the David, Ham/Noah and other such narratives are valid and within the bounds of the Hebrew language and acceptable scholarship. Incidentally that same Rabbi teaches at Sarum College, Salisbury. In November 2024 she ran a one-day seminar on the Joseph story in Genesis. She argued… Read more »
I know I am chided here, but I have taught Hebrew for over forty years, including upper level PhD seminars; and had to take Akkadian, Ugaritic, Aramaic in graduate training at Yale.
Exactly. The OT is quite clear about sexual activity, child-bearing, and so forth and does not mince words. David and Bathsheba etc etc. There is no such account concerning David and Jonathan. This is just transferring LGBT+ hopes and wishes–such as they are–onto OT narratives.
Anglican Priest. I refer you to my response to Peter above. You and I differ profoundly on this, and I acknowledge that many of my arguments differ profoundly from traditional Christian understandings. But the academic method is to put forward one’s arguments backed up by academic evidence and sources, which I have done. I would argue that the dial on this subject is moving slowly in my direction – if one pays attention to current research. My sources in this discussion are Professor Diarmaid MacCulloch, and Professor Theodore Jennings writing in the Oxford Handbook of Theology, Sexuality and Gender. I… Read more »
Yes, there is a danger of moving from contextual criticism to Carry On Criticism in which Professor Sid James ThD, assisted by Rev Babs Windsor MTh, rummage through the Old Testament looking for double entendres.
I admit to having mixed feelings about this post. On the one hand I was quite encouraged. I have past experience working on gay rights; the Age of Consent Campaign, the Armed Forces Gay Ban, and now the Church. I have had stones thrown at me in the street, and debated with generals on BBC TV, so a bit of name-calling will not discourage me. Quite the opposite. I learnt in those campaigns that when the discourse moves from reasoned debate to name-calling and insults then people have run out arguments. It is a sign one is beginning to make… Read more »
‘This is an issue of biblical authority. Despite much well-intentioned theological fancy footwork to the contrary, it is difficult to see the Bible as expressing anything else but disapproval of homosexual activity’
Diarmaid MacCulloch, Reformation: Europe’s House Divided.
Sometimes he gets his exegesis right, Peter and Simon.
I think this is the exegetical question you and I disagreed on a few days ago.
Does the Bible in all places have a universal view on homosexuality, or is it a compilation of narratives from a huge range of different times and cultures, within which the views on homosexuality should be expected to vary widely.
Both approaches are valid. And on that point I think it’s time to withdraw from this thread. I have had my say. Thanks.
If language is the primary battleground in culture wars. Together for the Church of England appears to be engaged in a full on assault on the mainstream Christian Church and any possibility of unity. But I guess we already knew that. The English language however evolved out of the everyday use of the English bible, translated using everyday language, so perhaps that’s the place to start discussions about human sexuality. It’s really not that difficult to understand.
“The English language however evolved out of the everyday use of the English bible, translated using everyday language”
Really? I always thought that the AV (which I presume is the English Bible to which AC refers) was written in somewhat self-consciously archaic language. I wouldn’t want to underplay its cultural significance, but there’s a lot of English language – some of it religious – developing before 1611. I know St Paul used the AV, but….
Certainly an extreme Protestant view – not at all mainstream.
English discourse was and still is certainly very much influenced by the AV, though some of the famous phrases – ‘powers that be’/ ‘my cup runneth over’ – come, I understand, from the earlier work of Tyndale and Coverdale
Your characterisation of Together for the Church of England is wide of the mark. The organisation works for the unity of the church and the full inclusion of all. It does not encourage church’s to limit their parish share so that those it disagrees with cannot be financially supported. It does not promote irregular ordinations. It does not seek alternative forms of episcopal oversight. These are all policies and actions of The Alliance, which looks increasingly like a church within a church that cannot tolerate any deviation from its own particular worldview. In July 2026 Helen King, Vice-Chair of Together,… Read more »
When you say “believing and faithful persons” and apply that to a requirement that church members must “live with difference”, I can see a very pertinent issue there, what is a “believing and faithful person”? I think you will find that from a conservative point of view, if people do not believe that all sexual relationships outside of marriage between one man and one woman are contrary to God’s will, then those people are not “believing and faithful”. Where I personally start to struggle following the discussions on this subject is that first of all the liberal perspective is that… Read more »
since feelings of love and mutual consent can occur without marriage for anyone, what then makes marriage relevant for anyone? I feel I am extremely unqualified to respond to this question (I am but a survivor of divorce!), but here goes: From a Biblical POV, I would start with “it is not good for [a human being] to live alone”: that God made MOST of us to bond with another (a bonding that goes beyond mere feelings of love and mutual consent in any particular interpersonal action). This bonding is variously adapted over time and cultures (some might argue that… Read more »
Thank you, for the interesting reply. However, I was not really asking what marriage is per se. I was asking why, if mutual consent and desirable feelings between two people are the definition of a non-sinful sexually involved relationship, and this applies regardless of male/female or both men/both women in the pairing, therefore marriage is unecessary to avoid sexual sin, then why would anybody get married? It appears to become an unecessary, stressful, expensive move, probably not worth the hassle. Personally, I think this way of thinking is far too removed from what the church used to believe about the… Read more »
Respectfully, perhaps you’re overly focused, Miss CR, on the mere “avoidance of sin”?
I believe God made us for our mutual JOY, not merely to “avoid sin”!
Hmm. Is this where we get into qualifications for our “ways of thinking”? [Life-long Episcopalian here, Masters and Doctorate from a theological seminary . . . but I’m sure I’m one of the less accredited commenters on TA! ;-/]
Thank you, Nic, for your clarity. This Yank has a much better understanding of the matters at (if this is not too “intimate”) hand!
By The way Nic, the person you are responding to is not the Adrian Clarke from General Synod, I am. I’m not sure who this Adrian Clarke is but I keep bringing these comments to the attention of the moderators of this site
Please may it be known by the moderators that this is not the Adrian Clarke from General Synod
Noted. Perhaps you could adopt a slighly different form of your name to make the distinction clear?
Or the Synod member could so define his moniker.
So Adrian Clarke is a pantomime horse?
My goodness we live in strange times. Open debate about public scandals are shut down on the grounds of impropriety.
Yet we are apparently happy to engage in public discussion on matters of intimacy which every previous generation would have recognised as a subject that should be the entirely private concern of couples who are married.
I find myself echoing the words of Rowland in a previous thread. Not words I ever expected to say !
Is this topic really a matter for public comment ?
Purely in interests of accuracy, I don’t recall using those words. A better summary would be Lord Asquith’s “wait and see”. You will be relieved to know that I’m not commenting about Helen King’s articles! I have read both.
Rowland,
My recollection is that you were perhaps a little more emphatic than you suggest, but your general point is well made.
I do not presume to know your vintage but I guess, like me, you recall the days when the social goods of decorum and discretion were understand.
Back then people made all the same mistakes, of course. However I doubt the vulgarisation of culture and discourse since those days is really progress.
Peter
Since apparently it’s OK to return to this topic, I do not believe you understood the objections being raised. They had nothing to do with innocence or guilt about the tragic death of a man; or ‘wait and see’ just what is said about that.
No, they had to do with facts already in the public domain for which there was no need for waiting about something else.
And, I too abstain from commenting on essays on the proper language to use about this or that sex act — as if this would move the needle somehow.
The facts may be in the public domain, but the elephants remain in shadows. i am hoping those elephants come into the light following various investigations (including Ghent).
I have just added my name to support an independent public enquiry.
https://goodlawproject.org/petition/jason-arday-letter/
I couldn;t find anything to debate in the letter. I can;t say that about all GoodLaw campaigns.
Maybe Christians of all flavours could also find it in themselves to support this, and show leadership?
Almost 149,000 signatories so far.
Nigel,
Do you understand what you are calling for by signing such a petition ?
An “ inquiry” based on the premise that a free press has failed.
Do you realise what it means to control the press ? History offers little encouragement for such ideas
It is not looking to control the press.The ‘free press’ has failed. I once clicked on a nasty social media post about the case, and I have since been flooded with similar recommendations.What are you suggestions for action following Savi’s recent article about the far right?My main concern is for truth.My least concern is arguing with you.Of course a national independent enquiry may be redundant given all the other inquiries, but so be it.The voice of the majority needs to be heard. Paticularly the voice of the Black community. Of course, it is strange for you to defend the so-called… Read more »
I’m afraid we must ‘wait and see’. ‘Facts’ in the public domain must be factually accurate to merit respect and serious consideration. We now have to respect the editors’ decision to close this debate. I have no doubt that it will reopen in due course, although not necessarily in a religious context, nor hence on TA.
Just to be clear, you did not judge the matter “closed” as you yourself re-entered with: “Purely in interests of accuracy, I don’t recall using those words. A better summary would be Lord Asquith’s “wait and see”. You will be relieved to know that I’m not commenting about Helen King’s articles! I have read both.” And of course whether facts in the public domain are “factually accurate or not” is not for you to foreclose on, by fiat. Let us respect the generous flow of discourse without any hindrance or declarations from on high. TA has generally been good at… Read more »
I’m afraid that I don’t accept this, or the sophistry employed based on my very mild correction of what I am claimed to have said on the previous, now closed, thread. It was not I who reopened that matter. This had ceased to be primarily a subject for TA which I took to be the reason for Simon Sarmiento’s decision.
You are of course entitled to your opinion, which is why a free flow of comments and positions is better than calling for moratoria. In this instance and more generally.
Grace and peace.
Do you really believe that until “this generation” discussion on “matters of intimacy” was reckoned properly to take place only between married couples? Perhaps I’ve misunderstood you – perhaps you mean that what consenting adults “get up to” is no concern of anyone else’s, and the Church should mind its own business. In which case I’m inclined to agree. But once the Church sets out to legislate for what kind of hanky-panky, and between whom, is acceptable, some agreement on the terms of the debate is surely vital? I am currently reading the splendid new book on Babylon by Lloyd… Read more »
https://alanlester.co.uk/blog/the-argument-about-project-spire-and-the-real-history-of-the-church-of-england-as-an-enslaver/
Peter
as you linked this issue as part of your argument in the previous post this is the best rebuttal of Biggar and your other fellow travellers arguments I could find.
Thanks for this link.
A discussion on Project Spire deserves its own thread. I will set up a separate article for this purpose early next week, so that comments about that are not intermingled with comments on the two items linked in this article.
Matters of moral principle are rarely, even if they concern the principles of individual behaviour, out of season for discussion. Matters of actual individual conduct or behaviour are sometimes thought to benefit from a moment of reflection and discretion. There isn’t a paradox there, I think
Martin,
Could you confirm which of my comments you are addressing
Thanks
Peter
I was replying to your remarks about the permission of open public discussion of intimacy, a term of abstract moral discussion, vs the closure of debate on matters of individual behaviour in the name of awaiting more information
You mis understood me.
The public debate to which I was referring – and which met with resistance – was a debate about institutional failure.
The kikuyu rituals of Nguīko or ngweko have much to commend them. I don’t think much of that happened in church youth clubs, at least in my day.
The other thing worth noting is how intimacy changes between couples over time, either through inability or changing interest.
The Kikuyu also practised clitoridectomy, so maybe not the greatest of role models for the C of E…! But the training in ngweko is indeed a strong contrast with talking about cake icing.
Helen,
Is it really necessary to tell us this ?
What an extraordinary question? Is FGM one of those things which nice Anglicans shouldn’t think about, let alone (perhaps because God did forbid), talk about?
Pam and Helen
The abuse of women is an outrage.
Please do not suggest that a refusal to follow your choices of vocabulary is a moral failure. It is not.
I do not understand what you are objecting to, Peter. Are you saying I am ‘allowed’ to use the word clitoridectomy but not to mention Mike Pilavachi’s much-mentioned cake icing image? In the original blog posts, I am quoting from published documents. Anything in “ “ quotes is a direct quotation rather than a use of ‘ ‘ scare quotes. I am quoting from documents published on church websites.
I’m genuinely puzzled. What vocabulary would you prefer?
you seem very unwilling to face historical facts, unlike Nigel
Yes, it is shocking to see Kenyatta’s advcacy of clitoridectomy – it was not that long ago. It maybe brings some balance to discussions on colonialism and the benefits of Christain ideals. There were other tribes (Ibeso) which did not practise that, but still had similar practices. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/cd6d/1a5e7dcfa34930f5c7eb018781024bcf3c76.pdf It is all a bit gruesome. But there is clarity over the language. There seems to be little mention of homosexual men or women, but I regard talk that they did not exist as being a bit fanciful. In my era of growing up, nothing below the waist was ever mentioned. Maybe… Read more »
I honestly don’t know what Helen realistically expects to get out of this.
Conservatives aren’t going to accept her position this side of heaven.
It doesn’t look like the deadlock in Synod is going to be broken any time soon.
So isn’t a negotiated settlement to split a better way forward where both sides can move forward?
What am I missing?
You are missing the raison d’etre of the Church of England
Flesh this out a bit more. I wonder which raison d’etre could possibly mean that it’s better to duck heads in the sand than face reality both on this issue and on the place of the CofE in modern England. If it’s some idea that the CofE is meant to be a national church that ship sailed a very long time ago with 700k attending weekly. If we really must argue that the CofE is a national church despite this, the CofE should be a church that encourages people to turn from sin and trust in Christ rather than a… Read more »
At some point what you write will become so blindingly obvious that the ever shrinking population worshipping in the Church of England will have to face reality. It was one thing to hammer home the idea of a national church under the monarch in Elizabeth’s day, with parties at theological distance from one another obliged to trim their sails. We are in an entirely different universe at present. Numerically, culturally, theologically, practically.
The raison d’être I had in mind was the holding together of warring factions within the church, for the sake of unity, which, imperfect as it may be, may be understood firstly in spiritual terms of the third part of Jesus’ High Priestly prayer in John 17:20-23, and secondly in historical terms of the wars of the Reformation, with the Church of England maintaining an identity (again, imperfect as it may be) as both catholic and reformed. This identity has been maintained to this day by Anglicans who, while they may personally be more catholic, or reformed, or indeed liberal,… Read more »
I don’t think anyone thinks the CofE should encourage people to continue in sin, there are just disagreements about what things are sinful, as there have been throughout Christian history and about matters as weighty as taking up arms, executing criminals or enslaving people. Somehow the church managed to hold together through disagreements on all of these yet somehow some in the church recognising that in Christ there is neither male nor female is a deal breaker.
The text is crystal clear on this, it’s also clear it’s a salvation issue.
The arguments haven’t changed at all since J.I Packer left the Anglican Church of Canada in 2002.
No matter how much Helen wants to dwell on unimportant matters like what the word intimacy means, that reality remains unchanged in the mind of traditionalists and conservatives.
Surely the choice is keep banging heads against the same brick wall or go separate ways.
Like every single other church split right down the middle on this has.
Crystal clear? Let me offer you a few quotes from a leading conservative theologian on this issue from a book published twelve years ago. ‘The question of homosexuality defies simple answers. [Furthermore] we all have biases and presuppositions that we bring to the text. There is no such thing as an unbiased reading of the Bible.” (pp10,19) ‘You may find it shocking, but most scholars who have written books about homosexuality in the last forty years have concluded that the Bible does not condemn consensual, monogamous, same-sex relations.” (p23) (Preston Sprinkle. People to Be Loved: Why Homosexuality is Not Just an… Read more »
Gareth, I spent the best part of two years posting regularly on this site making regular appeals for a settlement through differentiation. It must have been wearisome for the moderators and with the benefit of hindsight a waste of my time. What became obvious was that the bishops will not entertain any such meaningful structural accommodation because they look back on the settlement over the ordination of women as a fundamental strategic and moral failure. They have no intention of repeating what they see as that mistake. An orderly parting of the ways is just not going to happen, Gareth.… Read more »
It’s not “every single other church” though, is it? There remain Presbyterians and Episcopalians in Scotland (and indeed congregations) who don’t agree with equal marriage or having clergy who are gay (or indeed female) yet have somehow managed to accept that others in their church disagree.
Stamping your feet and insisting that it’s “clear” you’re right is pretty meaningless. If you insist that the only way forward is schism then I’m sure someone can show you the door.
It’s pretty much every church with a 50/50 down the middle split. You can find no shortage of examples on the other side of the pond. Irrespective of characterising it as stamping feet ultimately the numbers don’t seem to be massively shifting to permit significant change. A clear way where that can happen is if there’s a parting of ways and both sides get to move forward. Otherwise it just looks like people have fun banging their heads against the same brick wall. Repeating the same thing and expecting different results seems to be the definition of foolishness to me.… Read more »
“ Repeating the same thing and expecting different results seems to be the definition of foolishness to me.”
As famously said Voltaire, Albert Einstein, Mahatma Gandhi, Mae West etc. etc.
I see little evidence of a 50-50 split though. I see something more like a 90-10 division! My personal experience across a number of churches in the Church of England and a wide range of churchmanship is that the overwhelming majority support the “progressive”, “inclusive” position. That may well not reflect the position of the leaders of their churches, and consequently they may be wary of speaking out. But in private, or in other forums their views are clear. Even I was personally somewhat surprised, for example, that the PCC of which I am a member unanimously voted recently to… Read more »
If you’re primarily moving in liberal parishes perhaps…
I tend to leave anecdotal assessments aside in favour of the voting proportions in Synod itself.
I specifically said across “a wide range of churchmanship”, probably outside my own parish they would mostly be described as conservative evangelical in e.g. their theology of the atonement. I accept your criticism of anecdotal evidence. However, my point is perhaps that numbers in synod reflect a level of commitment and organization (and that’s true on all sides) over and above that of ordinary churchgoers who have better things to do in life that stand for their deanery synod! Another anecdote: the parish of which I am a member was a “resolution parish”, prohibiting women from exercising any priestly ministry… Read more »
I had a similar experience when helping to draft our parish profile. I suggested a rather vague wording about being willing to explore the possibilities offered by PLF. To my surprise, the PCC adopted it unanimously.
Gareth, you asked me to ‘flesh this out a bit more’, which I did. While you have not acknowledged my response to your request, you have responded to Jo B’s comment on the same subject, so I am replying to that instead. Jo refers to Galatians 3.28, and you reply that ‘The text is crystal clear on this, it’s also clear it’s a salvation issue.’ If you are referring to the same text, I would concur that it clearly states ‘there is no longer male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.’ I might also agree that… Read more »
‘This Synod recognises that there is a range of legitimate views on the issue of slave-holding in the contemporary church. These include views holding that slave-holding is compatible with Christian discipleship, and views holding that it is incompatible.’ Would such a motion be acceptable today? Would it have been acceptable in the C18/19 had the Synod existed then? If the C of E had formalised any such position at any stage, might it not have become a membership deal-breaker for some Anglicans, at some point in time? All sorts of views, opinions and errors can co-exist ‘on the ground’ within… Read more »
To turn from the sin of homophobic judgment? COME LORD JESUS!
Helen writes: In these reports, the language of intimacy also features in regard to friendship, but the line is a thin one; sharing a bed when a person has night terrors can be part of an “intimate friendship” but not if this is done “repeatedly” It is interesting that she sees sharing a bed continually (but no more than that is seen as “intimacy”, because a look at historical poverty, or for that matter with poverty in other countries, sharing a bed to sleep in is a necessity because there is no room for separate beds. I hate to say… Read more »
Couldn’t agree more, Tony. But that sentence starts ‘In these reports’. It’s not what I think, it’s what the current position, as expressed in tribunal reports/abuse case reviews, appears to be. You are right that this is a very recent feature of some societies!
You are so right, Tony Bellows, about the “modern, middle-class, luxury”. My father (who fought in the Second World War as a very young man) had lived with his mother, brother and sister, in two rooms of a small house. I lived till I was 17 in a house with no bathroom and as a small child regularly shared a bed with my Welsh grandmother and aunts when visiting their houses. Can still remember how cosy and safe it felt even though I was invariably too hot sinking in to a squishy feather mattress with scratchy blankets.
I would have preferred it if the PMM had stood as originally worded, but without obfuscation as to the meaning of ‘intimacy’. This is not a matter of culture wars for me; it is a matter of knowing where I stand with the Church. In some ways, I wish Synod could have an honest discussion about same sex ‘sex’ and sin, as that’s what lies at the heart of the matter. Instead, we tiptoe through the tulips, leaving those of us who long for a word of acceptance hanging on for that one little crumb. It’s a lonely old place… Read more »
Perhaps the level of ‘intimacy’ and whether it might be appropriate depends to some extent on the context of words or actions, including the relationship between (or among) the people involved? So what might seem unexceptional between two single people in their 20s on a dancefloor, surrounded by others, might be far more questionable if a teacher or youth leader is in a room alone with a young person in their care? Likewise siblings sharing a bed if there are several people trying to get a night’s rest in a house or flat with not many beds, or two friends… Read more »
Heavens! Professor King is willing to go where others fear to tread. As an academic she uses a lot of words to describe the absurdity of the CofE’s position on hanky panky. We all know that the bishops don’t expect civil partners to conclude the evening with a chaste kiss as they switch off the television and retire to separate bedrooms. There’s that famous video clip of a young cleric live streaming himself saying Morning Prayer in his study during the pandemic, when suddenly his civil partner strides into the room not wearing so much as a stitch of clothing.… Read more »
Thank you for these two frank, articulate and intelligent reflections on the use and mis-sue of language when discussing expressions of human love and desire.
The main problem with ambiguous or euphemistic language is when it is used to conceal a double standard or power play. For example, male pronouns for the generic human, which revert to referring to male human (male God) more often than is warranted by the sources, and in accord with the interpreter’s inherited norms (one might even say prejudices). This is also in play in the discourse around sexuality, sexual expression, affection, close friendship and intimacy. We end up having dishonest and unhelpful conversations which avoid us having to face our self-deceptions because we will not be clear. We can… Read more »
O dear! I thought this area of the internet might not be continually going back to homosexuality. I was clearly due to be disappointed. I had thought what St Paul had told us about it in 1 Corinthians 6 vs 9, and that was pretty clear. But then he basically said that women in the church should sit and shut up. We seem to have advanced from there. I do find it strange that “The love that dare not speak its name” has for 40 years or so been screaming it from the rooftops. But there we are. There is… Read more »
Naughtius Maximus. Your prostitute comment is perceptive. Yes, these people were often not regarded negatively within their contemporary culture. Perhaps because the word commonly translated as “prostitute” in our modern English Christian bible is often “kedeshim” or “kedesher”, with a meaning of holy man or woman. It refers to the widespread cult practise of the erotic or sexual being used within a religious context to facilitate transcendence and connection with the divine. This was accepted practise in many of the cultures represented in much of the early Hebrew scriptures, but later Christian scholars rejected such a thing, and choose to… Read more »
NRSV I Kings 15.12 and II Kings 23.7 ‘Male Temple Prostitutes’
NRSVUE ‘Illicit Priests’
I don’t think it was ‘later scholars’ who found the practices of the Kedeshim problematic.
I think it was Asa, Josiah and the writer of Kings.
Albanian, thanks for the response. You are right that the NRSVUE (UE=Updated Edition) has updated the translation, but I would still challenge the use of “illicit” which does not appear in the Hebrew text. You are also right that Asa, Josiah etc found these customs to be problematic, which is why I wrote “much of the EARLY Hebrew scriptures”. I would argue that we have in the early Hebrew Scriptures, texts from less patriarchal times when gender variance and eroticism within worship were widely accepted. And we have echoes of those customs in the text if we pay attention, and… Read more »
Thanks Simon, I think I disagree with your hermeneutical approach to scripture so profoundly that taking discussion further on that front will be tiresome to us both. But I am interested in the implications of our assessments of the Kedeshim for our current discontents. It seems that your positive view of the practices of the Kedeshim (as you understand their activities) rather undermines the proposed limiting of affirmation of same-sex sexual relationships to those which are monogamous, faithful and permanent. If the OT (properly understood, according to your lights) does teach us that transient, widespread and perhaps commercial same-sex erotic… Read more »
Hi Albanian, Thanks for the response. I agree, perhaps we are so far apart in our understanding that further debate on this platform would be frustrating, but I suspect we would enjoy a conversation face-to-face over a coffee or a pint of beer. But just one final point, have a look at the paper posted by Nigel Goodwin below, especially the section labelled “Spiritually driven same-sex relationships”. https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/34452 It is exactly the same issue as we were discussing. Gender variant or same-sex active men being involved in spiritual practises such as healing, shamanship, divination etc But these traditional practises sometimes… Read more »
What Judah actually tells Hirah isn’t recorded. Meanings of kdesha and zonah overlap, the words appearing together in Hosea 4.14. Hirah is a Canaanite, so he’s familiar with kdeshot. Perhaps the same woman could be a zonah on the street and a kdesha in the cult. In any case all the references are critical of both forms of conduct, and the men who make use of them. It’s more than a stretch to claim some kind of scriptural endorsement for these roles. Actually it’s calling evil good, and claiming that the good opponents (kings, prophets etc.) of kdeshic abomination are… Read more »
Screaming, “Get off our necks.” Ending the latter ends the former, see?
Final bit before I ran out of space:-
I think there is no easy answer- is there ever? But maybe one is that the church, armed with our CURRENT knowledge, should politely and humbly withdraw from this area? Maybe we should say, “It’s up to the individual, their make up, their relationship to God” and not for us to pontificate, censure, make rules, induce guilt.
And let’s just follow Jesus’s summary of the Law. We can’t go far wrong then- surely?
I think the main point is being lost: if people use euphemisms and evasions in church communities they are being predisposed to using euphemisms and evasions in prayer – or worse, avoiding the subject entirely. I say that because it was something God recently taught me: my prayers were exemplar in their respectability. I was sanitising things for God, which is the sin of pride. I take – and took in my confession – full responsibility for my actions but I was aware it happened because church communities, liturgy, worship and sermons, sanitise language, and in so doing attempt to… Read more »
Helen King is right to try to move the debate away from sex towards intimacy and love. It might help is we paid attention to what gay scholars have been saying. For over 150 years now gay scholars have been arguing that there is more to homosexuality than the sex. Karl Ulrichs has been described as the world’s first out gay campaigner, and the first man to write academically about homosexuality (in 1860s Germany). He rejected the word “homosexual” precisely because it risked linking gayness only to the sexual act. He preferred the term “Uranian” or “Uranism”, derived from Greek… Read more »
I cannot agree with Helen more when she observes the variety of expressions that may be applied to the term intimacy. It’s too complex to be pinned down as if everyone expresses intimacy the same. In our sadly over-sexualised cultures, I feel we can lose sight of romantic love and tender care. It is entirely possible to be a devoted wife, and a sexual woman, and yet – like Elena Duglioli – to express intimacy through physical closeness, kissing, sleeping arm in arm… without any desire for insertion, erotic climax, or genital love-making. Devotion is what matters.
Absolutely! But the shared expressions of intimacy—and whether or not they include any of the latter aspects listed—should be up to the spouses involved, and no one else (least of all a synod!).
Two wonderful articles. They just go to show how we should not try to police one another’s expressions of intimacy, but to look to the love and devotion inherent in them, and pray God for grace and flourishing.
Professor King wrote: “It’s interesting how ‘ambiguous’ can become a dirty word when used in a Synod debate. The history of Christianity demonstrates instead that ambiguity has often been a deliberate choice, made in order to keep the maximum number of sheep within the fold… Is the Eucharist a commemoration or a sacrifice? The English Reformation found ways around the question; the first Prayer Book has famously been described as a “masterpiece … in studied ambiguity”, with both conservatives and reformers being able to use it. Like it or not, our current liturgy continues to hold this ambiguity, allowing worshippers to believe different… Read more »
I agree but would go further. One of the effects of Jesus teaching in parables is that the approach inherently embeds ambiguity. Also, as believers, we don’t all have the same calling and what is appropriate for some of us may be inappropriate for others. I would prefer a greater emphasis on teaching people how to exercise choice than a rules based faith some prefer.
Thank you for articulating all this, and for recovering something precious in our conversations here.
How absolutely beautiful. Thank you, hidden sister.
“Would love your thoughts. Please comment”. Well, I’ve tried to but someone clearly doesn’t like them. Unless they disappeared into the luminiferous ether. But as it said they (for there were two) were awaiting approval and now have gone, it seems not all thoughts are welcome. And mine contained no profanity. No point in staying here for a reasoned debate, but I shall be at church as normal tomorrow am. And at 6pm too.
WEll, looks like it has now. Odd. Maybe a backlog.
It is my common experience that posts will often be processed quickly during the week, but there will often be significantly longer delays over the weekend.
I would imagine that such a state is entirely understandable.
The level of control here is positively Soviet. Contrast Psephizo where comments appear at once and all comers are welcome. The censorship here is the chief problem.
That’s a bit harsh,James.
That is not to say I don’t wonder quite why my posts are not allowed on a fairly regular basis.
Psephizo comments threads are a snake pit, frankly.
For the avoidance of doubt, I am a conservative evangelical
James, I have been reading TA for a number of years now for both research and for my own interest. I cannot recall a time where comments were closed , perhaps during ICSA to avoid legal issues but never in the last few years. Having looked at the comment section attached to the Biggar article on the Arday allegations many long term posters found the tone of the comments from the Neo Conservative side incredibly troubling. That the admins closed down that thread was both necessary and deeply needed as the death of Jason Arday was a tragedy. Some of… Read more »
All comers are not welcome at Psephizo. Yes, comments are open, but anyone even slightly progressive who comments there risks immediately being flocked by a dozen people, each firing twelve rounds of scripture from the hip. I stopped commenting there because, frankly, I had enough stress in my life. What’s that line from Burns about being able to ‘see ourselves as others see us’? Of course conservatives see Psephizo as a welcoming site; they’re welcome there. Reminds me of something a friend of mine used to say: When churches claim ‘we’re a friendly church’, the question you need to ask… Read more »
If a church website has a mass of happy smiling faces, I know it is not for me! I’m trying to remember the verse ‘Jesus smiled’. Just been checking churches associated with the primary school my grandson is about to attend tomorrow – shock horror, one is Gafcon associated, apparently the ministry of women is to make tea and support the family. or, as the website says, women’s ministry is “To realise the potential of the Mothers Union as a global ministry to promote patterns of biblical marriage and family life.” They are a Renew church under the Bishop of… Read more »
‘I’m trying to remember the verse ‘Jesus smiled’.’
There is a verse that says, ‘Jesus, full of joy in the Holy Spirit…’
An inner joy?
Maybe I am an oldie, but I expect school teachers, politicians and clergy to look serious. But I also expect sermons to have one good joke somewhere.
Unfortunately, photos of clergy seem to be of smiley faces and there are no jokes.
I am being slightly serious.
In my day jobs in private businesses, it is those with a smiley charming exterior who harbour the most vicious inclinations. Stern but fair bosses are fine. Is it different in the church?
‘Tears and smiles like us He knew’ is the verse that comes to mind.
Oh, I see, not that kind of verse. But a Jesus who never smiled – or laughed at one of Peter’s jokes – would have been a strange fellow indeed.
Indeed. Some here may not realise that some of my comments are to provoke laughter or prick pomposity. Maybe we also take Jesus’ parables too seriously – the accountant who wrote off all his master’s debts? Rolling in the aisles. The rich man told to sell everything? Waiting for a beating by his wife?
I must check which verses Matthew Henry classified as jokes.
Funny thing about jokes – we remember them.
The Mothers’ Union is especially important in the African Anglican Church, which is predominantly Gafcon now. I had a friend who was active in the leadership of the Mothers’ Union in England. I don’t know how strong that organisation is now; perhaps it has declined because there are far fewer children in Church of England congregations than there used to be.
I’ve absolutely nothing against the Mothers’ Union. My problem is with complementarianism.
Tim,
There is an important distinction to be made. Ian Paul is a courageous and intelligent commentator and he publishes much serious theological reflection on Psephizo.
The comments section is obviously a different matter.
My advice would be visit the site and read his articles but steer well clear of the comments
I don’t find Ian’s pugnacious style very helpful. I’m also aware that there may be some cultural and temperamental differences between us. For instance, when he posts links to provocative articles on his Facebook page and then tags people he wants to argue with, I just find that rude (especially since, if people don’t have their privacy settings ramped up, those tagged articles will then appear on their own Facebook pages whether they want them there or not).
If newcomers tell me that their last church was very friendly, I reply that they’ll probably find it the same here. When they tell me they’re trying somewhere new because their last congregation wasn’t welcoming to them, I wonder, but don’t say so, whether their experience will be repeated.
Tim,
Do you think we evangelicals are ‘welcome’ in TA? Of course we’re not. I was referring to the heavy moderation and delay in posting comments from evangelicals. Some of mine have never appeared although I have never defamed anyone or used offensive language, while standard liberal views are quickly approved. That’s why Psephizo is far better in encouraging debate, through an open comments policy. You don’t like being challenged? Nobody does. But liberals are also free to comment there and are *never censored. That’s the difference.
There are many evangelicals who post here regularly. That is why I am here – the range is wide. My own background is evangelical, like many others.
I am an evangelical. My comments have never been censored here.
Tim,
You are rather proving the point that James is making !
Peter:
James to me: ‘Tim, Do you think we evangelicals are ‘welcome’ in TA? Of course we’re not.’
Me to James: ‘I am an evangelical’.
How am I proving his point?
Sorry – I must be missing something.
Perhaps you Tim are the kind of ‘evangelical’ whom James does not think to actually be an evangelical, but whom the TA community (in general) are keen to welcome as an evangelical.
But I could be barking up the wrong tree.
Tim,
You are more liberal than James. (I know you will object to the label). You are saying you are never censored. James’ point is that liberals are not censored on this site. Hence you prove his point.
To be clear, I don’t think censorship is the right term, but we know what James means.
Forgive me, Tim, but I am not “going round the houses” again over who is and is not evangelical. James’ meaning is, again, clear
James,
My TA experience is similar to yours, however I think the editors are entitled to have a “general view” on matters.
They are clearly not conservative evangelicals, but they will post comments from other perspectives.
They give considerable amounts of time on a voluntary basis to running the site. It would be a bit much to expect them to be simply neutral administrators without opinion or perspective.
I would never be able to criticise happy clappies publicly if their extreme views weren’t published here regularly.
Mostly, you criticise us for being happy, clapping, wearing jeans, playing guitars and using abbreviated names – all of which you could find by going to an Ed Sheeran concert.
Exactly! Why should people listen to the fundamentalist ramblings of a grinning minister called Rick when they could be better entertained by a guitarist called Ed.
Good question … Ed is more expensive and doesn’t offer harvest suppers, bible studies, baptisms, weddings and funerals
Singer-songwriter. That’s his forte. Even Wikipedia gets that right; it barely mentions his guitar playing, but its very first sentence is ‘Edward Christopher Sheeran (/ˈʃɪərən/SHEER-ən; born 17 February 1991) is an English singer-songwriter.’
If you’re going to use pop culture references, at least bother to get them right.
I suspect you’d still find a way?
I am neither happy nor clappy. You know my views on the term.
It’s worth pointing out that I don’t feel particularly censored here despite coming here with a particularly conservative evangelical bent.
I find that people are pretty patient with me particularly given I’m not attending a CofE church at this point and I’m very much looking in from the outside.
Yes, but you are funny.
I can’t imagine anything more inappropriate or incorrect about TA which has an extraordinarily generous and tolerant editorship. They aren’t, of course, obliged to publish anything which is potentially libellous, and are wise not to, but reading practically any thread shows extremes of opinions (sometimes expressed in quite offensive language) freely published here.
I think that intimacy is the opposite of reserve. Someone intimate with me mentally or intellectually knows my thoughts without concealment on my part and is, if having interest in the relevant matters, free to discuss them. Someone intimate with me physically knows my body without concealment and is, if sexual feelings are present, drawn to caress me – such is common usage, I think. Of course anyone in any discussion is permitted, if being clear about it, to state a personal definition of any word in use. I don’t see that we are able to solve moral or factual… Read more »
My thinking on a Monday morning? I agree with much of what Maximus said, which surprised me. I kind of assume Helen wrote the articles with a smile, partly to show how ridiculous we all are, and also how ridiculous sex is – a kind of reductio ab adsurbum. Isn;t the important part respect rather than physical acts? I had a friend a very long time ago who went to confession because he felt he had sinned by touching (consensually) a female friend’s private parts (being euphemistic again). It seems so ridiculous looking back. I don’t think he ever went… Read more »
What a strange article. Most of what it describes as ‘same-sex marriage between females’ has nothing to do with sexual intimacy but is about procuring a second wife when the first can’t bear children. And I didn’t see anything on the most famous (or notorious) instance of African homosexuality, the Kabaka and the page boys of Uganda. A serious lack of critical judgment in this article.
It was just something I came across, there is no doubt other literature which provides different or wider perspectives. I saw it more as a myth-busting and showing how complex and hetergenous it all is. i was aware of Kabaka, king of Buganda, there were many martyrs who were burnt, I hadn’t noticed it wasn’t mentioned in the article. So, at certain times and in certain places, people were killed for not carrying out homosexual acts (or maybe strictly not renoucing their Christianity), in other times and places people are killed for carrying out homosexual acts. Plus there was some… Read more »
As the end of this article says, life is complicated.
https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2024/12/a-century-before-kill-the-gays-uganda-had-a-queer-king-mwanga-ii/
It’s not a very accurate article, though, Nigel. Buganda isn’t ‘now Uganda’, it’s the largest of the four kingdoms that make up Uganda. The idea that Mwanga was viewed as an African hero post-independence in 1962 is to miss the point that the post-independence Obote I regime exiled the Kabaka of the day, Edward Mutesa II, Mwanga’s grandson; and the kabaka and kingdom of Buganda were eventually restored by Musevoni in 1993 following the overthrow of Obote II. There are no roads in Kampala named after Mwanga, but Apollo Kaggwar Road is still there, together with roads named after Ugandan… Read more »
Thanks. I know nothing about the topic, as is obvious, just trying to expose the complexities. What I do not like is the idea of Africa and African opinion and African culture being a homogenous whole. ‘White people think this’ is as bad as ‘African people think that’.
And as in Europe, ethical and religious developments are bound up in the tide of human history and difficult to separate out. Ingrams’ 1960 book ‘Uganda’ concludes
‘the moment of truth will come when the people of Uganda feel they have a unity of purpose and can be a nation together. That will be the beginning of another story and neither they nor we can tell what it will be‘.
Amazing how the story is working out.
Thank you for the video. A bit happy clappy for FrDavid H, but i found it truly moving when they started singing ‘when I survey..’
It doesn’t look remotely ‘happy clappy’ to me. Not a drum-kit in sight, and I bet that not a single member of that great throng is named ‘Dave’ or ‘Andy’.
In fact one of the Uganda martyrs, St Andrew Kaggwa, is the patron saint of drummers, and Namirembe Cathedral used to have drums rather than bells to announce services.
This should make FrDavid H’s Friday!
https://www.facebook.com/ugcatholics/videos/passion-in-drumming/2184733731981529/
Plus booty dancing to rival Beyonce!
Kampala’s Ghetto Kids did dance with Shakira and Burna Boy at the world cup final …
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly5j2gq587o
This might provide a bit more detail about what was going on. It is an article by the anthropologist Evans Pritchard about the “Boy Wives” culture of the Azande, not a long way from Uganda in time or geographic distance. https://www.greek-love.com/index.php/sub-saharan-africa/boy-wives-azande-sudan-pederasty In a culture where women were scarce it was common and accepted for young men to form companionship relationships which would have many benefits: companionship, sexual satisfaction, mutual assistance etc. This was widespread across the world. Sometimes these were informal “friends with benefits ” relationships (Marsh Arabs as described by Wilfred Thesiger, or late Victorian working class Britain as… Read more »
Hmm. there goes 2 hours of my life. I read your first link and then got engulfed in Edward Capenter’s article, and stories of his life.
Thank you!
My pleasure Nigel,
Edward Carpenter is a hero of mine. I think someone said in a recent thread that we gay people have been banging on about gay issues for forty years. In fact the first gay campaigns started in 1864 with Karl Ulrichs, and Edward Carpenter did his writing 1894-1911. He had a lot of good things to say, which are still relevant
It was Carpenter who first pointed out the homophobic translation problem, and we have still not put that right over 100 years later.
Thanks Simon, I don’t know much about Sudan, but it’s useful to consider Nigel’s point that Africa is not homogeneous. Buganda lies in the South of Uganda, above and to the East of Lake Victoria. The Sudan border lies about 300 miles north of Kampala. The Baganda are a Bantu people who probably migrated from Central Africa. The population of northern Uganda is Nilotic and may be more connected to Sudan.
Also worth bearing in mind that finding women hasn’t been a problem for kabakas: Mwanga had 16 wives.
Thanks Rerum novarum. You are correct that each culture or indigenous nation may be different, This makes it is hugely complex, and so I struggle to make things simple enough to understand in a blog post and yet deal with that complexity. But there are some common patterns to be seen if you look across a wide range of cultures. Those common patterns extend not just across Africa, but can be seen in other continents and in other time frames. The “lack of women” argument is valid, easily understood, and matched the Evans-Pritchard essay, which is why I mentioned it.… Read more »
Yes, I’m not disagreeing – the point I was making was that people were martyred, and regardless of the specifics, Mwanga may not have been a particularly great guy. The current Kabaka is Ronald Mutebi II, a son of Edward Mutesa II, a statesman who the British ludicrously exiled from his own kingdom. He was allowed to return after a strike shut down Uganda, only to be exiled again by Obote. In turn Mutesa II was a grandson of Mwanga – so this is not all stuff that happened in a distant galaxy a long time ago – it’s living… Read more »
“so this is not all stuff that happened in a distant galaxy a long time ago – it’s living history.” Absolutely correct, and that is what makes this so fascinating. The Christian colonial suppression of these same-sex active/gender variant supporting cultures across the world peaked in the late 19th/early 20th Century. It’s fascinating what various indigenous groups and individuals are now doing to recover their past history from such suppression. All they have to do is chat to their grandmothers. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/20/the-trans-queen-mother-reclaiming-fijis-third-gender-photo-essay And it’s not just LGBTQ people reclaiming their past – many African women are going back to their own… Read more »
I always wonder when people talk about Christian colonial suppression, how much of it was Christian, how much a product of the culture and times? The slaughter of Australian indigenous people was nothing to do with (true) Christianity. I also fully appreciate the benefits which colonialism, and of course Christianity, brought. Some Guardian readers may differ!
Some practices, such as FGM, are well forgotten.
Carpenter maybe also demolishes the myths of Victorian society.
Nigel, you wrote “I always wonder when people talk about Christian colonial suppression, how much of it was Christian, how much a product of the culture and times?” That is a very fair question and worth paying attention to. As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, each culture or society is different and will have its own history, the answer will vary hugely from place to place. But I think is possible to argue that Christianity bears much responsibility for this suppression. It may have happened in two different ways. Firstly the colonial powers enforced their understanding of morality and ethics… Read more »
Thank you. Maybe I ought to clarify? There may have been mission schools etc., maybe a certain sexual morality, but these have little to do with what I regard as Christianity. ‘Suffer little children’ etc. In a similar way, I do not regard Smyth (and many others) as following Jesus. Until or unless he repented, which I don’t think he ever did. Mattew 7:16-20 I don’t think Jesus ever said ‘by their theology you shall know them’. Evangelicals will talk about salvation by grace, but they will also say that good works are an outpouring of grace, and without good… Read more »
Although some changes might be viewed as progressive: Mwanga had 17 wives; Mutesa II had one primary wife, twelve others and 23 children; Mutebi II has one wife and 5 children.
In the cases you speak about, presumably we are talking about concrete evidence for sexual activity between men. I’m afraid–though it is generous to make the David-Jonathon look like us–we have no real evidence for same sex activity between them. To honor cultures is also to deal with them on their own terms. And in OT terms, we know what the cultural realities were, esp vis-a-vis Canaanite culture, when it comes to sex between men. David and Jonathan having sex? We’d need more than conjecture, as fun as that is. Or, “fascinating’ –as you put it. A word with a… Read more »
Anglican priest, Thanks for the comments. I totally agree with you that we need to deal with these cultures on their own terms. Sadly that is a thing which we in the West struggle to do. We tend to focus only on the sex, and define homosexuality only as men having sex with each other, but that is a very unhelpful definition. They do things differently in many other cultures by widening the definition to include love. We should follow them Please see my response to Helen King about halfway down this thread above. In many of these cultures it… Read more »
MacCulloch would benefit from some instruction in the rudiments of exegesis.
You do not take one word and attribute a meaning to it which is in contradiction to the general biblical perspective.
His attempt to turn the verse you quote into a narrative about same sex activity is entirely unconvincing.
Peter, Prof Diarmaid MacCulloch is Emeritus Professor of the History of the Church University of Oxford, so it’s a bold man who suggests he needs to take some instruction in the rudiments of exegesis. Nevertheless I am happy to respond to your suggestion. I would argue that this single verse is not an isolated case. In the mass the Hebrew Scriptures are often very strange, very sexual, and very “queer”. But the distorted translation issue hides that from us. I only have time for two examples. In 1 Samuel 20.30 (just before the episode reported above) an angry Saul says to… Read more »
I am happy to leave the final word to the Old Testament scholar, Professor Seitz.
DOH!
IF Ham and Jonathan did do what you say they did – and this is contested, ideologically motivated conjecture being dressed up as fact – the scriptural witness is that IT WAS BAD STUFF FOR THEM TO BE DOING.
Everything oozing from the ground up isn’t divine. That is precisely what it means for God to lovingly rescue us, starting with the beach-head of Israel’s election and purpose and culminating in the Israel, Jesus Christ, God’s only Son. I’m not sure what is wrong with this very basic statement about where truth and life live.
Do you have any actual Hebrew language training? I ask with innocence. You seem to be relying on secondary literature, and on an historian who is not a Hebraist.
Anglican Priest. That is a valid question, thank you, and one I am well aware of. I am not a trained Hebrew scholar. I have been careful to mitigate that risk by discussing these issues of Hebrew translation in one-to-one conversations with a Rabbi and Hebrew scholar, who has told me that my understandings of the David, Ham/Noah and other such narratives are valid and within the bounds of the Hebrew language and acceptable scholarship. Incidentally that same Rabbi teaches at Sarum College, Salisbury. In November 2024 she ran a one-day seminar on the Joseph story in Genesis. She argued… Read more »
I know I am chided here, but I have taught Hebrew for over forty years, including upper level PhD seminars; and had to take Akkadian, Ugaritic, Aramaic in graduate training at Yale.
Hence my question.
Exactly. The OT is quite clear about sexual activity, child-bearing, and so forth and does not mince words. David and Bathsheba etc etc. There is no such account concerning David and Jonathan. This is just transferring LGBT+ hopes and wishes–such as they are–onto OT narratives.
Anglican Priest. I refer you to my response to Peter above. You and I differ profoundly on this, and I acknowledge that many of my arguments differ profoundly from traditional Christian understandings. But the academic method is to put forward one’s arguments backed up by academic evidence and sources, which I have done. I would argue that the dial on this subject is moving slowly in my direction – if one pays attention to current research. My sources in this discussion are Professor Diarmaid MacCulloch, and Professor Theodore Jennings writing in the Oxford Handbook of Theology, Sexuality and Gender. I… Read more »
I refer you to Albanian below. Historians may not be Hebraists or exegetes, but they must use sound judgment.
Yes, there is a danger of moving from contextual criticism to Carry On Criticism in which Professor Sid James ThD, assisted by Rev Babs Windsor MTh, rummage through the Old Testament looking for double entendres.
In a oner.
I admit to having mixed feelings about this post. On the one hand I was quite encouraged. I have past experience working on gay rights; the Age of Consent Campaign, the Armed Forces Gay Ban, and now the Church. I have had stones thrown at me in the street, and debated with generals on BBC TV, so a bit of name-calling will not discourage me. Quite the opposite. I learnt in those campaigns that when the discourse moves from reasoned debate to name-calling and insults then people have run out arguments. It is a sign one is beginning to make… Read more »
‘This is an issue of biblical authority. Despite much well-intentioned theological fancy footwork to the contrary, it is difficult to see the Bible as expressing anything else but disapproval of homosexual activity’
Diarmaid MacCulloch, Reformation: Europe’s House Divided.
Sometimes he gets his exegesis right, Peter and Simon.
Albanian,
I think this is the exegetical question you and I disagreed on a few days ago.
Does the Bible in all places have a universal view on homosexuality, or is it a compilation of narratives from a huge range of different times and cultures, within which the views on homosexuality should be expected to vary widely.
Both approaches are valid. And on that point I think it’s time to withdraw from this thread. I have had my say. Thanks.