Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Archbishop of Canterbury: ‘Gays have split Anglican church in two’

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Simon Murphy 28 Jul 2009, 10:31am

    “The question is not a simple one of human rights or human dignity. It is that a certain choice of lifestyle has certain consequences… A person living in such a union cannot without serious incongruity have a representative function in a Church whose public teaching is at odds with their lifestyle”

    Seriously Dr Williams – you need to f*ck off with your excuses for bigotry. You claim to be a christian but yet are willing to tolerate and facilitate hatred.

    A schism would be a very good thing for your church as it would rid of those evil, hate-filled bigots like Nazir-Ali who are such bigotted morons.

    1. Rashid Karapiet 2 Aug 2011, 5:53pm

      Dr. Williams has to persist with the myth that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice and not an inherent state of being: anything else would rob him of what he and his forbears regard as the power to control human sexuality which is essentially why the Anglican church has tied itself in nit-picking knots. For a scholar like the Archbishop one can only feel pity.

  2. Homophobes have split the Church, and now they’re putting blame on gays… Nothing new. It is always easier to blame LGBT than to repent and change attitude.

  3. If that’s really how it breaks down in the humble opinion of the Big Cheese himself, I know I did the right thing by ditching religion wholesale about 15 years ago.
    Unlike Groucho Marx, I no longer want to be part of any club that wouldn’t have me as a member.
    Sorry but I already wasted 15 of what should have been the best years of my life having my self-worth dragged through the mud by clerics. You can keep your unproven god hypothesis, I can be good without it!

  4. The only intent behind making something ‘less simple’ than “human rights or human dignity” is to deny human rights and human dignity – there’s really no weasel room within that.

  5. “But perhaps we are faced rather with the possibility of the two-track model, two ways of witnessing to the Anglican heritage.”

    Perhaps. Or maybe you could just move away from bigotry and preach Christianity’s REAL message of love? Funny how some Christians are ready to sacrifice their beloved church on the altar of their own prejudice, isn’t it?

    And every time I hear that word ‘lifestyle’ I want to spit. It’s just an excuse to deny one group of human beings rights.

  6. “If society changes its attitudes, that change does not of itself count as a reason for the Church to change its discipline.”
    of course, just like it is still ok to take an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. Why are church congregations dwindling? because they are living in the past. Man not laying with man may have been a good law when populations were smaller and infant mortality was high….now it should be seen as nature adjusting itself to ensure the planet survives the population explosion.

  7. At one point the Anglican Church thought people of colour where savages and not fit for leadership in the church. They forced faith on many peoples and destroyed cultures at the hands of fascist missionaries.

    The church has not moved that far on from its prejudices the last 300 years. Only they have changed the goalposts from race to women onto sexuality and probably left handed people in the future.

    You must ask the question why does Christianity need to always have some group it can hate when its teachings talk of love?

  8. Gays have not split the church in two; its the backward looking conservatives in the church (especially the African Anglicans!) that have caused this by their inability to move on, just like the RC church which refuses to deal with paedophiles!

  9. Abi1975, the Old Testament is full of violence and prejudice, which is a bit at odds with the message of ‘Love’. As is usual with most holy books, there’s a bit of everything in it for all of us, which makes a job like being a bishop a tough one.

  10. When people of colour wanted a place in the church . . . it threatened to split

    When women wanted a place in the church . . . it threatened to split

    When gays wanted a place in the church . . . it threatened to split

    Why does the church claiming to be a “Christian Church” ignore Jesus’s life and minisitry of inclusivity, diversity and tolerance? . . .

  11. I wish some zealot came along and told us we were insulting God and making society sick by having sex with people of the same sex. That would certainly make this thread a lot more interesting.

    ric (6) – I think your anthropological hypothesizing is really beside the point: no demographic concerns could give a majority the right to oppress any minority for something that does not hurt anyone. Also, with 5-10% of the population being gay, men who have this inclination laying with men could never endanger the survival of any community. I think such argumentation is flawed as it allows for situations when supressing gays can be acceptable, while it clearly never is.

  12. So your Jewish then Har Davids, if you follow the old testament teachings and not those of Jesus in the new testament!!!!!

  13. Andy – Give it time… I’m waiting for Upandatem or David Skinner to set the ball rolling!

  14. no your silly-hattedness. homophobes have split your church and if you had any guts you’d state that

  15. “I wish some zealot came along and told us we were insulting God and making society sick by having sex with people of the same sex. That would certainly make this thread a lot more interesting.”

    Andy . . . you will not need to wait for too long.
    Take a guess at which resident zealous zealots will be first.

  16. Brian Burton 28 Jul 2009, 12:54pm

    What on earth is Rowan Williams up to? The only ‘Schism’ that will exist will be of Rowan Williams own making because of his ‘Regret’ at the monatorium on the Ordination of Gay Bishops was voted down. the Ordination of Gay Clergy cannot mean ‘two tracks’ as he put it because a Gay Bishop is every bit as equal to a strieght one. So, when would a first and second class structure (according to Williams) be instituted? The stupid man is playing Hop-Scoch in a minefield!

  17. Mihangel apYrs 28 Jul 2009, 12:57pm

    Williams should know that it’s not a lifestyle choice it’s what we are. He KNOWS WELL gay clergy, he’s got friends who are gay!! Does he honestly believe we’d choose to be gay in the face of the hostility we face?

    Further more he says that “A blessing for a same-sex union cannot have the authority of the Church Catholic, or even of the Communion as a whole . . .” He had no qualms about blessing the union of the adulterous Chas and the (divorced) Camel did he?

  18. oh no…”…a certain CHOICE of lifestyle has certain consequences.”

    I hope he’s talking about those who choose to be homophobic!

    Why doesn’t he give God the CHOICE of lifestyle, like male or female??

  19. Williams is only concerned about the church so he sells out gays, lesbians and bisexuals just to keep the bigots happy, he even admits he empathises with Islam! he is a bigot and a hypocrite and that’s all that matters to him now

  20. Religion is undoubtedly a choice, sexuality is pre-determined.

  21. Abi1974 . . . I affirm this too

    Religion is a . . . “Life Style Choice”

  22. Theoretically I agree that religion is a choice; in reality I was baptized into the RCC as a 5-day-old infant.

    When did I choose to be brought up a Catholic?

    I didn’t choose to be gay either; like one of the guys just said: who would choose to be gay with all this hostility coming at us?

    If all the gay Christians stayed home for 2 months, all the churches would have to close. Haha.

  23. Bentham (22): I would. I love my life as it is. What I would choose is not coming across this silly question so often.

  24. No homophobia split the Anglian Church in two.

  25. Dr Williams says: “If society changes its attitudes, that change does not of itself count as a reason for the Church to change its discipline.”

    Unfortunately the Church didn’t think it was an issue when they went to communities across the world where same sex relationships were part and parcel of daily life BEFORE they arrived and told them it was wrong when they visited.

    Once again, it only works one way.

    As I’ve said in numerous occasions and posts, stop believing in God, start Nichiren Daishonin’s Buddhism and chant ‘nam myoho renge kyo’ ;0)

    RJ

  26. Henry Collier 28 Jul 2009, 2:48pm

    What a bunch of pure unadulterated crap. The homophobes and hate mongers, those unable and unwilling to accept individual differences are the ones who split the church. Those who discriminate have great power … take away the tax advantages from groups that discriminate and they will discriminate less when they’re hit in the pocket book.

  27. Peter Fuchs 28 Jul 2009, 2:52pm

    Perhaps his Grace would prefer Sharia Law?

  28. “If society changes its attitudes, that change does not of itself count as a reason for the Church to change its discipline.” For a supposedly intelligent and thoughtful archbishop, this is truly a bizarre statement. There are so many issues on which the Church has altered its standpoint: let’s face it, the Anglican Church only came into being in the first place BECAUSE ITS NEW HEAD (HENRY VIII) WANTED A DIVORCE!!! The Church has changed its position on women priests, fornication, divorce, contraception, the decriminalisation of homosexuality (yes, many of the bishops did vote in favour in 1967), transubstantiation, papal infallibility (remember that?), the ability of priests to marry…the list is endless. Dr Williams: you, sir, are a hypocrite. And that, I’m sure, is a far greater sin, than any you can accuse us of.

  29. I am quite happy to be part of the split that allows homophobes to fight each other but I refuse to be responsible for it. I don’t need any religion to dictate my pleasures and find it very amusing that instead of peace and world hunger they are distracted by my bumstuff.

    Methinks she doth protest too much . .

  30. As a proud Episcopalian who is sick to death of the hateful, backwards, dark ages drage queens that inhabit Canterbury I say F*CK Williams, F*CK Canterbury and F*CK the Church of England. England can have the whole lot of them.

    The Episcopal Church of America and the Anglican Church of Canada need to do what they should have done a LONG, LONG time ago and sever ALL ties to this evil Catholic stepsister and let them die and rot in their own hate and ignorance.

    It’s the EPISCOPAL church that has kept the Anglican communion alive all these years. It’s OUR dollars and NOT England’s pounds that have financed the church and it’s growth around the world, INCLUDING in the Global South. We should keep our money here and build up our own church, welcoming to ALL and see just how well Williams, and Canterbury and the (poor as paupers) Global South and the rest of the CoE does without our support.

    They need us. We DO NOT need them.

    I say SPLIT and GOOD RIDDANCE.

    I’m sick and tire of having this conversation. I’m in church to be a kinder, gentler more compassionate person but this whole mess just infuriates me and leaves me questioning the church, the Church and all this religious bullsh*t that seems to be at the center of, or at least associated with, just about every bit of hate and discourse in the world.

    I hope these people are happy that they are driving people to atheism.

  31. Dear Rowan it is hard to see how they (the established church of England) can act in the necessarily representative role as a member of government and discriminate and denigrate some citizens who are meant to be considered equal by the state .” F*** off and give up your priveleged role in Government. Which strand of Cof E will remain a part of the Government surely it can’t be one that outregously discriminates against some citizens.

  32. “I say F*CK Williams, F*CK Canterbury and F*CK the Church of England.”

    What a wonderful display of Christian love. I can see how well the Episcopalian church teaches Christ’s message.

    “We should keep our money here and build up our own church, welcoming to ALL and see just how well Williams, and Canterbury and the (poor as paupers) Global South and the rest of the CoE does without our support.”

    Yeah, the Global South are so poor, screw ‘em! Who needs to give support to the poor.
    I’m sure Desmon Tutu will be crying himself to sleep knowing you no longer want to support the African church.

  33. Jonathan: go for it! I look forward to the day the Episcopal Church of America buys up churches here in the UK and starts preaching a version of Christianity that Christ might have recognised..

  34. Hi Andy (23):

    Touché !

    I do love my life, as my friend Mihangel ap Yrs loves his.

    It may someday become a cliché to say that we wouldn’t choose this life. Mind you, the hostility we have faced because of Christian homophobia is nonetheless quite real, and it has damaged many, many young gay men, some of whom have either attempted or succeeded to end it the only way they knew how, not because they hated their lives…you can take it from there, buddy.

    By the way, a clever lad like you would be a more valuable part of the team if you addressed the issue at hand instead of shooting us down, e.g. ric @ 11.

    You wouldn’t want us to think you were trying to cause a ‘split’ in this community, would you. Come on, climb aboard!

  35. Roger j Smith 28 Jul 2009, 4:04pm

    As an active member of the church for the past sixty years the split canot come fast enough for me. I have no desire to have any part of the revolting hypocrisy shown to gay people. Williams was and is a dead loss.Thank God for the American church, at least they have some guts.

  36. John K:

    You ever hear of this guy ‘Andy’ who thinks ric’s ‘anthropological hypothesizing’ is ‘flawed’? Reality check or am I trigger-happy?

  37. TomPaine:

    Can you feel the pressure rising on this thread?

  38. After re-reading my previous rant I want to apologize for something that I said that I regret. It was offensive and uncalled for.

    When I called Williams and his coven of Canterbury witches “dark ages drag queens”, I stepped over the line, I was unfair and unkind. So, to all the drag queens out there, I apologize profusely. I should never have dragged you, innocent bystanders, into my rant. I love drag queens and it was completely inappropriate for me to associate them with clutch of homophobic old men who run the show in the CoE.

    Again, to drag queens everywhere, my sincerest apologies.

    To JohnF, cry me a river baby. I stand by every word (but the drag queen part) and, BY THE WAY, Desmond Tutu agrees with the EPISCOPAL CHURCH and not the Global South on this issue. I’ve had the honor and humbling experience of meeting him and talking to him about this very topic. How about you?

    You may think it’s gay American Episcopalians’ jobs to support anti-gay churches but I sure don’t. I think they should be supported by the break away churches in America who share their homophobia as well as the English churche’s who don’t have the guts, or bollocks as you would say, to stand with the Episcopal church on this issue of fairness and tolerance. Oh, and here’s a thought, why don’t YOU increase your contribution to the Global South maintenance fund, assuming of course that you actually give your money to the cause that you feel I should be ashamed of withholding mine from.

    Let me remind you that the American Episcopal Church has NEVER demanded, or even ASKED FOR, other churched to believe as we do, or practice as we do. We’ve only asked that we, and others, decide for ourselves on these issues. It’s Williams and Akinola and the Global South who are DEMANDING that EVERYONE in the communion belief and practice as THEY dictate.

    We Episcopals are sick of being treated like naughty children and have no doubt that history will prove that we were right and history will show this to be a shameful time in the CoE, if it survives.

    But anyway, yeah I’m pissed. There is such a thing as righteous anger and your whining about my tone isn’t going to make me feel guilty or ashamed of my human emotions. Nice try though.

  39. He says authoritively, standing in a big yellow frock

  40. I know a COE vicar who is in a long term and active gay relationship; does the toilets as well on the sly. The live together in the official vicarage and don’t seem have any problems. I have never heard them mention civil partnership even. Just two old queens living in sin and buggering to their hearts content. Dr Nazir-Ali would have a fit!

  41. Adultery is condemmed far more often and strongly in the bible- but we have bishops blessing adulterous people- why?

  42. Jonathan @39 did you know you’re bi-polar? You seem to be, you know. Either that or you are completely false! You start off down your knees, or no, lower still, on your belly even, begging forgiveness for speaking seemingly pejoratively of drag queens, . . . and then in an instant you dismiss all contrition and rave like a lunatic.

    Yep, you’re one of those that believes in gods and fairies I expect.

  43. I agree whole heartedly with John K (10). Despite all the talk in the past about women priests in the UK, I know of at lest two women who were against it that are now Priests. Also, if you Dr. Williams, took out all the gay priests you would loose all very large number in the UK alone, let alone at least two bishops!

    You would also loose the vast majority of priests & their bishop in an area of London!

  44. Dominick J. 28 Jul 2009, 4:57pm

    Hog Wash!! The Anglican church Split the Anglican church because of their stupid archiac laws. Instead of seeing ALL of it’s people as one group of Human beings in the scheme of things of the whole world they have separated Homosexuals and those family and friends and Heterosexuals. Denying that if there is a God He/She created all mankind to be as they are. Jesus put the Pharasie down once before and now again some 2000+ years later HE will do it again.

  45. Well, I now have conclusive proof that PinkNews is NOT about free speech. They are monitoring these threads and deleting anything that they don’t happen to like, such as the following. I saw my message appear, then five minutes later I came back and it was gone! I see that they have also deleted JohnF’s #31 comment, JohnF being the first to observe this shoddy piece of Sun-type gutter-level journalism from PinkNews.

    —————————–

    JohnF, #31, indeed, PinkNews does not give the source of the quote in their headline! The headline reads “Archbishop of Canterbury: ‘Gays have split Anglican church in two’.

    I have googled the phrase and have found that only Gay and Lesbian websites have today reported this story using exactly the same headline . . . and the source of the headline and its quote appears to be PinkNews! Therefore, it appears that PinkNews has attributed to Rowan Williams words that he has not uttered.

    Shame on you, Pink News. This is cheap journalism!

    (Those who know me, know that I am not defending Williams or bigots within the Anglican church.)

    ———————————–

  46. Both the Anglican and the Cathlic churches seem to encourage and protect paedophilia whilst they condemn harmless consensual homosexual relationships, clearly both churches are intrinsically morally disordered.

  47. #16

    “The stupid man is playing Hop-Scoch in a minefield!…”

    Comment by Brian Burton — July 28, 2009 @ 12:54…

    BRIAN..!
    GLEETINGS EVELLYBODDEE FLOM A HOT AND SUNNY THAIRAND..!

    I just love that…”Hop-scotch in a minefield…!”

    Would that the daft old sod would hop-scotch in that minefield, in all that yeller clobber…It’d be like an explosion in a custard factory.
    The hypocrisy of the C of E and all the rest of them is ….well, isn’t it!
    Someone mentioned earlier, “Chas and the Camel…” – a case in point.
    Someone else said that the Christian churches, while preaching love and….are not happy unless they are marginalising some group or other; exactly so.
    Someone else thinks that if all the gays stoppped going to church the doors would just shut.
    Flapjack said that he kicked it all into touch 15 years ago; I did it 50 years ago; makes no difference.

    It’ll come.

    Maybe that is just about the best answer.

    K.

  48. It was first the Jews, then the “witches”, now the “gays”…. if they’re not persecuting someone, they’re not happy.

    How weak their ethos must be not to be able to stand on his own without deflecting blame onto another group. Let the church split. Churches have being splitting since some twat first got on a podium and started crapping on about how he knows what “gods wants”.

  49. Gays have NOT split the Anglican church in two, Archbishop Williams.

    Today’s OPENNESS about being gay may well be doing, may well have done.

    It is the OPENNESS that has put the cat among the pigeons.

    Have ‘gays’ just suddenly appeared on the scene in the C of E, or for that matter the RCC..?

    Hardly.

    So what you can deduce from that is that it certainly was better when it was illegal from the churchman’s point of view, if from no-one else’s point of view.
    Now that everyone is ‘at it’ and demanding their rights, it has left all these be-gowned fairies in a quandery-ette; they have been RUMBLED.

    That is why there is a priestly vow of celibacy in the Catholic Church; it is a screen, it is one way, to hide your gay-i-tude behind.

    Not any more, however.

    Who needs a vow of celibacy to hide behind when there is nothing to hide FROM today..?

    You are gay, today…?
    So what…?

    You can go in the army, the RAF, the police, the navy….with gusto…these organisations actively ENCOURAGE enquiries from would-be recruits.

    And the church, the RCC church, in particular, is not now the hidey-hole it once was; you cannot use the RCC celibacy ‘diktat’ as the reason for ‘not having a woman in tow’; it is no longer the bolt-hole, the excuse, for gay men, that it undoubtedly once was, as in say the younger days of Ratzinger, who is a case in point.

    He has sublimated himself and his self-loathing of his own ‘orientation’ all the way into the Chair of St. Peter; jobbo numero uno..

    Doesn’t stop her being as camp as Christmas.

    You cannot knock out of the flesh what is bred in the bone.

    Good luck to the man; just stop knocking the rest, just ‘cos YOU can’t handle it; live and let live, du silly, alte, Deutche, Konigin.

    They are all ‘at it’.
    Here in Thailand, they are all ‘at it’ too in their wats (temples) – their ‘bum-palaces’ as I have often heard them referred to affectionately..

    K.

  50. #30 Jonathan, you’re magnificent, excellent and right. There’s absolutely no reason why the episcopalians should fund the homophobes, and Williams should get some historical perspective. (Am reminded that when they shut Gene Robinson out of the Lambeth conference, they still sent him a begging letter asking for a donation so the African bishops could attend.)

  51. Dominick J. 28 Jul 2009, 6:26pm

    Eddy your comment is cheap! Pink News is more than fair, hell they let the likes of you post here. SO why did they let you post your tirade up above exposing them? LOL–Free Speech that’s why.

  52. Bentham (34),

    To keep with the subject of this article, I would really not like to cause a schism between all the good gays visiting this site. However, I find both the overpopulation and the why would anybody choose homosexuality arguments flawed and I think they do not serve the interest of our community. We are at comment 52 and there is still no homophobe to argue with on this thread, so I think we can afford discussing issues like the merit or flaws of arguments we use.

  53. Gays haven’t split the church, bigatory, hatred, judgement and intolerance have split the church!!!

  54. Hi Andy:

    It’s really good to see your post. I didn’t mean to shut you up. We were all pretty hyper at the opening of this post…we say things, you know how it is. Your own tone is back to your own sweet, intelligent self, and of course you have the right to post in any way you want. I’m sorry to have offended you.

    You are also right to point out that the fundies have not yet made their entrance; we really did expect them because we are being neither facetious nor paranoid when we say that they are in the wings at all times, waiting to strike.

    Again, please let’s forget it…and carry on the debates.

  55. What is it with the Christian Right that we have to be diminished as having a “lifestyle with consequences” as Rowan says – I don’t have a fricking “lifestyle” I have a “LIFE” – a God-given life that is exactly the way He intended it to be – a gay one!

  56. This, this statement by Dr. Williams, is not, in my opinion, about homosexuality per se. Rather, it is a deeply political statement designed to align the Church of England with the current and future power structure in the UK – it is a statement designed to ensure that the Church of England survives under the inevitable Conservative government that will be voted into power at the next election in the UK.

    The Archbishop of Canterbury isn’t actually concerned here about the rights of Gay people, I think that he believes that any future Government of our countries will not disturb the current legal situations – but he is, I think, concerned with the threat that any future Conservative Government might pose to the Church of England. He is merely making noises which he hopes will placate the more rabidly anti-Church members of the Conservative party whilst trying desperately not to offend Gay Christians of the Anglican persuasion.

    He is in a lose/lose situation. One cannot placate the anti-Church Conservatives – those who have bought, hook line and sinker, into the dubious and relativistic model of multi-culturalism in our society pedalled by the hard of thinking – whilst, at one and the same time placating the liberal Christian, such as me.

    That is the impossible balancing act that he is trying to perform – a balancing act which he hopes will keep the Anglican Church intact! Well, it won’t.

    When Dr. Williams writes “A person living in such a union cannot without serious incongruity have a representative function in a Church whose public teaching is at odds with their lifestyle… A blessing for a same-sex union cannot have the authority of the Church Catholic, or even of the Communion as a whole . . .” then he reveals a deep ignorance of the history of Chistianity and an alignment with fundamentalists that must worry us all. Such ignorance of the basic tenets of Christianity by an Archbishop of Canterbury is, to say the least, quite staggering. Tht he is unaware that the early Church, the Church we seek to emulate, had no difficulties in allowing homosexuals to marry and to take a full and active role in Church life simply beggars belief.

    Frankly, I stand with all of you who insist, demand, that our Church splits now, divides now. It is way beyond time that we followers of the true Christ of love and compassion split off from the hatred of the undereducated Biblical literalists.

    Dr. Wilkiams, perhaps to his credit, doesn’t see things that way – he still, I think, believes that we can all live together.

    We can’t!

    Time to split, once more. Time to split, no matter what the cost!

    Sometimes morality is woth more thzn compromise!

  57. Bing brought up in the RC faith I was always taught the Refermation was the worst thing that ever happened! As an ex RC adult, I discovered that the Reformation was the best thing that happened to this country! Perhaps its time for another rethink for a more modern age; institutions that do not move with the times ineviatably fail! (and YES Desmond Tutu is an example of what a true Christian Minister should be!)

  58. asorry about the awful spolig; have not woken up yet!!

  59. Hey Bentham, you did not offend me at all, but thank you for your concerns :)

  60. Moral authority comes from leadership. Priests are to represent the Will of God in the world, and Bishops to organise them to do that. It’s a top down system. God Bless him Archbishop Rowan seems to have forgotten this. If the Military can celebrate it’s gay service personnel and the Church can’t, it underscores just how irrelevant the church is. Shame.

  61. Yes, split now. John M.J. obviously has a handle on the issue. If the Archbishop wants to go the way of the fundies, goodbye and the sooner the better. We’ll pick up the pieces and carry on in the dynamic presence of the Spirit of a loving God.

    As a lapsed-Catholic who is revolted by the hierarchy’s refusal to accept the teachings of Vatican II and to rather lead the RCC back to the Middle Ages, I see a very similar split imminant here too.

    Countless thousands of Catholics around the world, among them the ‘Rainbow’ population, are organized right now – today – to petition Rome in favour of a third Oecumenical Council, Vatican III, to stress the undeniable importance for the survival of the RCC to atune itself theologically to the tremenous scientific discoveries of the 20th century regarding human sexuality.

    Enough is enough, or as John MacNeill, a Jesuit no less, said in his groundbreaking book, ‘Homosexuality and the Catholic Church’: BASTA! BASTA! Enough is enough!

  62. Brian Burton 29 Jul 2009, 6:57pm

    Bentham,
    It’s because of the stance Rowan Williams is taking with his ‘Regrets’ that Gay Clergy want equal right etcetera, makes the Polititions pussy-foot around the whole subject of Homosexuality. Therefore, the political qualification gets watered down to damp-squib preportions. I mentioned in a previous comment that Rowan is trying to be all things to all people and as you know, thats impossible. I don’t think Basta! Basta! will cut it untill you and I and all that we know now is riding into the sun-set!

  63. I’m really not interested in being “tolerated” by people who hold superstious views. What concerns me is that there are unelected members of the church in the House of Lords? and these people are still in a position to influence policy.

  64. Mike:

    What you need is a hand in the morning. Did I say that?

  65. Brian Burton 31 Jul 2009, 9:15pm

    Bentom,
    Wash you mouth out with soap and water you saucy boy!

  66. Brian:

    OK, but not the whip, ple-e-ease|

  67. Brian Burton 1 Aug 2009, 12:56pm

    Benthom,
    Yes the whip it is, now you are not to say: ‘Stoppit I like it!’ as the teasing cat ‘o nine tails soothes the flesh. (Did I just say that?)

  68. mark gory 1 Aug 2009, 2:44pm

    ‘church triumphant” – indeed – successful in exposing itself as rotten to the core and the ‘whited sepulchures’ still protest! if so much protectionism didn’t exist on its behalf, it would have closed down a long long time ago. maybe that’s where we should start by exposing it for the unviable archaic and Christless joke it is.
    Why ever permit these base spiritual bankrupts determine our worth for another moment?
    I am sure that this is another space where “Jesus wept” and continues to weep for the horrendous misrepresentation of his life and example to us all.
    You can’t stop the inevitable – let the schism occur sooner than later.

  69. Brian Burton 1 Aug 2009, 5:22pm

    Mark Gory,
    I for one am looking foward to th schism, they need to be shaken out of their complacentcy.

  70. Sue Whitlock 18 Dec 2009, 9:23am

    I have always thought that the role of the Church was to serve its people. Now, according to Dr Williams, preserving the Church as an immutable monolith is more important than making sure that it ministers to ALL people. Surely he doesn’t really believe that?

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all