Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Chris Bryant attacks Church of England ‘silliness about homosexuality’

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Robert in S. Kensington 16 Jan 2012, 1:49pm

    Does anyone really believe that gay clerics in same-sex relationships do not succumb to “temptations of the flesh”? I find that hard to believe. Just how absurd the C of E is on this, imagine a straight couple intending to marry in the church told the priest they were going to marry but remain celibate and not procreate. I wonder what the reaction would be by the church? Refuse to marry them?

    1. Whilst there may be some same sex relationships that adopt celibacy within a relationship as a choice for them, for a range of reasons, I would not pretend to understand it …

      I suspect a straight couple who have no intention of having children (out of choice) would still be married (partly because I know several church married couples who have no intention to have children)

      I do suspect (and hear rumour which would confirm this … but it is merely rumour ..) that the celibacy is not necessarily as hard and fast as some might present in the public light, in some of those relationships …

      Chris Bryants comments are very welcome, sensible, honest and direct … it’s time the church recognised the hypocracy of their position …

      1. Robert in S. Kensington 16 Jan 2012, 5:09pm

        In the roman church it would be grounds for annulment if they hadn’t divulged it before marrying and one of them decided, after the fact, that he or she wanted to have it annulled. In fact, if a couple told a catholic priest prior to marriage that celibacy was their intention, he would probably not marry them.

  2. Jamie Taylor 16 Jan 2012, 2:02pm

    Bryant, shut up. You are a complete nipple – and we have all seen your nipples too! Shut up.

  3. Jock S. Trap 16 Jan 2012, 2:03pm

    Indeed but it’s a tad more than just ‘silliness’ it’s damn right bigotry and will ultimately be the downfall of the church.

    The fact it wishes to be the only church whose people can be free to discriminate esp if we don’t choose to fall a chosen religious lifestyle.

    The fact it wishes to be the only church who wishes to break and be above the law of any land so they can preach endlessly about garbage they read coz they haven’t got the brains to think for themselves.

    Time for the church to be seen for what it really is… a bigotted, discriminating organisation bound by thinking it has the rights to enslave everyone else.

    Enough already. Let people be free and if your really clever you’ll see that, that means christians too. However like everyone else, follow the laws of the land.

    Yes I do believe some Gay cleric can make a difference but they need to be seen making a difference otherwise they are just as enslaved and the other ‘believers’.

  4. Why is the Cult of England still the official church of this country?

    Why is the British head of state also the head of this vile cult?

    It is grotesquely offensive that this pathetic, worthless cult (which is based on a badly written work of fiction, which was written to give meaning to the lives of illiterate peasants thousands of years ago.) enjoys an official status in Britain.

    As for Jeffrey Johns? Well I don’t understand masochism. Why doesn’t he find a less vicious cult to work for.

    I mean the sky-fairy (‘god’) is fictional, so it doesn’t matter which cult you belong to.

    1. de Villiers 17 Jan 2012, 7:45am

      So simplistic and ignorant. Again.

  5. Something is needed to force the issue and get some progress. There are other national churches in more progressive countries like those in Scandinavia where there aren’t such hang-ups about homosexuality. With several closeted gay bishops I think it’s time for some more outings. Perhaps these people aren’t being actively homophobic but by being in the closet they are holding things back. If they were out it would mean the hypocrisy would be exposed and progress would be forced.

    1. The idea of a ‘national church is grossly offensive.

      There is no excuse for it in any country.

      The cult of England is really a very scummy cult as well.

      That non-entity Rowan Willliams is reluctant to condemn the genocidal homophobia of the Anglican cult in Uganda, as cult unity is more important to that pathetic monster than LGBT lives.

      People like Jeffrey Johns suffer from battered spouse syndrome. They are so used to being beaten by their abuser (the cult of England) that they excuse and justify the hideous behaviourn of their abusers.

      1. de Villiers 17 Jan 2012, 7:47am

        What a hypocrite you are – referring to someone else as being grossly offensive when you employ the crudest and most childish insults.

  6. I have no idea why these men join the church. Start your own and stop beggi ng for acceptance. like a black man wanting to join the

    1. Exactly.

      The cult of England wears its toxic bigotry on its sleeves.

      AND it’s based on a work of fiction.

      I would not join a club that quite openly expresses its hatred of me.

      What type of behaviour was Jeffrey Johns expecting from this worthless cult?

      Is he surprised that they are acting out all the disgusing bigotry they are known for?

      1. Jock S. Trap 16 Jan 2012, 4:31pm

        You bitch a lot but you don’t add realistic ideas on how we change things in these organisations.

        Oh yes and I do mean realistically dAVID.

        1. Mr. Ripley's Asscrack 16 Jan 2012, 6:12pm

          Perhaps a time-machine would do the trick! The mission: to go back to Bethlehem to a non-existent ‘manger’ far, far away! Maybe even a few thousand semi-automatic machine guns and an equivalent amount of C4 would help them change their ways… Maybe a CME directly over England would achieve the desired effect? The idea that it only takes one to make a difference is almost entirely naive! Unless that person is himself a superman!

          1. Galadriel1010 16 Jan 2012, 6:28pm

            You’re going to say that, on Martin Luther King Day of all days?

        2. Leave the church? You can worship without being a church member can’t you? And don’t join any that begrudgingly “tolerate” you.

          1. Galadriel1010 16 Jan 2012, 11:56pm

            That would effect change, certainly, but I imagine it would be the wrong sort. If every lgbt christian, and every lgbt-supporting christian were to leave the church, where would we find ourselves, do you think? The church would still be there, it would just be made up entirely of homophobes. Not what I’d call a positive change.

      2. Galadriel1010 16 Jan 2012, 6:27pm

        It’s funny how you rant about bigotry by spewing faith-based prejudice.

        Wait, I don’t mean funny, do I? I mean immensely hypocritical and childish. Yes, I know you hate the church and all religions. Yes, I know that the church is being a dick and that many religious people are bigots. No, that doesn’t make it okay to judge people based on their religious affiliations. If you do that, you’re no better than they are.

        1. @Galadriel1010

          It is interesting that some people can easily see the bigotry in others, but are blind to their own prejudices …

          Maybe a lacking of self awareness …

          1. Galadriel1010 16 Jan 2012, 11:57pm

            Ain’t it always the way? At least it reminds us that people from every walk of life can be asshats, not just right wing christians.

  7. If I was to talk about the silliness of the church of england, their stance on homosexuality would be way down the list (way after all the superstitious supernatural bronze age hocus bloody pocus of it all). LGBT followers are collaborating with an institution they already know to be homophobic so kindly pardon my inability to give a damn about them.

  8. Good for you Chris; silly is a mild word for this bigotry. Rowan W is too busy appeasing the African bishops and Extremists here to look after what should be his first concern – ALL the people of his church

  9. What is not so silly is the point he made that the church believe in celibacy which is not a part of the bible but in fact God does say that man should marry. This is one of the problems in religion today like in the Catholic church and has been for a long time. Man will always be man, history has proven that and gay or straight they have sex, sooner or later. It is time for the church to come out of the dark ages and accept that God makes both gay and straight men and that they do and will have sex. It is only a natural part of life that God gave man to enjoy life.

  10. Mr. Ripley's Asscrack 16 Jan 2012, 5:56pm

    When Bryant says that nobody believes that homosexuality is “a deliberate choice, a perversion, a sin”?! Isn’t that the problem – they still do believe we have chosen to be gay, that it is a perversion and a sin!? Isn’t this the reason why Rev John ain’t the bishop he should be? The cruel double-speak Bryant claims in his article is little more than the CofE getting down on it’s knees to its parent church and begging for forgiveness. Hence the reason Archiebish Williams blocked the Rev John’s promotion twice (allegedly).

    Also, of all the words that could be employed to describe the vile duplicity of bigoted religious fowk, silliness isn’t one of them. It’s like saying Hitler was not a nice man – such a weak choice of words. We all know it’s okay to be a gay Rev but a gay bishop is too much to handle (regardless of the private proclivities of others). I mean, what do we say to the African Anglicans…!

  11. Now is a perfect moment for ALL those “in” bishops to “come out”!!!!

  12. When I read comments in the press from Christians condemning homosexuality because it’s comndemned in the bible, it demonstrates just how much cherry picking they do from the bible. If the bible was followed as faithfully as these people follow it when it comes to homosexuality they would be advocating a barbaric society which approved the keeping of slaves, the beating of slaves. Death for non virgin brides and for those who had been diisrespecful to parents and many many other barbarities. These people are risible.

  13. please folks..he is not the only Gay in the Village…eh? this religious bunk is absurd..world-wide…where is the humanity in all of this…?

  14. Chris Bryant is still FUGLY and reminds me of Noddy

    1. Bit of an ad-hominem there…
      Debate the issue, not whether or not you’d consider Chris Bryant as potential date material.

  15. GingerlyColors 17 Jan 2012, 7:08am

    With poverty, unemployment, debt, homelessness, crime and broken families, I’m sure that the Church of England will have bigger fish to fry than quibbling about homosexuality.

    1. The problem is they don’t. Look at any LGBT item in the mainstream media and after reading the comments the proverbial martian would assume that homosexuality was the biggie as far as problems are concerned. There seems to be an orchestrated campaign taking place (probably evangelicals) to pile in the negative comments and red arrow the favourable comments..

      1. GingerlyColors 17 Jan 2012, 2:41pm

        So will the world be a better place when we are all end up living on government handouts in crime-ridden, disease infected shanty towns full of debt laden single-parent families wondering were the next meal is coming from as long as the scourge of homosexuality has been consigned to the history books?
        When the CofE and all the other denominations start to get their priorities right then vicars may not have to look at rows of empty pews every Sunday morning.

  16. Chris Bryant knows what he is talking about.

  17. Creepy smile, guy.

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

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all