Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Archbishop of Canterbury in ‘intensive and private’ talks over Uganda’s gay law

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. a person who is willing to pander to homophobes is no help
    Rowan is a sell-out

  2. malcanoid 4 Dec 2009, 1:36pm

    Must the unity of the anglican church be protected at the expense of great misery for many and possibly their lives. I am afraid I see parallels here with Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Dublin and its attitudes to child abuse.

  3. To publicly speak out won’t be as detrimental to the church as the law will be to the LGBT people in Uganda who face being murdered without opposition.

  4. Simon Murphy 4 Dec 2009, 2:09pm

    How pathetic – he won’t speak out about a blatantly evil, murderous law because he’s worried about causing further division in his church.

    He is no christian if he is so concerned with his church that he can’t condemn state-sanctioned murder.

    What a loser.

  5. No need to worry; rowan’s church is, thankfully, dying. Men who wear dresses and believe in fable should not be taken seriously.

  6. “Men who wear dresses and believe in fable should not be taken seriously. ”

    WHOA! Sorry, we bash men who wear dresses now?

    I had high hopes for the Archbishop when he first came to office. I can see the cleft stick he’s in, of running the risk of a) schism and b) fundamentalists running around without any check on their activities if he draws a line in the sand, but of hamstringing the Anglican Communion if he doesn’t. It IS best to try and remain in communion with others, but it requires that they have any intention – no matter how small – of remaining in communion with you. I honestly think the best thing to do is make acceptance of women clergy and bishops and LGBTQI people as congregants and clergy a basic part of what you sign up to not fighting against if you want to remain in the AC, and make sure that the AC continues to be open to dialogue with those who choose to break away.

    As a couple of elderly relatives of mine said recently, “Our vicar’s gay and he’s a damn fine priest – and it’s the damn fine priest bit that’s important.”

  7. “Men who wear dresses and believe in fable should not be taken seriously.”
    That’s pretty cruel, they probably said similar things about gay people once

  8. Hugh of Lincoln 4 Dec 2009, 3:23pm

    God wants the Church to allow same-sex marriage. The bishops will be judged very severely for preventing it, you mark my words.

  9. douglas in canada 4 Dec 2009, 3:28pm

    Ha! Can you imagine these words coming out of Jesus’ mouth, perhpas in a prayer to God?
    “It has been made clear to us, as indeed to others, that attempts to publicly influence either the local church or political opinion … would be divisive and counter-productive.”
    Ah, how history could have changed.

  10. Jen Marcus 4 Dec 2009, 4:24pm

    Its time “to fish or cut bait your Excellency.” If you are truly a Christian and a leader you must do the right thing or you will be repeating the tragic cowardly drama role of Pontius Pilate. By not publicly speaking out you are condemning members of the LGBT community: Part of Christ’s Mystical Body and equal children of God, theological concepts of your belief system, to be handed over to be crucified and to die. Do you want that on your conscience for the sake of a false and tenuous unity of your already crumbling church due in part to its hypocrisy as exemplified by your present lack of action and behaviour?

  11. Jennifer Hynes 4 Dec 2009, 4:33pm

    I’m not sure but I think Gideon Byamugisha is a pro-gay Ugandan churchman, so there is some hope. Perhaps.

    As for Rowan Williams, it’s either Christ’s teaching or church politics, he can’t have it both ways. To be a disciple of Christ is to live the message. By not speaking out he is simply hiding his lamp under a bushel and living for the world and not for Christ.

    To live for Christ would mean he would speak out strongly, but as he isn’t, the cheap grace he has fallen for will do him no good in the long run.

  12. Jennifer – unfortunately many think homophobia and the various evils like murder is part of what Jesus wanted as many are cherry-picking homophobes

  13. Father Andrew Gentry FCSF 4 Dec 2009, 5:32pm

    I wonder if the Archbishop would have taken the same stance in 1939 towards the Nazi government of Germany. Perhaps he would have thought Mr. Chamberlain’s “Peace in Our Time” was the better way so as not to antagonize Hitler! It did not work then and it will not work now. It is either stand against hate or suffer the consequences. After all the Cross is way of the follower of Jesus not compromise for the sake of political expediency.

  14. Brian Burton 4 Dec 2009, 6:07pm

    A PR exercise only. Bishop Williams is a very weak man and goes with the flow!

  15. George Broadhead 4 Dec 2009, 6:19pm

    The implication in some of these emails that Jesus would have been gay-friendly is nonsense. I suggest that those who posted them read the briefing ‘Jesus and Homosexuality on the GALHA website at http://www.galha.org

  16. Could you please use another photo from the archive, P.N.?
    This one looks like an explosion at Bird’s.
    K

  17. Robert, ex pat Brit 4 Dec 2009, 7:18pm

    Make no mistake, if there were NO Anglican community in Uganda, Williams would be dead silent. What a douche-bag. Note the deafening silence of the former nazi in the Vatican, it obviously condones it since it stated several months ago that homosexuality must be wiped from the face of the earth. I guess Uganda is carrying out his instructions.

  18. Oh well, if we have ABC taking care of things then we are well and truly b******d.

  19. Fr Gentry hits the nail on the head. I encourage him to make that point in Church Times etc.

  20. ‘rahman’ has crawled out of his sewer. Don’t feed the troll.

  21. Rahman, the founder of your religion was a paedophile, the youngest of his wives was SIX years old! Yet you say “peace be upon him”! He had perhaps as many as TWENTY-TWO wives. A fine example. He probably hadn’t the time (or the imagination) for boyfriends, although maybe there were boyfriends after all, there are plenty of gay Muslims, maybe it just was censored over the years. Maybe like Randy Rahman trawling gay websites for solitary kicks, eh, maybe he was a bit of a boy’s boy in his cave, after all?

    See you at the Qiyamat!

  22. jonnielondon 4 Dec 2009, 10:59pm

    Any Ugandan lawmakers/politicians responsible for the enactment of this proposed package of laws should be subject to court proceedings by the Criminal Court of Justice in the Hague for crimes against humanity.

  23. Jean-Paul Bentham 4 Dec 2009, 11:25pm

    Exactly, it is a crime against humanity and it should be treated so.

    Get irrelevant and inconsequential religious institutions outta there.

  24. Jean-Paul Bentham 5 Dec 2009, 1:37am

    This is a Human Rights Issue. Here is a pod cast from Human Rights Watch regarding the situation in Uganda at the moment.

    http://www.hrw.org/en/audio/2009/11/30/world-aids-day-2009-rights-watch-21?tr=y&auid=5671026

    The Archbishop is meddling and has nothing to bring to Uganda, unless he can get rid of the fundamentalist evangelicals.

  25. Rahman for some one who goes on and on about their paedophile prophet . . . I would be very worried if you worked with children.

  26. Father Andrew Gentry 5 Dec 2009, 3:33am

    Adrian thank you. I will indeed endeavor to do exactly that. On a related topic if George thinks that Jesus is not gay friendly he is living in delusional world created by homophobes. One of the most affirming events of his ministry indeed one in which he marvels at the faith of a “gentile” is the plea by the Centurion to heal his beloved servant. The word in the original aramaic infers clearly one who is loved as in a companion not one who is enslaved, so Jesus clearly understood the relationship between the centurion and his “servant”. No preaching to the “unclean” and or one engaging in an “abomination” here instead he heals the man’s lover and marvels at his faith. Sorry homophobes if Jesus was against us he certainly missed a wonderful opportunity to say so!!!!!

  27. Simon Murphy 5 Dec 2009, 4:01am

    I don’t believe in Jesus but that’s my choice.

    This bishop is pandering to Uganda by remaining silent.

  28. Ugandan politicians will be more interested in the words of Church authorities in their own country than of those from a foreign country. If Rowan has no success with Ugandan Church folk then he could still speak out. In the meantime, concentrating his efforts where he can do the most good is sensible.

    Other people could investigate where Uganda gets its money from – tourism? goods trade? development assistance? and try to get external pressure, like boycotts organised. Pressure from foreign customers withholding payments may be as effective as internal discussions with church leaders.

    For Rahman, Allah preached mercy – you should listen and not blaspheme.

  29. George Broadhead 5 Dec 2009, 9:17am

    Re Father Andrew Gentry’s daft attempt to convince us that Jesus was gay friendly, please see http://www.galha.org/jesus-and-homosexuality.

    George

  30. I don’t really mind if Jesus was gay-friendly or not, he’s been dead for a very long time now. I believe he lived and was a good person, but I don’t believe he was the son of God because I don’t believe in God. I don’t doubt religion gives a great many people around the world comfort, but all I said was that if heaven existed, and that people like that Cardinal were there, then that would be my idea of hell.

  31. Rahman is a full of Homophobic hatred and heterosexism to the extent that it clouds his vision of the world.

    If you heart is full of hate and paranoia. . . hate and paranoia is all that you will see

  32. George Broadhead 5 Dec 2009, 3:52pm

    George x writes: “I don’t really mind if Jesus was gay-friendly or not, he’s been dead for a very long time now. I believe he lived and was a good person.”

    Is it being good to want people to roast alive in hell? Just read Jesus’ teaching on hell-fire in the Gospels: “Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell”. This was said to people who did not like his preaching and it is just one example of his rantings about this cruel doctrine which has probably caused more terror and misery than any religious belief in the history of mankind.

  33. Robert, ex pat Brit 5 Dec 2009, 3:56pm

    Notice how closet case Rahman never addresses or better yet avoids the truth about paedophile prophet Mohammed? Religion for the most part is the refuge for the insecure and mentally ill. No human ever came back from the dead to prove the existence of the sky pilot, until that happens, I’ll remain an avowed atheist. Science has proved that the light people allegedly see at the time of death is the result of hundreds of millions of neurons that remain active during the dying process, the final surge if you will.

  34. This exceedingly silly, semi-literate Rahman chap is in danger of taking over the airwaves.
    I want to enjoy debate without rancour or mud-slinging, but this silly little prat is denying me this right – it reminds me of someone opening the door and farting in a closed telephone kiosk when I’m in it and enjoying a conversation.
    Just ingnore the silly bugger and he’ll hopefully, go away.
    In future, if I see his name on these pages, I’m going to exit quickly and so the purpose of the Comments page will be lost. I’d advise everyone else to do the same and maybe – just maybe – he’ll be quiet and go and find a job.

  35. Barry, it would be better if we had an ignore button, that way the thread wouldn’t be lost but I guess that kind of function isn’t available on this type of comments board.

  36. gay humanist 5 Dec 2009, 10:15pm

    One significant consideration: if Rowan Williams made ANY pronouncement against the bill, that would establish the official position of his church internationally.
    If the bill was passed it would define, all Anglicans in Uganda as those who promote homosexuality.
    They would be subject to the full weight of the new law, imprisonment and even death.
    He could still speak out … but it would be at severe risk to others. It may be extremely difficult for him to stay silent, but it is not cowardice.

  37. Mihangel apYrs 5 Dec 2009, 11:28pm

    gay humanist:

    Williams barely has authority to speak for England, let alone the wider sect: the African prelates ignore and insult him and trespass into English Anglican matters, but whine like schoolkids if they’re crossed. Whatever Williams says will be ignored by the Ugandan (and wider African) church, which will go on persecuting gays.

    They will however continue to accept any money

  38. Father Andrew Gentry 6 Dec 2009, 9:57am

    As to the “Moslem” commentator who called me “false” I can only say I have been called many things but never “false” or “daft” for that matter, radical, communist, even a wolf in priest’s cassock but not false or daft. Whatever your religious or non religious views may be if you promote hate you are promoting an evil agenda. The great danger to human civilization are those who in their warped and corrupted nonsense claim a “divine” connection and there are many of those delusional souls out there. Lastly anyone who thinks Jesus taught hatred or condemnation of gays obviously has some very large skeletons in their closets and if Islam means “peace” where in the Name of Allah has the message been lost as evidenced by suicide bombings, mass murder, and execution of people who brake a medieval code that would do Hannibal justice!

  39. Rahman wrote

    “Muslims of the world expressing their solidarity with people of Uganda, and will support government of Uganda in the matters of national security of Uganda.”

    . . . tell us something we do not know

  40. The ABC’s policy of pandering to homophobes is exposed by Lambeth Palace’s mealy-mouthed statement. Now we have the news from America on the election of a second gay bishop.

  41. Mr Pope Pope 6 Dec 2009, 2:16pm

    Destruction religious warmongers.

  42. Father Andrew Gentry 6 Dec 2009, 3:34pm

    On last comment to Rahman and George. I am not self proclaimed I am ordained! George you poor soul, the example you cite is Jesus condemning exactly what you are condemning in people who claim to be religious! With this I will endeavor to follow the wise counsel of an old Yiddish proverb to wit, “if you argue with an idiot and a stranger passes by the strange will not know who is the idiot” and with that I bid the discussion fare well~

  43. Rahman – Alias (Abu Usamah)

    When are you going to get over your tantrums because homosexuals have stopped you preaching your hate at City University and University College London. . .

    http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/11/24/london-universities-invite-homophobic-preacher-to-speak#

  44. He is willing to overlook and tolerate genocide.

    He is a grossly evil man and head of a deeply evil organisation. He is a hateful enemy of us all who doesn’t give a damn about our lives – or our deaths.

    he is deserving of no respect or regard for us. He is a homophobe and a bigot deserving of our contempt and anger.

  45. The Primates of the Anglican Church of Canada and The Episcopal Church of the USA have both
    strongly spoken out against this proposed African genocide. Why can’t the Archbishop? We in the US heard him speak out within just a few hours about our jeopardizing the communion and offending Africa with electing a lesbian bishop in LA. Why can clergy be gay but not bishops? Makes NO sense. I’m Episcopalian and I’d rather be out of the Anglican communion and be on the side of what is right than to be an appeaser to hate, prejudice, and murder.

  46. All of those who follow the Abrahmic tradition have equal responsibility on discriminatory activity in its name such as this in Uganda. Their many factions and disagreements are largely excuses to allow their consciences to rest easy when their same “holy books” are use to justify evil. It is long past time that they were all told that the excuses have grown old and useless. Each and every one of them, and not least high office holders, have a responsibility to speak out when one of their fellow believers uses their beliefs as justification for evil, or themselves stand condemned as complicit.

  47. How sad that His Excellency the Archbishop is afraid to overturn the applecart! Jesus threw the moneychangers out of the temple for defiling his fathers house of prayer. Is it really too difficult to say that state sanctioned execution of gay persons under proposed law in Uganda is wrong? Would it upset him if the Uganda govt executed gays in front of Lambeth Palace? When is it wrong to speak out against hatred? When will he grow up & realize that God loves all people and everyone is welcome in His house. If the archbishop is afraid to speak out for justice and tolerance maybe he should just ban gay people from his church and refuse to accept our offerings in his collection.

  48. What is the next group to be singled out? Why aren’t women allowed to be bishops in the church of England? Would it be impolite to protest if Uganda makes law to execute women, divorced people, white colonialists descendants? Would we have seen WWII if everyone had stood up to Hitler? Someone needs to stand up & speak out for equal rights & justice even if gays are not welcome in your ranks

  49. Robert Conti 8 Dec 2009, 9:29pm

    The ABC’s “distressed?” What the hell does that mean? He should be pissed and angry about what’s happening. He’s happy to tell us in the States that the Episcopal Church may be pushed to second tier status because, oh my Lord no, we are about to appoint a lesbian as an assistant bishop in the Los Angeles Diocese (my diocese). He’s fine with going public on his website about that. But certainly he can’t bear the thought of pissing off Uganda. Personally, I, and many others over here, say it’s time for the ECUSA to break from the Anglican Communion. The thought of our dollars going to support an establishment that tolerates hatred and death over love and inclusion is loathsome.

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