Tag Archives: homosexuality

Rev. Dudley makes his excuses to the Bishop of London

Posted on by
Reply

The Rector of St Bartholomew the Great, the Rev Dr Martin Dudley makes his excuses to the Bishop of London, the Right Rev Richard Chartres after conducting a same sex ‘wedding’. Here is his letter along with a translation:

Dear Bishop,
As the result of a conference with my solicitor and with my counsel, Chancellor Mark Hill, I am able to respond fully to your letter of 18 June. I think I now have my butt covered; which is just as well considering the company I’m keeping.

I can now appreciate that the service held at St Bartholomew the Great on 31 May 2008 was inconsistent with the terms of the Pastoral Statement from the House of Bishops issued in 2005. Whilst the precise status of this pastoral document within the Church of England generally and the Diocese of London in particular may be a matter of differing interpretations, I ought to have afforded it far greater weight. You and I both know that we’ve had centuries of experience re-interpreting the bible to make it fit our queer… err peculiar way of looking at things, so this wimpy pastoral document should present no problem at all.

I regret the embarrassment caused to you by this event and by its subsequent portrayal in the media. I now recognise that I should not have responded positively to the request for this service, even though it was made by another incumbent of your Diocese, who is a colleague, neighbour and friend of us both nor should I have adopted uncritically the Order of Service prepared by the him and his partner. I had not appreciated that the event would have been attended by so many nor that it would have attracted the publicity and notoriety which it did. Hey, these are our buddies we are talking about; OK, maybe I should have looked over the service a bit, but honestly, I had no idea so many reporters would be present. We’ll do a better job of screening the onlookers next time.

I share your abhorrence of homophobia in all its forms. I am profoundly uneasy with much of the content of the House of Bishops’ Pastoral Statement which anecdotal evidence suggests is being widely, though discretely, disregarded in this Diocese and elsewhere. Nonetheless, I am willing to abide by its content in the future, until such time as it is rescinded or amended, and I undertake not to provide any form of blessing for same sex couples registering civil partnerships. We both know everyone is ignoring the HOB Pastoral Statement; it’s designed to pacify those pesky homophobic, conservative, fundamentalists; we should really just ignore them and leave them to their snakes. Of course, we have to both pretend to do what it says – next time I’ll be more circumspect; I’ll even make sure you’re invited! And there’s always a great party afterwards, know what I mean… nudge, nudge.

I am writing to you in confidence but seek your guidance on such steps as may be necessary and appropriate to make public my regret and my undertaking, mindful that your initial letter to me was widely disseminated. What’s the best way to cover this up? And please make sure this letter doesn’t get leaked.
Yours sincerely

The right to indoctrinate

Posted on by
7

From the National Post:

Rights complaint filed in B. C. over cancelled course.

VANCOUVER – Two men responsible for creating a new social justice course for a B. C. high school have filed a human-rights complaint against the Abbotsford school district for its refusal to offer the course this year.

Murray and Peter Corren filed the complaint with the B. C. Human Rights Tribunal, alleging that the decision not to offer Social Justice 12 in W. J. Mouat Secondary School amounts to discrimination against students — especially those who are gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered.

In a statement released yesterday, the Correns say the district refused to offer the course, even though more than 90 students had signed up, because some parents had complained about content dealing with sexual orientation, gender identity, homophobia and heterosexism.

The Correns, one of the first gay couples in Canada to marry, almost single-handedly forced the topics of sexual orientation, gender identity and same-sex families into schools when they launched a B. C. Human Rights Tribunal complaint against the provincial government.

You may agree or not with the teaching of this course on ‘social justice’; but how could a school district’s decision not to teach it possibly be a violation of anyone’s human rights? No-one is advocating censoring the material in the course; there is no frenzied mob gathering to burn copies of it; it is even available on the Internet for perusal by incurable insomniacs who may be looking for an untried soporific.

It appears to me to be a pile of tendentious tripe, but that’s just me. Here is an excerpt:

Students should be able to identify and define a range of concepts and terms of social justice:

e.g., ableism, ageism, anthropocentrism, colonization, conservative, consumerism, cultural imperialism, democratization, dignity, discrimination, diversity, economic imperialism, economic liberalization, empowerment, equality, equity, extremism, fairness, feminism, fundamentalism, genocide, globalization, hate crime, hegemony, heterosexism, homophobia, human rights, humanism, humility, inclusion, marginalization, misogyny, oppression, peace, persecution, power, prejudice, privilege, racism, radical, sexism, speciesism, stereotyping, systemic, transformational leadership, truth, value, worth

These words alone convey a cornucopia of codswallop; read the whole thing to judge for yourself.

George Pitcher and the Wright stuff

Posted on by
4

Dr. Deborah Pitt, an evangelical from Penarth, Wales (around the corner from where I used to live in another era) had the effrontery to publish some letters to her from Rowan Williams when he was archbishop of Wales. The Friends of the ABC – most notably, Tom Wright leapt valiantly to Rowan’s defense. Rowan’s letters include statements like this: “I concluded that an active sexual relationship between two people of the same sex might therefore reflect the love of God in a way comparable to marriage, if and only if it had about it the same character of absolute covenanted faithfulness.”

Now I know Rowan doesn’t write or speak English the way a mere mortal would, but that seems pretty clear to me. Tom Wright and co. focus on the word “might” with a tenacity worthy of Bill Clinton’s obsession with the word “is”. Also, much is made of the absurd proposition that there is a difference between ‘thinking aloud’ as a theologian and the task of a bishop (let alone an Archbishop) to uphold the church’s teaching, as if the task of a bishop to uphold the church’s teaching is unaffected by what he is thinking. Which brings us to George Pitcher, who writes about Deborah Pitt’s attempt to explain herself:

A sad and dispiriting little letter in The Times today, from the woman who “leaked” 8-year-old letters from Dr Rowan Williams that “revealed” he was personally sympathetic to same-sex unions that were faithful and permanent.

He then mocks her grammar – something I would never do – and continues:

About the only thing clear here is that the Bishop of Durham’s letter, co-signed by 18 other Anglican bishops from across the ecclesiological spectrum, was articulate. It certainly put Ms Pitt in her place. Her letter, by contrast, is neither articulate nor clear.

Poor Ms. Pitt – actually, that’s Dr. Pitt to you George – already knows her place: it’s in Penarth being a medical doctor; not, unlike some, having interminable conversations with other doctors on what it really means to be a doctor.

George Pitcher’s article is at the Telegraph

Deborah Pitt’s response the the ABC is at SF. She seems to be a gracious lady.

Here's to you Mrs. Robinson

Posted on by
Reply

From The Christian Institute

Another successful skirmish before the minions of the night envelop us in a new Dark Age of political correctness.

The Prime Minister’s office has rejected a petition asking it to reprimand a Christian MP who expressed the Bible’s teaching about homosexual practice.

Iris Robinson, DUP MP for Strangford, was speaking on a BBC radio programme in June when she said the Bible describes homosexuality as an “abomination”.

She also referred positively to the work of Dr Paul Miller, a psychiatrist who helps people suffering from unwanted same-sex attraction.

Following the comments John O’Doherty, Co-Chair of the Northern Ireland Policing Board LGBT Reference Group, made a formal complaint to the police about the remarks.

“People like Mrs Robinson need to learn that their comments have consequences,” he said at the time. The Police Service of Northern Ireland did investigate the complaint.

Mrs Robinson says there has been a concerted campaign to silence her. “I think at the moment there is a witch hunt to curb or actually stop or prevent Christians speaking out and I make no apology for what I said because it’s the word of God,” she said in June.

Mrs Robinson pointed out that her criticism was directed at the practice of homosexuality, rather than homosexuals themselves.

“I was very careful in saying that I have nothing against any homosexual,” she said. “I love them; that is what the Lord tells me, to love the sinner and not the sin.”

Desmond Tutu is confused

Posted on by
Reply

Desmond Tutu weighs in on the Gene Robinson fiasco (be warned, this is a link to a pro-gay site). By saying “I could not stand by while people were being penalised again for something about which they could do nothing – their sexual orientation” he is confusing – using standard Anglican obfuscation – sexual orientation with sexual practice. The fact is, it is not Gene’s sexual orientation that is the problem: the problem is his acting on it by leaving his wife, setting up house with his gay partner and proclaiming to the world that this is not only socially acceptable (which it may be), but fully in line with Christian teaching – which it isn’t.

Also of note is that fact that Obama has met with Gene 3 times already! What more can one ask.

Influential figures within the church, such as Nobel Peace Prize winner Desmond Tutu, the former Archbishop of Cape Town, strongly support Robinson. Tutu even penned the foreword in Robinson’s book.

“Apartheid, crassly racist, sought to penalise people for something about which they could do nothing,” he wrote. “I could not stand by while people were being penalised again for something about which they could do nothing – their sexual orientation … Gene Robinson is a wonderful person and I am proud to belong to the same church as he.”

Robinson also enjoys powerful support in the wider community. While the Archbishop of Canterbury has only acceded to one meeting with him – and then under such secrecy that he was told the venue at the last possible moment – Robinson has already had three one-on-one meetings with US presidential candidate Barack Obama, the man many believe will be the next President of the United States.

What people like Obama and Tutu realise, says Robinson, is that far from being dependent on texts from thousands of years ago for God’s word, the human relationship with God is a living, breathing, ever-evolving one.

Or, to put that last sentence another way: “since the Bible is really, really old, we might as well ignore it and make this up as we go along.”