Reader comments · Blessings for same-sex couples rejected by Church of England · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Blessings for same-sex couples rejected by Church of England

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. The Anglican Communion in the United States is the Episcopal Church. You’ll be pleased to know the Episcopal Church already solemnizes same-gendered marriages in many congregations. I think that means its only a matter of time before the Church of England follows suit.

    1. I doubt very much that the CofE will follow very soon…if a “matter of time” means a few hundred years then perhaps, who knows and quite frankly who cares!

      1. No self-respecting person would go anywhere near a church let alone get married or blessed in one. It’s still superstitious nonsense which ever way you look at it.

    2. Christopher in Canada 10 Apr 2013, 12:40pm

      So does the Anglican Church of Canada. So much for the English Church leading the denomination anymore, eh? Power to the Colonies!!!

      1. And I was listening to New Zealand National Radio last night on the Internet and suddenly “The Bishop of Christchurch” (Anglican) pipes up . . . and she’s a woman!

        So this is not a unified company that’s being run here! Difference offices in difference locations are clearly doing what the hell they like! (Here that, Welby?)

        1. The Episcopalian Church in the US has women bishops too (and why not?). I have to say I don’t quite understand how they can all be part of the ‘Anglican Communion’ when they have such different approaches.

    3. Matt Pollock 11 Apr 2013, 2:33am

      bull…episcopal church is folding like a cheap tent. won’t exist in a few years..time for gays to move on,

  2. And the award for ‘most shocking article of the year’ goes to…

    Religion spreads its poison once again.

  3. Does anybody care anymore what the CofE says? I find the whole concpet of them providing “pastoral care” to LGBT people patronising and repugnant and creepy.

    I find their idea of gay people destroying the “social fabric of human society” and damaging the “stability and health of human society” if they are allowed to get married absurd and nasty.

    I would suggest they should get out a bit more into the real world and stop “fanning” around with gay sex and worrying more about the needy in the community.

  4. Leonardo Ricardo 10 Apr 2013, 4:41am

    Church of England is plain stupid (the legacy of Lord Carey of Clifton and befuddled thinking of foggybody Williams)…let them sit alone with their mitres in place at palaces and parishes thoughout the land…who will care? Only them.

  5. Do we really care what the CoE, RC Church or any of the other fairy tale Christian or Muslim religions say about marriages? No!!! Want want civil marriages not some hocus pocus religious marriage which requires an imaginary sky god’s blessings!

    1. I agree with you Vee. I would not for a minute want a word of religion to pollute my and my partner’s marriage ceremony. However, there are other same-sex couples who DO believe in hocus-pocus and gobbledegook and if they wish to be married in a church, mosque, or synagogue, then should have that right, don’t you think?

      1. I have to say I’m not so sure – I see religious organisations as clubs, entitled to set their own rules. And if their rules say gay couples can’t get married, I can’t understand why gay couples would want to be part of that club.

        But it does also mean that I think they should have no more say on civil matters, like civil marriage, than the RAC should.

    2. Then why all the hype condemning the RC and CoE and others?

  6. Barry WilliamTeske 10 Apr 2013, 7:00am

    “There is a danger in the current debate of picking apart the institution of marriage which is part of the social fabric of human society,” he added.”

    You have erred in your centuries of so called wisdom Dr. Christopher Cocksworth because LGBT people have been around just as long as their ‘straight’ counterparts.
    It is not the LGBT peoples fault you choose to ignore the present is just as important as the past.

  7. They are quite happy to bless the civil marriages of the adulterous and divorced. Says it all really. Not that it’s important.

    1. Not to mention “picking apart the institution of marriage” and breaking with centuries of tradition by allowing priests and bishops to get married.

    2. Why is it so important to LGBT people to be married in church?

      1. Good question, most of the straight community don’t get married in a religious setting.

  8. Peter Duncan 10 Apr 2013, 7:23am

    “The bishop of Coventry, Dr Christopher Cocksworth who chairs the commission which compiled the report, reiterated the church’s stance that it would offer “care, prayer and compassion” to those who are unable to get married in the church, but said it would not offer blessings.’ Patronising, condescending and insulting statement

  9. Too bad, we reject you too.

  10. Maybe the Queen should make a new branch of the c of E that allows for gay marriage c of E 2.0….. You know, much like Henry did from the catholic church so he could get rid of the slack fannied old girl for a younger tighter model!!
    (And I hate how my autocorrect wants to capitalise religious words!)

  11. They bless battleships…

  12. Colin (London) 10 Apr 2013, 8:53am

    The world is moving forward with recognising that we all can add to our communities regardless of sex, race, colour. The enlightened countries are facing issues of gays, women, disabled, transgender with inclusive attitudes for the benefit of all with one exception left. “MOST OF THE CHURCH” (not all)
    Fascinating to me that my dad hated me being gay (only son with 4 sisters – kind of understandably) but when one of his grand kids came out he changed. Then another one came out he embraced her and follows gay rights now. One of my nieces (UK based) recently was working for a client who spoke to the Supreme Court in USA a couple of weeks ago.
    We have nothing to fear as gay people as long as we are responsible citizens and push for equality and show the rest of our communities that we care about them as well.

    The church is dead….It may take 100 years but logic, science and communications outstrips it’s hatred, introverted, living in the past arttitudes. Be gone

  13. Colin (London) 10 Apr 2013, 8:56am

    Get religion out of Parliament please. (partic HOL – should be an elected house)

  14. dorset bob 10 Apr 2013, 9:00am

    So Cocksworth thinks that blessings should only be for a man and a woman in a faithfull, comitted and permanent marriage. Not going to be too busy then. I dont know any hetero couples who can tick all of those boxes.

  15. Give them a couple of decades and they’ll pretend they were all for LGBT rights all along! Hypocrites!

  16. As a member of the CofE I do resent the suggestion that this report represents the entire church.

    I attend a small, traditional country parish and yet I believe the vast majority of the PCC (the Parochial Church Council) would approve of same-sex marriage and blessing Civil Partnerships.

    I know many, many members of the wider CofE who disagree strongly with the sort of suggestions and ‘facts’ contained within this report, and I understand that many Bishops do as well.

    Now is the time for members of the CofE to stand up and say ‘not in my name’. I’ll start.

    1. Better to do it to Coxbollocks, or whatever his name is, than to do it here!

      1. Fair point. But, while posting on Pink News comment pages might not directly influence CofE doctrine, I hope it will at least help a few people see that not everyone in the CofE is prejudice.

        As someone who sits in the CofE and LGBT arenas, I know that prejudice and misunderstanding fuel much of the anti-LGBT feeling within the CofE. But prejudice and misunderstanding also fuel a lot of anti-CofE feeling within the LGBT movement.

        The sooner both sides lower their defences and talk sensibly, the sooner this overblown issue can be sorted. Atheists may question why they should ‘understand’ or ‘work with’ Christians. But it’s a matter of principle, and the sooner same-sex marriage is accepted by much of the church, the sooner a large message will be sent out to society as a whole.

        Whether someone’s an atheistic member of the LGBT movement, or a straight member of the CofE, this is an issue that involves us all. Understanding on both sides is required for a solution.

        1. A view borne of experience and reflexion is, by definition, not prejudiced. I loathe the church (admittedly the RC one) because of what it, as represented by its clergy and teachers, told me about me. As a self-aware gay child I was made to understand what the church thought. I’ve reacted to that. Frankly, I wasn’t given the time to develop a prejudice. In this debate the prejudice comes from one direction. That individual believers are not homophobic or are gay is not the point. The institution most certainly is.

          1. Your opinions are obvious not prejudice, they come from experience. I’m very sorry that your experience was so bad. Most viewpoints, indeed many on this very page, I fear don’t come from such in depth reflection.

            My experience was similar, in that I attended a Cathedral school and there was only ever one viewpoint given.

            I’ve reacted differently however. I see the positives, indeed I feel and live the positives, and I hope for change. The institution is capable of change – it’s done so on other topics, it can do so on this.

      2. You’ve made me laugh out loud in the office!

        1. Where do you think I’m wrong? Genuinely interested to hear why you reacted with laughter.

          1. Maybe it was the witty pejorative “CoxBollocks” that caused the laughter?

          2. Ah true – sorry if I misunderstood, I misread the indents and was unclear who the reply was aimed at.

    2. Colin (London) 10 Apr 2013, 11:55am

      I respect your comment. Thanks

      1. Thank you – that means a lot to hear.

    3. Robert in S. Kensington 10 Apr 2013, 12:29pm

      Well, if some bishops strongly disagree with the report, I don’t think any of them are that courageous to take a stand and defy Welby They may well ignore the ban and conduct their own blessings, but none of them are going to mount official opposition.

      1. So what kind of “corporation” is this damn C of E? Rather like The Vatican, I fear. The leader does not represent the views of all those beneath, and all those beneath FEAR to openly go against the leader.

        These cults are dysfunctional. If they were businesses they’d end up being closed down.

      2. I don’t think it is a case of ‘defying Welby’.. Or any individual. As the women Bishop vote showed the Archbishop of Canterbury, or even the combined House of Bishops, has very little power indeed over policy!

        I’d say the problem is the opposite – there aren’t many inspiring people leading either side. Some people are strongly for same sex marriage, some are strongly against, the rest have given it little thought. The CofE has no clear path to change policy, or even consult on it.

        The greatest strength, and conversely the greatest weakness, of the CofE is that the lack of a single leader or leading body makes change long-winded and difficult.

    4. Good luck with that!

    5. Private, may I remind you that the church is in this world but not of this world.

  17. The CofE continues to dig its own grave!

    Why anyone would want anything to do with this lot is beyond me!

    1. Again I ask, then what is all the fuss about?

  18. **The report does recognise same-sex relationships, however it describes them as ”forms of human relationships which fall short of marriage in the form God has given us”.**

    It might not be immediately obvious, but it’s this kind of language that causes harm in the minds of gay people struggling with their sexuality because of religion.

    It is homophobic to suggest that gay relationships fall short of ANYTHING.

    And I’m sick of the ‘fabric of society’ – what does the EVEN MEAN? Vague meaningless phrases.

    1. I wonder whether the ‘fabric of society’ has mixed fibres……?

      1. It would seem that no beautiful exotic fabrics are permitted by the C of E, yet watch them poncing around on their altars in full regalia and you see that in fact they absolutely REVEL in threads and fibres of a vast rainbow of types!

        Hypocrites. Total hypocrites. No integrity whatsoever. Sick. Delusioned.

        They actually believe that there IS a great big pixie in the sky called “God”.

        1. Yes, indeed. All religious people are completely delusioned. It amazes me that they can believe in the supernatural yet they despise supernatural horror films!

          1. Oh, I don’t know – they’d probably queue up to see The Passion of the Christ

    2. Paul Brownsey 10 Apr 2013, 4:31pm

      These people usually say that marriages are the building blocks of society–they love that phrase and use it with wondrous mindlessness. When clergy are talking about marriage it usually crops up. Try saying to them, “”Oh, I thought people were.”

  19. Jock S. Trap 10 Apr 2013, 10:43am

    So hypocritical. In a decent society why exclude? If marriage is “central to the stability and health of human society” then why not give equality to it.

    All these says is that those extremists in the faith believe, opposite sex relationships are superior to same sex relationship. This when Welby insisted he knows how committed same sex couple are just as stable…. clearly just not as stable enough to deserve recognition.

    It’s simply appalling and all it does, I think is good because it hopefully will discourage people from believing in them and some will walk away.

    Nothing but a bunch of outdated hypocrites.

  20. PeterinSydney 10 Apr 2013, 11:06am

    These narrow minded narrow gutted crowd are a disgrace to a nation with noble traditions.

  21. Welby said “Gay relationships are just stunning in the quality of the relationship”, and added that he had “particular friends where I recognise that, and am deeply challenged by it.”

    But clearly you have failed to recognise it sufficiently, Mr. Welby, and to rise to the challenge! You have preferred to stick with the safety of your bits of 2000-year-old parchment.

    Welby is gutless. He has no gumption or originality. Now we know. Do not offer him an ounce of respect until he shows integrity and shows real respect towards those gay friends of his whom he says he so deeply respects!

  22. “Gay relationships that are just stunning in the quality of the relationship,” and that he had “particular friends where I recognise that and am deeply challenged by it.”

    Because he switches off his brain and his heart, and chooses to uphold dogma instead.

  23. Robert in S. Kensington 10 Apr 2013, 12:35pm

    I strongly urge Peter Tatchell to cancel his meeting with Archbigot Welby. What would be the point now that the CoE has made its position official?

    If Peter does meet with him, he ought to ask him why the CoE blessed the marriage of the divorced couple, Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles in St. George’s chapel, Windsor who had no chance of procreating? It’s beyond hypocrisy given it’s ban on remarrying divorced heteros.

  24. There wouldn’t even BE an A
    ‘Anglican’ church is Henry V111 hadn’t established it. So, all this hand-wringing is so childish. If an old king, on a whim, can abolish ‘tradition’, why can’t they do it now? Really, these people are painting themselves ever further into the realms of history. Not before time, if you ask me ….

  25. Who cares what these idiots say about us?! Tonight I will go home, spend a lovely few hours with my partner and son. We’ll bath him together, put him to bed & kiss him good night telling him we love him. Then we’ll cuddle on the sofa, watch TV, talk about our day & then sneak back upstairs to marvel at our child & say ‘we can’t believe how lucky we are’. We’ll go to bed, cuddle some more, sleep & do it all again tomorrow. No church, bishop or sky fairy will stop us.

    1. Bravo, Char! And what a wonderful life you lead!

    2. Wonderful. What they resent us that we live good lives without them.

    3. You paint an idyllic picture, and I’m so pleased you’ve got a great home.

      But many don’t wish for that sort of lifestyle, or haven’t been that lucky. I know people in my community for whom the church is much more than a ‘house of God’. There are some who wouldn’t leave the house if not for church, others wouldn’t see almost anyone all week, yet others have been comforted during times of loss or struggle.

      Richard Dawkins argues that many Christians haven’t actually considered the theological arguments. He’s right. That’s why the CofE position sends an important message. My parents told me it was fine to be gay, but I learnt that I wouldn’t be able to marry and thought “there must be something wrong with me – gay people aren’t equal.”

      10 years on I’ve overcome this, but there are others suffering from the same lesson today. I don’t want the end of the church – I value it – but I want it to change. We all should, for Christians LGBT people/families.

  26. This is entirely consistent with the C of E’s broad position on sexuality as affirmed by Justin (5-kids) Welby already. Be under no illusion that he’s more liberal or inclusive than his Evangelical brethren. Quite why anyone would want a blessing when it’s given either grudgingly or furtively is beyond me but what do I, as a devout atheist, know? What I resent is that my taxes go towards supporting this vile established institution and that their Lord Bishops make laws over me. C of E (and the rotten RCs that spawned you) – GET STUFFED!

  27. I find LGBT people who serve this CofE business and others like the catholic and muslim business , repugnant. Any LGBT person who would want a blessing from an institution like this ,needs to get some self respect, integrity and dignity as that is clearly where they are lacking.

  28. Paul Brownsey 10 Apr 2013, 4:28pm

    ‘A report titled Men and Women in Marriage was released as the announcement, which stressed the definition of marriage was ”a faithful, committed, permanent and legally sanctioned relationship between a man and a woman, central to the stability and health of human society.’

    The last nine words are no part of a *definition*. They are simply a view about the importance of marriage.

    ‘The report does recognise same-sex relationships, however it describes them as ”forms of human relationships which fall short of marriage in the form God has given us”.’

    Comma is wrong punctuation before “however” here. A full stop or semi-colon is required. Why must Pink News mimic the sloppy English of customer service centres?

  29. A view borne of experience and reflexion is, by definition, not prejudiced. I loathe the church (admittedly the RC one) because of what it, as represented by its clergy and teachers, told me about me. As a self-aware gay child I was made to understand what the church thought. I’ve reacted to that. Frankly, I wasn’t given the time to develop a prejudice. In this debate the prejudice comes from one direction. That individual believers are not homophobic or are gay is not the point. The institution most certainly is.

  30. ..what a surprise, the Anglican Church remains so as always towards everything that’s Gay…they’re nothing but idiotic cowards and I hope the whole Church crumbles…and I feel one day it actually will. Altogether now-‘people of the same sex can never ever possibly love one another, in the same way as a man and a woman. How quaint…

  31. Midnighter 5 Jun 2013, 9:21pm

    Reading this just after the Lords second reading ….

    The bishop was clear that the report said that the church was not going to change its stance and publicly recognise same-sex couples, he said a commission on same-sex relationships which was set up in July 2011, would report this year.

    Too late, society has already made its decision. You are irrelevant and behind the times … as always.

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.