An Anglican/Catholic exchange program

The Times is suggesting that Roman Catholic children might be safer from child rapists in the Anglican Church:

Has the time come for the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, to open the door to the many millions of British Roman Catholic worshippers who may be worried that their children are likely to be interfered with by priests? I think it’s correct that young children are slightly less at risk from the Anglican clergy, although it would be unwise of Rowan to offer any cast-iron promises, just in case.

A reciprocal arrangement could be made with the many Anglican clergy who want a male priest to interfere with them. A perfect arrangement: Anglicans send Rome all their pathicus clergy in exchange for Rome’s children.

UK: Catholic charity wins gay adoption ruling

From the BBC:

A Catholic adoption society has won a High Court battle over laws forcing it to consider gay couples as parents.

Leeds-based Catholic Care had warned it would be forced to give up its work finding homes for children if it had to comply with the legislation.

Its plea to be allowed an exemption was opposed by the Charity Commission.

However, Mr Justice Briggs has allowed Catholic Care’s appeal and ordered the commission to reconsider the case in the light of his judgement.

Predictably, the gay rights group, Stonewall wasn’t too happy:

Jonathan Finney, head of external affairs at Stonewall, said: “It’s unthinkable that anyone engaged in delivering any kind of public or publicly funded service should be given licence to pick and choose service users on the basis of individual prejudice.

“It’s clearly in the best interests of children in care to encourage as wide a pool of potential adopters as possible.”

Is it in the best interests of children to consider placing them with a same-sex couple? Not according to Baroness Deech, family lawyer and chairman of the Bar Standards Board:

Same sex parents are bad for children if they deprive them of the influence of a father or mother, she said.

She warned that gay or lesbian parents cannot be best for the welfare of children if there is no contact with adults of another sex.

Lady Deech spoke of her ‘unease’ about the laws on homosexual couples. The former chief of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority criticised recent laws on in vitro fertilisation that have given new rights to gay partners……

‘There is a wealth of research showing that children need fathers, not just two parents. Children need to see complementary roles, the relationship between the sexes, a microcosm of society, as they grow up.’

Compulsory equality in Ontario classrooms

My grandparents used to say to my parents, “I’m glad I’m not bringing up children in this day and age”; to gain perspective, “this day and age” was when I was young and we had no TV, no car, no telephone, the milk was delivered by horses pulling a cart and we learned to write with a scratchy pen that had to be dipped in an inkwell.

In their turn, my parents said the same thing to me; in the early days, we still had no car or telephone.

Now I look at my grandchildren and say to their parents, “I’m glad I’m not bringing up children in this day and age”.

There are many reasons; here is one:

TORONTO, Ontario, January 7, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The Ontario Ministry of Education has mandated that every school board in Ontario, Catholic and public, implement a new equity and inclusiveness policy by September 2010.

While the new initiative was devised with participation from the curriculum arm of the Ontario Bishops’ Assembly, it nevertheless would force Ontario’s Catholic school boards to recognize “sexual orientation” as a ground protected from discrimination.  The Vatican has warned, however, that such a recognition is usually part and parcel with the outright promotion of homosexuality. One prominent Catholic commentator and priest has said that this is indeed the Ministry’s aim.

The Ministry’s new initiative, called the Equity and Inclusive Education Strategy, requires school boards to address areas such as religious accommodation and the prevention of discrimination, which includes combating “homophobia.”

And so it begins

The UK government, under the guise of it’s Equality Mania, has lifted the ban on same-sex marriages in churches. What will happen next?

Traditionalist bishops and peers fear that vicars could be taken to court and accused of discrimination if they turn down requests to hold civil partnerships on religious premises.

Their concerns have been raised following a landmark vote by peers that will allow the ceremonies for same-sex couples to be held in places of worship for the first time.

In the interests of pressing home my advantage, if I were a gay man determined to legitimise my lifestyle, I would organise a series of gay church “marriages” as test cases; and sue the vicars if they refused to comply.

Homosexuals protest that the Roman Catholic Church is too Roman Catholic

From the BBC:

Hundreds of Dutch activists have walked out of a Mass in protest at a Roman Catholic policy of denying communion to practising homosexuals.

On this occasion, the church, in ‘s-Hertogenbosch, had already decided not to serve communion, so the protesters left, shouting and singing.

The dispute began earlier this month when a priest in a nearby town refused communion to an openly gay man.

This dispute began during Dutch carnival celebrations earlier in February, when the man chosen to be carnival prince in nearby Reusel was refused communion because of his open homosexuality.

The refusal offended many in the local community.

Several hundred demonstrators, dressed in pink wigs and clothes, left the church in protest.

The man at the centre of the row has said he just wants equal treatment – if he is regarded as a sinner, he wants the priest to refuse communion to all other sinners too.

The man at the centre of the row, rather than come to the Lord’s table as a penitent sinner, wants to argue with God about his particular sinfulness which, presumably, he thinks is so special that it deserves to be affirmed rather than forgiven. That is equal treatment?

Apple using child labour

Apple’s Steve Jobs believes in trendy causes like equality and fundamental rights and, for that reason, donated $100k to support homosexual marriage in California:

Steve Jobs’ company Apple Inc. released a statement in October 2008 opposing Proposition 8 and donating $100,000 to the No on 8 campaign. Said Apple, “[We] strongly believe that a person’s fundamental rights — including the right to marry — should not be affected by their sexual orientation.”

Oddly enough, until the prospect of bad publicity loomed large, Jobs’ enthusiasm for fundamental rights did not extend to avoiding the use of child labour in the making of iPods and iPhones:

Technology giant Apple has admitted that child labour has been employed at some of the factories that build its iPods, computers and mobile phones.

An audit found that at least eleven 15-year-old children were found to be working in three factories that supply Apple in the last year.

It said that child workers were now no longer being used at the sites, or were no longer underage.

High-tech piety is no match for profit.

Elton John, theologian

Let’s start on a positive note: Elton gets some things right. As the creator of the universe, the Logos, Jesus is quite bright; and Jesus was compassionate and forgiving.

Once Elton moves beyond that, there is just the slightest – the very slightest – chance that he may be allowing his own personal homoerotic perspective cloud his judgement; just a little. After all, why would the Creator of the universe, the One who caused all things to be, the archetype of abundance, who holds everything together through the power of his word, before whom every knee shall bow choose to be incarnate as an example of an evolutionary dead end destined for Darwinian deselection?

In Elton’s own words:

“I think Jesus was a compassionate, super-intelligent gay man who understood human problems,” John told the Sunday supplement. “On the cross, he forgave the people who crucified him. Jesus wanted us to be loving and forgiving. I don’t know what makes people so cruel. Try being a gay woman in the Middle East — you’re as good as dead.”

Ugandan aversion therapy

Martin Ssempa, a Ugandan pastor has supposedly shown homosexual pornography in his church to let people know “what homosexuals do.” For most of us, it is sufficient to imagine.

I suspect that the well intentioned cleric has made a bit of a blunder; perhaps he was trying to deter his congregation from following suit by exhibiting the undisputable (to a heterosexual) yuck factor; perhaps he genuinely thought his congregation could not make an informed decision without seeing for themselves “what homosexuals do”; or perhaps he is naïve and overzealous.

The usual coterie of LBGT and leftist hangers on have roundly condemned him.

John Bothwell, at one time bishop of the Diocese of Niagara, used to take a similar approach to toughen up his seminary students before agreeing to employ them. Every year he would show ordinands a pornographic homosexual film to introduce them to the real world – at least, his real world. The only people who complained were the audience.

Here is the article from the BBC:

An anti-gay clergyman in Uganda has screened gay pornography in his church, in an attempt to gain support for proposed anti-homosexuality laws.

“We are in the process of legislation and we have to educate ourselves about what homosexuals do,” Pastor Martin Ssempa told the BBC.

Gay rights activists suggested the pastor “needed medical help”.

The anti-gay bill, which proposes the death penalty for some gay people, has caused outrage around the world.

US President Barack Obama described the proposals as “odious”.

Monica Mbaru, from the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission, roundly condemned the pastor’s behaviour.

“You cannot screen pornographic material to your followers and then want to argue that you are upholding society’s morals,” she told the BBC.

Where are the Anglican protests over homosexuals killed in Iran?

The Anglican Church is in the West is falling all over itself to condemn the homosexuality bill before the Ugandan government. Here is the screech of outrage from the Anglican Church of Canada:

COGS passed a resolution that expressed its dismay and concern over the draft proposed anti-homosexuality bill currently before the parliament of Uganda. COGS resolved to call upon the church of the province of Uganda to oppose this private member’s bill, and called upon the Government of Canada, through the Minister of External Affairs, to convey to the government of Uganda a deep sense of alarm about this fundamental violation of human rights and through diplomatic channels, to press for its withdrawal; and asked the Primate to send this message to the appropriate bodies.

The bill as it stands is draconian and has been opposed by the Anglican Church of Uganda.

What is strange, though, is Iran has been routinely hanging homosexuals for the last 30 years with no real trial except an appearance before a sharia judge; and the Anglican Church in the West has not protested at all.

Where is the deep sense of alarm, the dismay, the message to the appropriate bodies? Entirely absent.

Does Fred Hiltz only care about Anglican homosexuals? Perhaps the Anglican Church is not as diverse and inclusive as it would like people to think.

The Church of England votes to give homosexual clergy hookups full benefits

At its recent synod, the Church of England voted to extend pension benefits to clergy in homosexual civil “partnerships”:

Prior to the vote, surviving civil partners of deceased gay clergy could claim pension benefits, but only back to 2005 when the Civil Partnership Act was introduced.

But now the Synod has voted to extend their pension benefits by offering surviving civil partners a pension based on all of their deceased partner’s pensionable service, equating them with widows and widowers.

The change means the Church of England will go beyond the requirements of the Civil Partnership Act 2004.

One Synod member, who asked to remain anonymous, said conservative Synod members had deliberately withheld from taking to the floor to speak against the motion for fear of reprisals.

“They didn’t dare to. There would have been screams of homophobia if anyone had dared oppose it,” he said.

It’s good to know that the CofE is an inclusive church where all are free to speak their mind – as long as they maintain the harmony of the zeitgeist.

The Times, notes:

The Church allows gay clergy to register their civil partnerships, but requests that they remain celibate.

Nudge nudge.

How many homosexual clergy are there in the CofE?

In the London and Southwark dioceses, up to one in five clergy is thought to be gay, according to Canon Giles Goddard, co-founder of the lobby group Inclusive Church.

In Britain as a whole, the percentage of homosexuals is just 6%:

Six per cent of the population, or about 3.6 million Britons, are either gay or lesbian, the government’s first attempt to quantify the homosexual population has concluded.

So in the dioceses of London and Southwark, 20% of priests are homosexual, whereas in the general population, 6% are homosexual.

Why are there so many homosexuals in the leadership of the Anglican Church? Is it a deliberate recruitment drive by the church; are the robes particularly alluring; is it the funny hats?

Or is it a plot to subvert the only denomination that consistently preaches the true Gospel? No, that can’t be it.

Perhaps it’s the judgement of God as described in Romans: Since they thought it foolish to acknowledge God, he abandoned them to their foolish thinking and let them do things that should never be done. Rom 1:28. The ultimate punishment: letting people have their own way.