Anglicans really need to get laid more often. They even turn on their own now. I went to Greenbelt in the early 80′s so it might have changed, but I would never describe it as being ‘too gay’. There was rock ‘n roll, Saint Cliff, lots of camping and some of my friends had (straight)sex. I went to one seminar about a gay cure (yes they were talking about it back then too) but left after 10 minutes as I didn’t fancy the speaker.
How immature can you get – your festival is soooo gay. GROW UP!
Anything that annoys Anglican Mainstream and has them seething with rage must be a good thing.
The Gayification of the Chuch? Gadzooks Sir!
I mentioned in another thread here that somebody wrote on a wall in a Soho Club: Those Gay People are so…. so ..Gay!
“gayification” of the church? well, why not? Im sure God loves the color of the rainbow too…so let’s “gayify” the church even further! Jesus won’t mind…
Some Christians Are Gay, When Will Anglican Mainstream Get Over It?
@mcc metro baguio – God made the rainbows – each and every one of us
With regard to the appalling ex-gay antics of “Anglican Mainstream”, Dominique Moloney has sent the following message to the National Secular Society:
I’m a member of the National Secular Society and a regular writer for the BBC. I just wanted to inform you that I have an episode of Doctors coming out on Thursday 6th August (1:45pm, BBC1) called Surrender. It tells the tragic story of two gay men torn apart by the fundamentalist Christian “Ex-Gay Movement”. The research I have done on the subject makes for shocking reading and countless lives have been ruined by this cruel bigotry. Although the BBC asked me to temper my references to any particular religious sect, I think it was brave of them to allow me to tackle such a controversial issue.
For those who are unable to see Doctors during its daytime broadcast, it will be available on BBC iPlayer for a week after broadcast.
“gayification” of the church?” – Why not? It’s been “bigotified” for long enough.
Simon Murphy should be Gayified, he’s far too dour!
the whole genre of Xian art is homoerotic. Christ as a blond-haired blue-eyed arian
St Sabastian writhing (erotically) under the arrows. The kisses etc, etc.
I am a Gay Christian and loving it. I have a Gay Lover, I love Gay sex, I am TOO GAY BY HALF! And God wants Simon Murphy for a Sunbeam! Yippee!
“And God wants Simon Murphy for a Sunbeam!”
How conspicuously esoteric. :P
Mihangel, you are SO right about a lot of Xian art being suffused with the homoerotic! And not only the Xian art of which the galleries are full. (One has to applaud Gilbert and George for recently suggesting that all Xian art, being complete lies, should be removed from the National Gallery and housed elsewhere.)
Years ago, I worked for a while in a Catholic bookshop. In trooped every sister, brother, priest, monsignor, and occasional bishop in the locality, as well as legions of devout laity. As well as the books of brainwash, the shop sold trinkets and objects for idolatry. In terms of “wall art”, such as high quality Byzantine-style (though fake) icons, the most popular depiction of Jesus was something which can best be described as “The Spunky Jesus”. Nuns in particular, old as well as young, were very fond of “The Spunky Jesus”. Every day or so another one left the shop in the hot little grip of some fervent religious. “The Spunky Jesus” depicts a rather beach-bummish Jesus – long blonde hair, blue eyes, designer stubble, lips slightly apart. The sexual allure is unmistakeable.
The following gives you an impression of what it was like:
Click here for sexy Jesus
Further examples are:
I don’t have time right now, or the inclination, to look for sexy depictions of Mohammed!
Dermot Darling Boy!
Please do not come out with phrases like esoteric. I hate it when I have to rush to the dictionary to find out what someone has said!
Miss Za-Za Gabor, “Are you a good Housekeeper?” “Of course Darling, every time I get devorced, I get to keep the house!
Is Brian Burton pissed, or is he on something?
How dare you use such an unspeakable term as Pi…d?
Now pin back your Jug-ears and next time the term is: ‘Brahms and Lizte.’…..I say, somebody should have ‘Tipped’ you about that one!
P.S. fot Tipster,
With a Shallalee under me arm and a twinkle in me eye and I’m off to Tipparari in the mornin’….! Now Tipster, don’t be stubborn like McGinty’s Goat!
Brian, I reckon Tipster’s right! :-) It’s either booze, drugs, or the love of Jaysus!
Up yours Too Eddy!
It should be noted that the article was written by one of the Anglican Mainstream contributors, but that there had already been a considerable debate on the issue on AM’s discussion board. At the same time, Greenbelt has never been an ‘Anglican’ event – rather it is non-denominational – and over time there have been a number of seminars and discussions on the rightness and wrongness of gay relationships. The 7 individuals/groups mentioned in the article are but a small minority of the 150 or so individuals and groups taking part this year, many of whom have expressed their concerns over the way in which gay relationships are being forced on a reluctant society.
As for reference to the ‘gay cure’ conference, and Dominic Maloney’s episode of ‘Doctors’, I can think of plenty of people who have been outed, despite having not a gay bone in their bodies (with all the resultant damage that does), as well as a number of people who have responded positively to psychological help for their homosexual orientation and who are now living happy, fulfilled lives.
Sadly, the gay community has as much to answer for as any other part of society in this respect, especially now that one of their lynchpin arguments – the gay gene – has been shown to be a false argument.
Before suggesting that society/the church/whoever should get their house in order, the gay community needs to ensure that it is not giving an incorrect and biased picture itself.
Only then can society seriously treat the community with respect.
Sunday 12th.July and I am offto my United Reformed Church along with the man I love. Now is’nt that just great?
Dolwgan, #21 wrote: “gay relationships are being forced on a reluctant society”. This statement is highly questionable and very ambiguous. Deconstruct it and it includes the proposition that the whole of society is being forced against its will into having gay relationships. This is quite clearly nonsense. What is true is that individuals, like the writer, are homophobic: they have a deeply entrenched, possibly subconscious, prejudice against homosexuality.
Re. Dolwgan’s statement “people who have been outed, despite having not a gay bone in their bodies”, it is not possible to “out” somebody who is not gay. You may be referring to the rare psychological phenomenon of a person who gives every sign of being gay except that he/she insists that they are not. I have known only one such person and quite closely. I, and dozens of other people who knew him (we were all studying for a qualification together), became sure he was in denial. He certainly showed signs of a lack of inner peace and a lack of authenticity and congruency. We suspected that due to some homophobic instruction at some point in his past, the reality of his being homosexual was utterly repugnant to him.
Dolwgan refers to “a number of people who have responded positively to psychological help for their homosexual orientation and who are now living happy, fulfilled lives.” You can repeat this statement as often as leaders of the ex-gay movement do, but the true evidence speaks otherwise. To put it bluntly even ex-gays who have openly testified that they have been “straightened” have subsequently been caught with their pants down in gay places and in gay relationships. All the ex-gay movement does is advise people to will themselves to living heterosexually. But to live heterosexually while remaining actually homosexual is to be inauthentic and to set up a disharmony in oneself that can only result in physical and mental disturbance.
Re. “the gay gene”, Dolwgan should hold his tongue until all the evidence is in. It is very early days yet.
Finally, Dolwgan, you clearly feel that you have acquitted your Xian duty by visiting this site and making your papal-like pronouncements. In so doing you have confirmed your Xian behaviour and this makes you feel more secure, more distanced from your fears. However, it may seem that you are light-years from approaching your irrational fears and overcoming them, and finding that there is no need for them, discovering that you can embrace the diversity of the world and be at peace, but please know that it IS a journey upon which you CAN embark. And it is a far braver journey than your clinging to the simple black and white strictures of a religion.
Currently you are voluntarily spending your life in a strait-jacket. You don’t have to. You can cast off your strait-jacket tomorrow. Say “Too hell!” with those peers who are currently governing the way you spend your precious life . . . and start to LIVE!
Now there’s a Sunday Sermon, the likes of which and the challenge of which you are unlikely to have ever heard before! Do you have the guts to respond? Or like a Xian automaton will you cling to your safe and narrow strictures?
Eddy, I have just sobered-up (although I was never drunk in the bleedin’ first place!) and read your exellent post.
Are these ‘professional’ agitators like Dolwgan becomming legion on the Pink threads? Mind you, it makes life a litle more interesting in the main and tests the wits of his Gay advisary! Ideals are dangerous things, if it is ideals they seek? like Dolwgan. Those who find ugly meanings in beautiful things such as the Homosexual matrix in all it’s formations, do no sevice to God or mankind. The aim of life is self-development. To realize your own nature perfectly, that is what each of us are here for. We, as outed Gays (And how is it possible to out a non-Gay?) should never be afraid of any critiscism of our beings. We are mostly a superior interlect than the one who would be our critics. So, we must not forget the highest of our duties, the duty to ourselves.
Know thyself, should be written over any door we enter in this life. Be Yourself on exit from that door.
I have my own idea of how to gayifie a church: it involves a housebrick tied with a pink ribbon, a strong arm, and a large target.
You naughty young beautiful Child of Pink. A well spanked rear if you did!!
Anglican Mainstream: Methinks they do protest way too much!
Gay and art go together so its not a suprise to find many artists and architects (and musicians) who worked for the Church were Gay. Statues oand pictures of hunky saints in S&M roles and nuns being given divine orgasms by having golden arrows thrust into them by angels etc and so forth. Even some cruxifictions show JC as someone who obvioulsy pumped iron a lot! As for Eddy 14′s sexy JC he looks like some hollywood heart throb(!)
Mike, There is a vast number of Gay Chritians, I am one of them.
The Anglican Community in England that I know has always been (not supportive of Gays) but Gays has always been part of the fabric of the Anglican Church. Great efforts and pressure is at present being put on the Anlican Church through discussion forums, and protest, as seen latley, when Peter Tatchell climbed into the Arch-Bishop’s pulpit with him and it was on the national news. So there it is and things can only get better.
Gays have always been part of the warp and woof of the Church even if they were closeted. If all gays left the Church tomorrow it would quickly become a very dull dark place–or at least duller and darker thaan some parts of it it are (Anglican Mainstream).
Does anyone here think that Dolwgan and David Skinner might make a lovely couple? I both the ladies doth protest too much.
A most disconcerting name Bishop? But no-matter, you are forgiven!
Dolwgan and Skinner? Nay, nay and thrice nay! We have enough to contend with in their singular capacity. Together would be inconcevable! I’m sure that Dolwgan could be the former Monkeychops who graced these threads untill his ignominious departure. The exelent Bentham and Pumpkin Pie exposed him for the fraud he was! But no-matter my dear Bishop loan. There are better fish to fry. I flatter myself in thinking I exposed Skinner as a closet Gay…He did not disagree with me on that score. I remember in the late 1960s. I saw written on a toilet wall: My Mother made me a Homosexual. Written underneath that was: If I buy the wool, will she make me one?
AM do not represent all Christians, I suspect just a minority. I love Greenbelt because it allows people to be who they are – gay/straight christian/atheist. If A.M. don’t like it, they should just stay away. Please don’t think all Christians agree with them. Everyone is welcome in my churches, regardless of sexuality, relationships etc etc
The editor of Anglican Mainstream is an old acquaintance of mine from church. He’s gay but has decided to marry a woman instead but still suffers from massive internal homophobia which kinda explains why AM protesteth too much!
Have ANY of you Actually read this story? So so quick to jump on the religious band-wagon. this story is misrepresented!