Christian Persecution

CofE General Sex Synod 2017: not one question about the Persecuted Church

Over the past few months Christians in the village of Jalalabad in Ghazipur District, India, where temperatures frequently soar to 40°C, have had their water supply cut to force them to deny Jesus. They have refused. Al-Shabaab militants walked into Fafi Primary School, 60 miles from Garissa in Kenya, and shot dead one Christian teacher in front of his pupils, and kidnapped another. Buses carrying Christians in Egypt are being attacked, and children slaughtered. Christian girls in Cairo are being kidnapped. Christians in Syria are being abducted. Christians in Pakistan are being subjected to false accusations of blasphemy, and being summarily dealt with: Asia Bibi has been languishing in a Pakistani prison since 2010. Churches are being torched and Christians taken hostage in the Philippines. In Iran for Christians have been sentenced to 10 years imprisonment each for engaging in missionary activities and “conducting activities against national security”. Pastor Zhang Shaojie in China is barely alive after suffering torture in prison. In Eritrea Christians are being routinely rounded up and detained. In Iraq, many Christians have been wiped out; thousands are now displaced.

But fear not, the General Synod of the Church of England is profoundly concerned about these matters…

Of the 85 listed Synod questions, not one – not one – is concerned with the plight of the persecuted church worldwide. There are questions about sex, sexuality, sex, LGBT, sex, LGTBQIA (what?), sex, LGBTI, sex, same-sex marriage, sex, ‘gay cure’ conversion therapy, sex, sex, and sex. O, there’s a question on ‘Monitoring air quality’, too. That’s diversity of obsession.

Welcome to the General Sex Synod of the Church of England.

The Very Rev’d Kelvin Holdsworth set out the LGBT strategy last year:

This can only be won in the Church of England in the General Synod of the Church of England. Notwithstanding anything else I say below, it can be won no-where else. That means building up a formidable synodical operation that works vote by vote for inclusive policies. The key here is that getting permission to marry gay couples in church unlocks all the other things you want too. Yes, it is worth making every debate about pensions, the forces chaplaincies, schools etc all debates where LGBT issues are paramount – these are all things where LGBT rights need to be talked about. However, equal marriage is the goal. And deliciously in a synodical system it is possible (difficult admittedly, but possible) to get things on the agenda. Oh, and don’t forget that the best way to provide jollity to a diocesan synod is to get enough people elected onto it and propose a motion or two about the national policy of the C of E when it comes to LGBT people. Don’t forget that it was in Diocesan Synods that the dreaded covenant was defeated in England. Synods are your friends.

Some would call this ‘entryism’ – infiltration and influence with the objective of subversion and domination. All democratic organisations are vulnerable to it, but most have mechanisms to mitigate it. In the case of the General Synod of the Church of England, is it too much to ask that those elected to it ought to swear to uphold the doctrine, discipline, and worship of the Church of England? Or is that all in the eye of the beholder? Might members assent to such an oath, but like anti-Monarchist MPs in Parliament, cross their fingers as they swear it? Would God smile at that, or applaud it? If heretics are lauded as prophets, where is discernment?

If Synod is the Church of England’s supreme law-making body, and if it may be crammed with activists who have their own crusades and personal agendas which are at variance with the Catholic and Reformed foundation, what is there to guard the church against ever-expanding circles of concentric permissiveness, under the guise of ‘radical inclusion‘? If the answer is nothing, what makes the Church of England different from the world?

Should we not, at the very, very least, be witnessing boldly and forcefully to the world that we care about our brothers and sisters around the world who are being persecuted, tortured and murdered for their faith? Should we not convey in our agendas and propagate in our schedules that we care deeply about the voice of the martyrs? ‘Remember them that are in bonds, as bound with them; and them which suffer adversity, as being yourselves also in the body‘ (Heb 13:3).

Or is it that the bonds, suffering and adversity of the LGBT community in England should truly eclipse the suffering of Christians in India, Pakistan, Kenya, Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Nigeria, Mali, Somalia, Afghanistan, Sudan, Syria, Yemen…?

It certainly seems so.

  • Peter Forster

    Amen

    Peter Forster

  • IanCad

    Indisputable evidence that the concerns raised in the three prior editorials will never be satisfactorily addressed.

  • Maalaistollo

    The fact that the institutional churches in the West seem to display little or no concern for their fellow-Christians elsewhere, but are far more interested in the matters referred to in this post, merely confirms to our Islamic friends the worthlessness of what they (with increasing accuracy) describe as ‘Pagan Christianity.’ Unless there is a significant change, it appears inevitable that they will be the instruments for cleansing the Western church of its false brethren and all that they espouse.

    • petej

      Believe it or not Welby has been criticised for spending too much time trying to mend division abroad and not enough time on domestic matters.

  • Perhaps the church is worried that drawing attention to Christian persecution overseas would be interpreted as criticism of England’s substantial Hindu and Muslim communities. The joy of multiculturalism.

    • petej

      How could a complaint about persecution overseas be criticism of people in Britain?!

      • @ petej—I did say ‘interpreted as criticism’, and Muslims in particular have a track record of taking umbrage when they think their faith is being criticized. The C of E has enough on its plate without earning the enmity of Islam.

        • petej

          I haven’t noticed this phenomenon- could you perhaps give me an example of when British Muslims complained about criticism of violence in Muslim majority countries?

          • @ petej—There are no examples to give because the churches have been careful not to give British Muslims reason to take umbrage. The churches take note of Muslim violence and decide that discretion is the better part of valour.

          • petej

            So how do you know that British Muslims will ‘take umbrage’. I’d say, given Muslims are much more likely to be victims of Islamic violence than Christians, they’d probably stand with the church of England, as they have done in reaction to Islamic terrorism in the UK

  • vsscoles

    It is the House of Clergy – all of whom have sworn to uphold and defend the doctrine of the Church of England – which is most obsessed with sexual liberation. Too many have been watching Fr Ted. “Sex, sex, sex”.

  • magnolia

    What would Jesus say? Or would he be too busy weeping over Jerusalem to talk at all?

    • magnolia

      And even Linus agrees 🙂

      • Linus

        WWJS?

        Now you know very well he’d say nothing at all. Non-existent beings have trouble forming coherent words, let alone intelligible phrases.

        The Christian whose hand is rammed up his backside and moving his lips would have plenty to say however. Mostly imprecations against those who refuse to fall down in obedience before his sock puppet of a god. There might be tears, depending on his level of emotional incontinence. But the emotion being expressed won’t be sadness.

        The anger of the frustrated despot knows no bounds and can often spill over into histrionic expressions of exaggerated sorrow.

  • Linus

    What can a CofE synod do about the persecution of Christians outside of England?

    Not a lot.

    The fake archbishop may disapprove of entryism, but he appears to be a fervent supporter of tokenism. As if a stiff resolution from a synod full of soft, overfed English Christians will change a single thing about the predicament of people in war torn zones.

    The hubris of it all is astonishing. Does he think that without his moral support, they’ll give up hope?

    He really does view himself as a shining beacon, doesn’t he?

    The CofE synod is concerning itself with things it can have an impact on. This shows a laudable pragmatism that the likes of the fake archbishop must hate. How dare they try to change what they are able to change when there are far more grandiose, impractical and quixotic projects to attend to?

    Ah well, while he’s bitching about a lack of tokenistic will to throw sops to the suffering, the agenda gives good hope that much progress towards burying traditional Anglican attitudes to human sexuality will be made. Let him shriek and posture about Christian persecutions while others get on and do some real work. After all, shrieking and posturing are what he does best.

    • alternative_perspective

      Are you as unpleasant in real life as you are here? Seriously, just why?

      On the odd occasion you make a seemingly sensible observations: “The CofE synod is concerning itself with things it can have an impact on. This shows a laudable pragmatism” you then poison the discussion with insults and attacks. In a singular moment any common sense we glimpse in you; any balance and willingness to discuss matters amiably is immediately obscured by hatred.

      Why? You’re obviously an attention seeking malcontent attempting to distribute the suffering you’ve endured generously amongst us but is this all there is to you? It is so superficial and a touch pathetique. Is there not a deeper, more substantive Linus?
      The more we read you, the less anger we feel and the more pity we have. You are quite literally becoming a two dimensional parody of an online troll. Sufficiently aware that attacks cannot be too egregious lest you are blocked from the site but sufficiently cutting so as to provoke a response and illicit a modicum of attention. In a swoop, you demonstrate your fears, your need to conform and your inner weaknesses. Insufficiently courageous to stray beyond the blog’s terms of use and risk being banned but too needy and predictable to leave this blog or contribute to it constructively.

      Sad really, you have my sympathies.

      • Linus

        You accuse me of hatred while giving vent to your own.

        Pot. Kettle. Black.

        It’s this kind of double standard that makes you ridiculous. You can abuse and criticise whoever you like but if I do it, I’m evil.

        Christian, gaze in the looking glass and see yourself. The reflection is so hideous, no wonder you can’t bear to look at it.

        • alternative_perspective

          Ha ha, funny.
          You think I’m hurt by your vacuous insult? You see, I’m not hateful. I never (literally never) feel hate. I don’t hate you… why should I? You think far too much of yourself. Seriously, what possible motivation could I have to hate you? Why do you think I care so much as to hate you?
          You are troll that’s too scared to say anything truly outrageous in case the webmaster kicks you off. In many ways, you need us – to be your audience and to absorb your punches, to give you the attention you crave. We have no need of you as you wilfully refuse to contribute anything of value to this blog, though I’m sure you could if you had the self-discipline and will. As I said, it is sad and I feel sorry for you that you have such a need.
          If you were honest with yourself, you’d accept that your persona “Linus” which you’ve created IS: superficial, nasty and emotionally needy – basically little more than a parasite. Whether you are in real life.. who knows?
          So yeah, I’m being quite blunt but it is patently true. I don’t call you names. I don’t question your intellect. I don’t stalk you across every story, nor do I feel the need to post comments damning you everywhere. But lets be honest – your the one haunting a Christian blog, dishing it out and refusing to take it. Your the one who knows we’re not going to throw expletives at you or threaten to harm you. You know full well that worst we’ll do is question your integrity and character. You’ve chosen a soft target and you hang around us because you need us. What kind of strong minded and courageous individual is it who latches on to a small bunch of Christians and then attempts to beat up on them daily knowing they’ll never respond in kind? And you think you’re normal, that you’re healthy, that you’re acting in a good and proper way?
          The problem is, you’ve got the wrong turn of phrase. It is not “a pot calling the kettle black”, its more, one “calling a spade a spade”.
          And the mirror you refer, it is not point at me, but at you.

          • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

            You have summed Linus up to a tee…excellent sir…excellent

          • Linus

            You never hate, eh?

            Careful. Your sky pixie knows when you’re lying and he’ll punish you for it.

            Go ahead and play the victim. It’s a role that Christians love. They’re never happier than when posing as martyrs. It’s a shame they can’t pull it off. Such bad acting hasn’t been seen since Keanu Reeves made his last movie.

            You denounce, insult and attack non-Christians in the most virulent way and then bleat histrionically when someone returns the favour.

            There’s only one word to describe your attitude: hypocrisy. You are what your own religion warns us against: a whitewashed tomb, a posing Pharisee. If there is a heaven, you’ll beat on the gates crying “Lord! Lord!”, but he won’t let you in. He doesn’t know you.

          • Chefofsinners

            But He knows you.

          • Linus

            Sigh!

            He knows nobody because he doesn’t exist.

            You think you know me, and because I oppose you and your ludicrous fantasy faith, you want to destroy me. Hence all the threats of divine retribution.

            But what is not real can harm nobody. And despite all your claims and menaces, you can provide no proof of the reality of your god. Not one shred of solid, verifiable, repeatable evidence.

            All you can offer are hollow threats. “My big daddy god will show you! You’ll see! You’ll be sorry!” It’s like listening to a belligerent child.

          • Maxine Schell

            You misunderstand…we don’t want to destroy you…we want Jesus to SAVE you.

          • Linus

            You want a figment of your imagination to save me, do you?

            So exactly how is that going to happen? And what do you mean by “save”?

            Tell you what I understand by it. You want to persuade me to think the way you do by threatening me with an existence after death that will be both eternal and horribly painful, but only if I don’t believe what you believe.

            You can’t provide me with any proof of this life after death. Your claim that it exists is entirely based on a story you have read and choose to believe without any verifiable corroborating evidence. Your demand that I believe (on pain of eternal punishment) is based on an unconditional acceptance of your word as the incontrovertible truth. I must believe because you do … and how could you be wrong?

            In effect your attempt to evangelise me is nothing more than narcissism in action. I must believe what you say without any evidence because you are so wonderful and wise, you must be right.

            Sorry to disappoint you, but I have no reason to believe that you are any different from any of the other blinkered and self-worshipping narcissists who inhabit this site. Indeed your argument, such as it is, tends to make me think you’re exactly like them.

      • dannybhoy

        Have you ever noticed that Linus no matter what has been said to him, always reacts with the same string of distorted and selective responses? Everyone gets the same treatment!
        Yet still he stays throwing out his bile to the same old crowd.
        Billy Nomates or what..

        • Martin

          Could be he isn’t a real person, just a computer.

          • dannybhoy

            Or a malfunctioning ‘genderoid’…?

          • Martin

            Actually I think he fails the Turing test.

        • magnolia

          He is sunk in a gloomy pit of old githood, from which he hurls out the gunkier bits, like slugs and snails that are pulling him down. He reminds me of Oscar the Grouch who lived in the bins on Sesame Street. I take him with roughly the same seriousness. Who knows? One day maybe he could grow to be Big Bird….

          • ” … a gloomy pit of old githood.”

            That’s a manifestation of grumpy old gitophobia.

  • John

    It is shameful. However, on the bright side, should the likes of Kelvin Holdsworth plunge the Church of England into irreparable schism over this issue, persecuted Christians (in England) will be top of the agenda.

    • petej

      I realise the blog post implies differently, but he’s not a priest in the cofe.

  • magnolia

    For a start General Synod might speak to the church leaders in the persecuted areas by television link and listen to their pleas for our prayers. For Christians heartfelt prayer IS a form of action.

    Of course it should not stop there and requires imagination, but it is a poor thing to pander to those apparently incapable of assessing that the crying needs of others might possibly be more important than the minor comfort adjustments of their extremely first world perceived problems

    • Linus

      Heartfelt prayer is nothing more than you trying to assuage your conscience with a token response.

      The hypocrisy of it is outrageous. You say a few words in support of people you can’t help and then rip politicians to shreds for doing exactly the same. If their good wishes aren’t expressed as a prayer to your idol, they count for nothing, even though the effort taken to express them is exactly the same as yours.

      Filthy hypocrite, you truly do belong in that hell you talk about so much. When faced with such spite and hatred, even an Atheist might regret that it doesn’t exist, if only to provide you with a fitting place to live out your loathing of your fellow man.

      • Chefofsinners

        Piffle, of course. Those who are suffering often ask Christians to ‘pray for me’. No-one ever asked a politician to ‘say a sound bite for me.’

        • Linus

          A wish expressed is a wish expressed whether you call it a prayer or not.

          Sick or suffering people are quite often cheered up by good wishes from their favourite celebrity or even a politician they might support. There’s no practical difference between that and the prayers of a Christian to his sky pixie asking for magical healing. Except of course that someone probably gives a damn about the celebrity (quite possibly even about the politician – Justin Trudeau has a BIG following), whereas nobody much cares what happens to some mad chanting religious nut.

          When Christians tell me they’ll pray for me, I generally tell them to knock themselves out. Their prayers can’t do me any good. But they can’t do any harm either. And if they’re busy praying for me, they’ll have less time for abusing children and torturing their gay offspring.

          Distract a Christian with a request for prayer and you sidetrack him in his quest to make life as difficult as possible for anyone who doesn’t believe in his sky fairy.

          • Chefofsinners

            Distract an atheist with short remark to wind him up. He’ll splutter bile all night long.

          • Maxine Schell

            St. Paul mean-mouthed Christians also. You may wind up a street preacher.

          • Linus

            If by “wind up” you mean “put out of business”, I sincerely hope so.

            The other common meaning – to provoke to anger – might also be amusing. Debunking gibbering religious nuts and rendering them ridiculous in the process is a simple process that serves a useful purpose. It reinforces the commonly-held belief that fundamentalists are mentally ill.

            The more religion is associated with extreme and pathological behaviours, the quicker it will disappear and the better off we’ll all be. Even religious fundamentalists. If you could only wise up to your own delusions, you could make so much more of your lives instead of wasting them chasing mirages and sky pixies.

            Of course if you want to do that, far be it from me to stop you. It’s your life to fritter away as you see fit, after all.

            So yes, I hope I wind up a street preacher very soon.

  • CliveM

    Well isn’t that a nice, shiny new stage in the photo. Looks like a party conference. Bit of money used there.

    Pity they will only be speaking to themselves. Why look all shiny and new for the cameras when you have no intention of speaking to the world behind them?

    World Wide Angican Communion now there’s a laugh. All very well, but don’t let it, or its concerns get in the way of a decent bout of navel gazing.

    The sin here is that the Church appears to to care, or to be listening to anything or anyone God anybody?) but itself.

    Behind the shiny stage lies fear and a shocking loss of confidence in its message and mission. It needs to ‘man up’. (Won’t like that phrase, not inclusive).

  • Never mind, there’s one in there on the Teaching of the Bible.

    • Busy Mum

      I noticed that! However, there is no indication as to whether the questioner is wanting to accept that teaching, or to change it. I suspect it may be the latter….

  • alternative_perspective

    Reminds me very much of the local church I attended a couple of years ago whilst ISIS were rushing through Syria and Iraq, crucifying and beheading Christians, enslaving and raping women of all minorities; butchering children if they wouldn’t confess the Islamic creeds, dropping gays off tower blocks and burning enemy fighters alive in cages.

    All the while, the naval gazing prayers of the congregation started to sicken me: for Doris and her knee. For old Jimmie who’s been feeling under the weather. Not a mention of the atrocities committed globally, and the suffering being endured. Eventually, months and months later, events managed to seep into their collective consciousness; so we got generic prayers for world peace and working toward the common good.

    The world was (is) falling to pieces, the black flags of ISIS were attempting to fulfil Islamic eschatology, Russia and Turkey were sliding towards war and the latter was (is) embracing radical Islam – and all we got were quietly mumbled amens from the congregation.

    The modern, established, mainstream, church of English.

    • dannybhoy

      It’s a problem in many local churches. Our people are ageing, comfortable and in a parochial rut. We have to prayerfully wake them up while there is still time..

    • Royinsouthwest

      If I had been there and If I had the courage I would have been tempted to pray that unless Doris’s knee really was in a very bad state God would encourage her to get off her backside and go for regular walks. There is good medical evidence that regular outdoor walking is beneficial in cases of mild and moderate knee arthritis.

      • Jonathan

        And God has placed in the church first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, of helping, of guidance, and of different kinds of tongues.

  • Oaths won’t help. You forget that the bishops’ teaching document upholding orthodoxy on marriage was defeated in the House of Clergy. These had already sworn to uphold the teaching of the church. The enemy is within. It’s not entryism. It’s a fifth column.

    • Sybaseguru

      It was actually the women priests that defeated it. The men voted 2:1 in favour of it, the women 4:1 against. No wonder Paul was inspired by the Holy Spirit to write 1 Tim 2:12. (“I would not put a woman in authority in the Church”)

      • magnolia

        False logic. More liberal because more liberal churches were initially more open to taking them. That will smooth out given time, like the Salvation Army etc. And while you have been whingeing about women I have been a channel of conversion for Linus! He agrees that “every knee will bow”! Don’t be too down on women; Jesus wasn’t.

        • It’s not about women, Magnolia. There are and have been plenty of fine women Christians. It’s about women who have been “ordained” by the Church of England. By definition, such women are liberal because, by offering themselves for the priesthood, they contradict Jesus and 2000 years of Christian Tradition.

      • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

        Alas it is also women politicians who are destroying Sweden…

  • alternative_perspective

    Where does the comma go in the “The General Sex Synod”?

    • The General Sex Syn – odd

      • Royinsouthwest

        You are jumping to conclusions Jack. How do you know that the number of sins is an odd number? Even if it is not even, i.e. if is odd, is that important? If there are exactly seven deadly sins then that is a prime number but does that numerical fact have theological significance?

        • Odd for the bunch of oddities in attendance.

  • dannybhoy

    “Of the 85 listed Synod questions, not one – not one – is concerned with the plight of the persecuted church worldwide. ”
    This is easily explained. At its most basic level it is society which is shaping the agenda not the Saviour of Mankind.
    Secondly the Church of England now more closely resembles those bishops and priests in Soviet Russia who, in order to survive collaborated with the State, promoting their message, and betraying their own congregations.
    The only difference is that the Church of England is cooperating with the State agenda willingly..
    No suffering in prison cells for them, oh no.
    I would also say that those remaining in the CofE out of a sense of loyalty and tradition need to examine their own consciences, and decide who they really acknowledge as Lord.. It’s time good, pious and decent people accepted that they cannot serve two masters.
    Thirdly I would encourage all Christians get in touch with organisations such as Open Doors, MAF, any Christian organisation Catholic or Protestant that working for our brothers and sisters in the persecuted churches, and get them to come and speak at your church, speak to your vicar, write to your bishop and demand that they get their priorities in line with those of the Kingdom of God…

    • CliveM

      I think too many within the CofE think criticising capitalism counts as making a stand.

      • dannybhoy

        Right. …what’s with your new trendy interchageable use of to/too and two?? Are you striking a blow for freedom of expression?

      • Watchman

        They think that Jesus died for the redistribution of wealth!

    • Simon Platt

      That’s rather good: “the Church of England now resembles those bishops and priests in Soviet Russia who collaborated with the State, promoting their message, and betraying their own congregations. The only difference is that the Church of England is cooperating with the State agenda willingly.” I hadn’t thought of it that way until just now, but I see its merits.

      In respect of “Christian organisations, Catholic or Protestant, working for our brothers and sisters in the persecuted churches” I’m very pleased to support Aid to the Church in Need (http://www.acnuk.org), and to say that there was indeed a recent visit by their local representative to my church, stwalburge.org. Their latest newsletter is all about supporting Iraqi Christians returning to their homeland in and around Mosul: http://www.acnuk.org/iraq-appeal-br-can-iraq-s-christians-return-home-

      • dannybhoy

        Stick with Dannybhoy kid, he’ll show you where it’s all at…
        Actually it only occurred to me this morning, but most definitely it bears comparison.
        We, the wife and I, live in ‘Deeper Norfolk’, – the land time forgot..
        but fortunately we also have contacts with UEA Christian Union, with YWAM, and of course the good old Internet.
        I believe God wants to involve all of us -young’ns and old’ns in His plans, and for me it boils down to recognising that a major one of our various job titles is “Servant.”
        So we wait on the Lord.
        We worship the Lord.
        In our prayers we bring before Him the Church worldwide, our nation and its leaders, our communities and the Christians in our locality.
        And we ask Him,
        “Lord what would you have me do?”

  • CliveM

    I’m not a believer in the ‘good old days ‘. Generally the world wasn’t a better place. But and it maybe because of the all enveloping nature of modern media, but has society ever been more sex obsessed?

    • Busy Mum

      I think we should believe in the ‘good old days’, not as absolutely good, but relatively so; though to dwell on this fact, and the whys and wherefores of it, is not good for us. See Ecclesiastes 7 vv 7-10

      • dannybhoy

        We compare the past with the present. There are aspects of ‘the past I grew up in’ that I think were preferable.

    • Royinsouthwest

      It is funny how those who are ostentatiously against all forms of “prejudice” think it is perfectly acceptable to be prejudiced against their forebears who made Britain a great country. It never seems to occur to them that their own achievements are minuscule compared to those of the Victorians, say, nor do they seem to wonder what the people living in this country a hundred years from now will think when they look back at contemporary obsessions.

      • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

        I quite agree

      • Maxine Schell

        Hopefully, our descendants will be as ashamed of abortion as we are of slavery.

        • Maalaistollo

          If there are any.

    • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

      I think it is a mistake to view the past through rose-tinted spectacles, but some things were better then, and some things far worse. The same applies today…

      • CliveM

        Id agree with that.

        • Id may agree but would ego and super-ego?

          • CliveM

            LOL I really must check what’s in my post before I release it!

    • Chefofsinners

      Do not say, “Why were the old days better than these?” For it is not wise to ask such questions.
      Ecclesiastes 7:10.

  • dannybhoy

    Hmmmmmm..

  • Busy Mum

    Just read the linked Holdsworth article. From somebody who thinks himself not only a reverend, but a very reverend at that, it is an incredibly irreverent, sickening, treacherous, politically motivated outpouring of hate.

    I wonder if HM the Queen knows that Holdsworth is praying that her great-grandson and third in line to the throne grows up to be homosexual? And is exhorting others to do the same?

    • Linus

      Little George Mountbatten will grow up to be what he is and no amount of sententious prayer will change that.

      If it does turn out that he’s gay, then Britain – if still a monarchy by that stage – will find itself with a king and a prince consort. If conservative Christian theories about homosexuality resulting from domineering mothers and dominated fathers are correct, then I’d say there’s even a good chance of it. Ms Middleclass clearly wears the trousers in that marriage. Her children are doomed.

      So if the next king but two turns out to be gay, and if reproductive technology moves on as predicted, King George VII and his happy prince consort will presumably be able to choose which of them bears the children. Or perhaps they’ll choose to make use of the services of a surrogate. Will she be ennobled for the occasion? The duchess of Upper Duff, perhaps? Or the countess of Cervix? One shudders to think of the problem this will pose for the College of Arms, given the tendency of the noblesse de robe to want to reflect in their blazon whatever dreary line of trade purchased them their peerage…

      Will George’s surrogate impale the lions, the unicorn and the harp with a Petri dish and a female reproductive system?

      Or maybe it will be the other way round…

      • Simon Platt

        What a nasty comment.

        • Busy Mum

          That’s why I’m not going to bother responding to him/her or whatever it is.

        • dannybhoy

          You can always rely upon Linus.
          But we keeps on a-praying for him.

          • Linus

            Well that’s a result then, isn’t it?

            While you’re praying for me, you won’t be out there abusing children, persecuting gays, hating Muslims and generally trying to hurt as many people as you can.

            So pray away. Pray hard enough and perhaps your sky pixie will rapture you up to Pixieland where you can play with Noddy and Big Ears for the rest of time.

          • dannybhoy

            You prove the point many of us are making Linus.
            It is an insult to those of us who have worked with children in care, children with learning difficulties and also fostered children to throw out the kind of slurs you continually make..
            Personally I don’t take offence because I recognise that you through no fault of your own ,have been seriously damaged.
            But just bear in mind that everyone here condemns any form of sexual abuse wherever it is found, and we especially deplore it in the established churches.
            If it were not for your damaged emotional circuitry you would realise that is indeed the case.

          • Linus

            A slur is an unjustified accusation. But thousands of cases of sexual abuse carried out by representatives of the church on the children in their care show that accusations against the church are fully justified.

            Any sensible parent knows to keep his or her child well away from unsupervised contact with Christians. Emotional manipulation is the Christian’s stock in trade. It’s the basic tactic of any evangelical religion. Convert, compel, control and force into submission: that’s how the church operates. Those who act on its behalf routinely use manipulative tactics to get their way.

            Given this tendency towards pathological behaviour, abuse is inevitable. That’s why despite all the scandals of the past, new cases come to light all the time. And they always will. Put inveterate manipulators in charge of children and abuse will happen.

            Be as offended as you like, but I wouldn’t trust you or any other Christian within a hundred metres of an unchaperoned child. Your religion is a symptom of your twisted relationship with power and children just don’t have the emotional sophistication to resist it. A Christian faith should be a warning flag to any parent that here is a person who wants to harm their children.

          • Maxine Schell

            As you seem to know everything, please tell……what percentage of sexual abusers of children are practicing Christians ?

          • Linus

            Exact figures are difficult to come by as the church does its best to cover up cases of abuse, but the example of the Australian investigation into the abuse of children in Catholic institutions found that 7% of Catholic priests (from 1950 to 2009) had been accused of the sexual abuse of children, rising to an astounding 40.4% in one particular order.

          • dannybhoy

            “A slur is an unjustified accusation. But thousands of cases of sexual abuse carried out by representatives of the church on the children in their care show that accusations against the church are fully justified.”
            And yes, I/we agree and deplore the statistics. We want these people rooted out of our churches.
            The fact is though that it happens most in the older, hierarchical, authoritarian denominations where congregants are encouraged to hold clergy in veneration.

            Look, my contact and involvement with church life goes right back to a Methodist Sunday School, then Gospel Hall ‘Jucos’ (juniors). I never ever experienced anything distressing nor heard from my friends anything that could be construed as abuse. I’m not saying it didn’t ever happen, but I never heard anything.
            Goodness! as children in the fifties society was very different, and we were pretty ignorant of the ‘seamier’ side of life.

        • len

          Linus exists so that Christians can exercise patience, tolerance, forgiveness, and other Christian virtues(albeit through gritted teeth sometimes)
          Bless you my son …now run along now….

          • dannybhoy

            Very good Len!

    • What do you expect from a person who prays to the “Holy Spirit of common sense”?

      • Busy Mum

        Is it too much to expect common sense?

  • Dreadnaught

    Islam is on a roll in furtherance of its global positioning as the only religion prepared to murder and main in pursuit of its objective. No government, world organisation or Faith is prepared to stand in its way.
    As long as any public dissent continues to be categorised as reactionary racism, they will indeed succeed before too long.
    BBC News reports in names and photographs, 100 people identified as British ‘jihadis’ that are liable to execute acts of violence against the public yet no one has a clue what to do about them and the other 22,000 potentials here, that quietly ferment their influence with impunity. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32026985

    We are truly sleepwalking our freedom and culture into oblivion when we can’t even defend our own country from British nationals let alone, act against the expansion of Islam the atrocities being perpetrated on a scale no politician or the UN is prepared to recognise.

    • dannybhoy

      It’s difficult to lay into Muslim extremists when you have a millions large Muslim community living amongst you. So the government of the day swings into appeasement mode and tries to say the Muslims carrying out these attacks are not real Muslims.
      It’s a difficult one. You have to feel sympathy for them.

      • Dreadnaught

        Where are the Christian theologians and historians who can easily identify the root of the problem we face so clearly written in the Hadith and Sunnah, that praises and lauds the idol of Islam. It’s all there but no one apart from the like of Douglas Murray, Hugh Fitzgerald, Robert Spencer, Ayan Hirsi Ali, who have done the spade-work, will take them seriously enough to act.

        • dannybhoy

          It has something to do with collective fear and a collective hope that if we ignore it, it will go away.
          As you yourself will know everything depends on the leadership. It wasn’t until Winston Churchill stepped in that this country realised what had to be done..
          I am not advocating war, But I really think whilst they are still our leaders they need to get tough with terrorists, using shoot to kill tactics in confrontations, and deportations for survivors and accomplices, including their immediate families.
          Until we realise what is at stake and act accordingly, we will continue giving ground.

          • Dreadnaught

            Going after terrorist or potential terrorists is opting to be always on the back foot, fire fighting instead of fire proofing.
            Nothing has inspired me to believe that a stand-alone UK will act any more decisively even when free of the ECHR.

          • dannybhoy

            I reluctantly agree with that point.

      • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

        No, I don’t. Politicians did this…

    • Maxine Schell
  • Royinsouthwest

    Why should the Synod worry about persecuted Christians? After all, they could probably avoid persecution by becoming Muslims or atheists, depending on who the persecutors are. The fact that they don’t take those elementary measures shows just how unbending the Christians are.

    If they were given asylum in Britain they would be the type of bigoted fundamentalist who refuses to bake a “gay cake” and they are the very last people we should allow into Britain. If these persecuted Christians were admitted to Britain and some of them joined the CoE they might actually expect the leaders to believe in various doctrines and that would create divisions in society. Everyone knows that Jesus simply told people to be nice to each other, didn’t he?

    • novellus

      I once read an article of an old incident (probably from the 1980s) where a christian woman in Libya wrote to a cardinal in Rome and asked for counsel in her situation with no local church and difficult circumstances everywhere. The cardinal is said to have advised her to become Muslim!
      So maybe that might be in the heade of some clergy. But we would only know if the question comes before themhere, in case if Britain becomes officially atheist (or islamic).

      • Maxine Schell

        Me thinks QE (as Protector of the Faith) should step up her game.

    • Maxine Schell

      Too bad Mohammed didn’t tell the same to his followers.

  • As Jack posted yesterday, there is a problem with authority in the Church of England. It is “episcopally led”, by 108 bishops, and “synodically governed”, by an elected group from the laity and clergy of each diocese. At these Synods the church forms its rules, elects its officials, and unifies or amends its doctrines.

    Authority
    A vexed question in the Church of England! Very simple, in essence: the Lord Jesus Christ is the Head of the church: there is no question of that. The problem comes in deciding how that authority is mediated to the church in practical everyday problems and situations. There are broadly three strands of belief. The catholic, which regards the church’s tradition as the final arbiter; the evangelical, which regards Scripture in that way; and the liberal, which gives final authority to human reason. It is not as clear cut as this simple division would suggest, for the Catholics have a high view of Scripture, the evangelicals do not ride roughshod over tradition (and both recognise that the interpretation of both tradition and Scripture in today’s culture calls for the application of reason), and the liberals are not without regard to tradition and Scripture. However, there is also fourth strand, the charismatic, which runs through the other three and which holds that the individual believer can experience the direct revelation of truth and its current application from the Holy Spirit. All this, however, raises the further question of how this authority, however it is derived, is mediated to the church. The Church of England does this through a system of synodical government, in which both clergy and laity take part.

    http://www.churchofenglandglossary.co.uk/dictionary/definition/authority

    This is a recipe for disaster and unending revision to doctrine once liberals and charismatics become an active majority force in Syn-odd. There’s no absolute truth and no absolute morality and scripture has to be “re-imagined” for every generation. They have a new “theology” as (bishop?) David Gillett has articulated:

    “Narrative theology asks that we take time to inhabit the story; to leave the story as story as it does its work with the people of God today. We will not too quickly form ethical conclusions and moral rules which apply to all people for all time. We are prepared to stand back awhile and see how God’s story is inviting us to live now. It is clear to us from the story that God deals with the followers of Christ in different ways and provides appropriately for the forgiveness, wellbeing and flourishing of humanity at different times and in different places. And when by God’s Spirit we recognize and accept our place in the story we act on the truth it has given us.”

    Story? More like a fairy-tale.

  • Talwin

    Yes, but they are dealing with the thorny problem of ‘Mutual flourishing’. Maybe they’ll get around to the awkward subject of Christians murdered another time.

    • Chefofsinners

      That’s ‘mute you all’ flourishing, I think you’ll find.

      • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

        Or, as colonists would say, Mutual flushing….

        • Chefofsinners

          The phrase is a ghastly construct. For something to be mutual it must be done by the parties to one another. So it demands that I ‘flourish’ you and you ‘flourish’ me. I can assure the bishops that none of them is going to flourish me, no not by a long chalk, nor yet with a barge pole.

    • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

      By which time there won’t be any left…Christians are the dodos of the secular world

      • Dodo’s are fine creatures, Mrs Proudie.

        • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

          Ah yes…your previous incarnation….mmmn

        • len

          Were.

        • Chefofsinners

          The name derives from the Dutch for ‘fat arse’, I believe.

          • You really must focus you’re mind on higher things.

            [“Dodo” comes from Portuguese doudo, meaning “fool”, or, as an adjective, “crazy.”]

          • Chefofsinners

            I admit there is controversy over the etymology, but somehow fatarse seems appropriate.

  • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

    If I said they have their heads up their own arses, would that be one of the subjects they were going to discuss?

    • Busy Mum

      Is that question number 86?

      • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

        Yes I think it is…

    • Just their heads?

      • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

        One shudders…

    • Chefofsinners

      I think it will be covered under ‘Sexuality: learning from the Scottish churches’.

      • An entrepreneur could make a packet flogging swimming caps over the weekend.

  • Manfarang

    CofE General Sex Synod 2017: not one question about the Persecuted Church, nor a question about giving persecuted Christians asylum in the UK.

    • petej

      It’s not in their gift.

      It is in their gift to resolve to start taking abuse victims seriously

      • Manfarang

        It seems it is in the gift of Christ Church Bangkok to help persecuted Christians.

        • petej

          Could you please explain what Christ Church Bangkok is doing that the Church of England is not?

          • Manfarang

            https://www.ccbangkok.org/
            Providing support to refugees that are stranded in Thailand.

          • petej

            The cofe does support refugees in England and gives aid to those in need in other countries.

          • Manfarang

            The only hope for some refugees stranded in Bangkok is to be resettled in third countries.

  • novellus

    It is becoming clearer to me now why the section in Matthew 25,31-46 is set in the context of the last judgement. No feeding and no visits, no sharing of sorrows. Probably many in the CofE want to make sure where they will be standing.

  • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

    I’m not fond of the electric cross on stage…its the sort of thing one might see in those Las Vegas drive-in chapels of love…tacky.

    • len

      But very fitting for the climate they are operating in?.

      • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

        Yes, I suppose it is…

    • bluedog

      Perhaps ++ Justin will arise from the floor tickling the ivories of a Wurlitzer.

    • IrishNeanderthal

      Talking of Las Vegas, Julia Bradbury, referring to the Pavilion in Brighton, referred to it as “Vegassy”. That, to me, is not a term of praise. I understand that the Americans introduced the word “overkill” as part of Cold War terminology: in Las Vegas it certainly applies in regard to entertainment.

      But I do think it is rather unfair to single out that desert conurbation as “Sin City”. The name would much better be applied to Los Angeles. Those Hollywood people recount with glee their games of sexual conquest and submission. As for that other city:

      Britannia needs no Boulevards,
        No spaces wide and gay:
      Her march was through the crooked streets
        Along the narrow way.
      Nor looks she where, New York’s seduction,
        The Broadway leadeth to destruction.

      (<a href="http://www.gkc.org.uk/gkc/books/americanisation.html&quot;)Americanisation, by G. K. Chesterton

  • Martin

    And in the meantime:

    UK Parliament will be flying the rainbow flag this weekend and taking part in @LondonLGBTPride. https://t.co/z8PLCmjNMu #Pride2017 pic.twitter.com/h4YESWm9iR— UK Parliament (@UKParliament) July 6, 2017

    • Sodomy is nothing to be proud of.

      • Martin

        Indeed!

      • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

        It’s a pain in the backside, that’s what it is.

  • len

    A bit more sexual distraction from the synod while brothers in Christ are being crucified, beheaded , burned alive etc.
    The General Synod is obviously’ mutually flourishing’ in an alternative reality from their suffering brethren.

  • Truly shocking! They’re obsessed with sex and perversions. LGBTQWERTY are the minorities and disordered lets not forget.

    Synod should be developing plan to protect persecuted Christians around the world not plotting how to dupe the Church into performing same sex ceremonies and thereby condoning sin.

    • petej

      So you don’t think that anything should be done about sexual abuse and other forms of abuse in the church? This is what the majority of questions are actually about.

      • Of course, but no need to devote so much time over it. A strict and simple policy should be adopted, immediate dismissal and a police referral for both the suspected sexual abusers and those covering it up. God has no mercy for those who indulge in such sin.

        • petej

          I don’t agree that God has no mercy, because I believe the cross has the power to wipe away any sin (except perhaps blasphemy of the Holy Spirit)

          I do agree that it’s not rocket science to set up an effective safe guarding policy. I also agree that perpetrators should not be protected by the church and victims should be supported by the church. Unfortunately there’s substantial kickback to that. The cofe is not structured like the RCC and power is split between the bishops and synod. Many members of synod (and probably some bishops) do not agree with us. There has to be debate to understand why and find a way forward.

          • Dominic Stockford

            Any REPENTED sin. And the qwertyuiop types don’t repent, but bathe and bask and wallow with joy in their sin – demanding meanwhile that everyone else stops calling it sin.

          • petej

            Actually God has the authority to decide who he shows mercy to.

            I think you are massively over generalising to say that no lgbti people repent of their sins.

            I’m interested, however are you saying that verbal, physical or sexual abuse is justified if the target is perceived to be an unrepentant sinner? I hope not. This seems to be the stated position of many on synod!

  • Chefofsinners

    Why will Synod spend its time debating questions whose answers have been settled for thousands of years? Because the Church of England is now the Church of the World. The Holy Spirit has been driven out and no longer restrains evil in this synagogue of Satan. The CoE is itself persecuting true Christians.

    • In a way it is, you’re right.

    • Tsk … how old fashioned you are. You must embrace Gillett’s “generous” approach and not criticise another Christian who has arrived at a different way of following Christ.

      Doctrine is never settled. Each generation has to arrive at a “fresh understanding” of scripture. The Bible doesn’t have one meaning and God hasn’t given us a settled view on morality. There’s no moral rules which apply to all people for all time and He God deals with the followers of Christ in different ways, at different times and in different places.

      • Why bother then?

        • That’s the spirit, Marie. Just accept every person is able to find their own truth in the story that is scripture.

      • Royinsouthwest

        Aren’t you being unfair Jack to imply that modern “Christian” leaders are fickle. Surely after 2,000 years churches are simply arriving at the correct view of LGBTQWERTY issues. Once all churches recognise the truth there will be no need for future generations to make any changes to the doctrine on these issues. The truth will have been established for all time. Only heretics will challenge it and they will face the full force of the hate speech laws.

        • But Roy, Jack is fully supportive of seeing scripture as a story that we have to enter into and also watch others in the same story acting out a different narrative. It’s so liberating and inclusive and diverse and Jack can embrace all sorts of different truths and even change his mind tomorrow or next week. We are different. That’s all. Everyone’s right and nobody’s wrong.

      • Chefofsinners

        In other words, “Has God really said…?”

        • That’s just another story that has many meanings. You can only work out what it means for you today, tomorrow and next week. Leave others to enter the narrative and work out what it means for them.

          • Chefofsinners

            Uncanny. It’s as if Giles Fraser had taken on flesh and was walking amongst us.

          • Why thank you.

  • Royinsouthwest

    There is one strange omission from the sex questions. Why nothing about the official tolerance in Britain of the illegal practice of female genital mutilation or FGM? There has not been a single successful prosecution in Britain. Perhaps the CoE does not care about the victims. Even the Guardian seems to be thinking about the case for a zero tolerance approach.

    France’s tough stance on female genital mutilation is working, say campaigners
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/feb/10/france-tough-stance-female-genital-mutilation-fgm

    Parents and ‘cutters’ have been jailed in France but concerns remain that parents go abroad – including to UK – for FGM.

    Would the Synod think that making Britain the European capital of FGM demonstrates our commitment to diversity and inclusiveness?

    • petej

      There are plenty of questions on sexual abuse more generally.

      I’d guess there are no questions on FGM because nobody has claimed that the cofe is involved in this.

      General synod is not the government of the uk.

    • Ray Spring

      Thank you for the link. I never read the Guardian, normally rubbish. But not rubbish this time, a lesson for UK.

  • Chefofsinners

    I’ll be speaking in the debate on unconscious bias training. This involves, first, imbibing communion wine and chanting “LGBT-low-IQ” until a state of ‘Krishna unconsciousness’ is achieved. Once in this state a bishop can channel her inner Corbyn more effectively, and Tweet her contempt for Brexiteers despite being functionally illiterate.

    • Good chap. It’s a splendid idea to train people to be unaware about their biases. Who needs to know if an irregularity in one’s balls causes one to swerve?

  • David

    Although it grieves me to say it, but the C of E is 90% spiritually sick. With a few notable exceptions the bishops are not Bible affirming Christians, and a very high proportion of the local churches are also following the world not Jesus. There is a small but vital and growing, mainly evangelical minority, who are still preaching the gospel and pointing towards God’s truth. Worldwide there is a regrouped Anglican communion, vibrant, burgeoning even, which is of late outside the control of the A of C.

    • CliveM

      90% of the Church you see in the media maybe, but that is only 10% of the whole.

      • David

        Errr ? ?

    • petej

      The cofe has never been evangelical. If you only consider evangelicals to be proper Christians then you do not consider the cofe to be a Christian church.

      • Dominic Stockford

        ? Pardon me? it was specifically set up as a Protestant evangelical body by Cranmer and his buddies.

        • petej

          Evangelical and protestant are not the same thing. I’m sure I don’t need to tell you that modern Anglican (Conservative) evangelicals have more in common with American fundamentalists than traditional Anglicanism.

  • len

    Transport the entire General Synod to the centre of Syria and let them experience for themselves the reality of what their brothers and sisters in Christ are experiencing. Perhaps the obsession of the general Synod with sexual matters would be put into perspective an they struggled to stay alive and true to the faith?.

    • Lain Iwakura

      For most the of the General Synod, it would seem that second part of the struggle has already been lost.

    • petej

      What do you want them to do about Syria? (Serious question)

      • Ray Spring

        Register their concern, plus require that the UK Govt ensure that 50% of all Syrian refugees admitted to UK be Christian.

        • petej

          They’re already lobbying government to take many more refugees and secured the right to sponsor refugees as if they were a local authority. The problem is they are not the government and they can’t require the government to wipe its feet let alone change its refugee policy. The government was elected with 42% of the vote. The 42% do not wish to take more refugees, but agree with the government position.

          • IanCad

            It’s not a question of more refugees – just different refugees.

          • petej

            My point stands. The cofe have been lobbying Parliament on this throughout the war and have had some success, but ultimately the voters are choosing manifestos that confound their desires.

          • IanCad

            I’m glad to learn of that Pete. If only their lobbying efforts in support of our fellow Christians were, seemingly, half as diligent as those championing the cause of the LGBTQIAPK tendency, this year’s General Synod would be a lot different.

          • petej

            Contrary to Welby’s claims of ‘radical inclusion’ the cofe has done nothing to stop abuse of lgbti even within its own walls, let alone in wider society. That’s why there are so many questions on this topic because the bishops statements do not match their actions.

        • bluedog

          By what logic did you pick the figure of 50% Christian? Look at it this way, if 5% of the population is Muslim, an intake of 95% Christian is entirely justified. Popular opinion may demand 100% Christian. Your reverse discrimination seems unsound.

  • David

    Yes and no. It’s true that the top clergy who are newsworthy are generally revisionists, but it is wrong to assume that the unmentioned majority have conservative beliefs, because the vast majority don’t. I’d say that as few are one in ten local churches, their clergy and congregations are Biblical Christians.

  • petej

    If all synod members were required to support the current policy on everything there would be no need for a synod.

    • Is that what Christian truth and doctrine is these days – “current policy”?

      • Maxine Schell

        Sadly, it would seem so.

  • petej

    Many, maybe even most, of the questions on sexuality are actually about abuse by priests and others in the church. This seems to me vitally important and the author of this blog thought so too a few days ago. I wonder what has changed.

    The only question on same sex marriage is how the cofe now relates to the sec, given the sec allows this to be a matter of conscience and the cofe does not.

  • IanCad

    Clicked around a bit, but can’t find out what the other 57 questions are. Enquiring minds would like to know.

  • David

    I also note that there are no items about evangelism, either at home or abroad. Surely as Jesus’ last earthly command was to spread the gospel that should always be item number one ? How very sad.
    On a cosmetic point, like Mrs Proudie I think that the new podium arrangement, or whatever it is called, looks very cold and tacky – it’s a purple, electronic, corporate nonentity of a thing, that’s presumably meant to suggest “progressiveness” – but what a waste of collection plate money – quite tasteless and horrible !

  • len

    The church age is coming to an end , there can be little doubt about that.
    I know that some will say ‘And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it’. (Matthew 16:18) but this is a mistranslation of the original..
    Jesus never started’ a Church’, but a group of people called out of this world an ‘ecclesia’.
    ‘The Church’ is an attempt by the state to take control over religious matters. ‘The church’ signifies ownership.

    https://ecclesia.org/truth/ekklesia.html

    Anyway, having said that the state Church is in a dismally wretched state (no pun intended)

    And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God; I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see. As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent. (Revelation 3:14-19)

    Jesus consider the Church as ‘vomit’, unless it gets real with Him.

  • michaelkx

    I am sorry to say that C f E looks more like the Laodicea church:

    (Rev 3:14-22)  “To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God’s creation.
    I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other!
      So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth.
    You say, ‘I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked.
      I counsel you to buy from me gold refined in the fire, so you can become rich; and white clothes to wear, so you can cover your shameful nakedness; and salve to put on your eyes, so you can see.
      Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest and repent.
      Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with that person, and they with me.
      To the one who is victorious, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I was victorious and sat down with my Father on his throne.
      Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches.”

    • Dominic Stockford

      I’m not sure its that good.

  • Darter Noster

    Shame on you Archbishop! Surely you should know that anybody questioning the sanity of a bearded six foot wide prop forward who suddenly decides he’s a woman (damn my cis-priveleged terminology!) and wants to get naked in a girls changing room is at least equal to actually being Adolf Eichmann.

    If you have the nerve to claim that menstruation is a ‘women’s issue’, then you are being transphobic, because not all women menstruate – some women have penises and testes, and any denial of their identity kills literally millions of trans people every week.

    And the greatest human rights issue of our age is the right to stick your willy up another man’s bottom without anyone else having an opinion on it.

    Is that not obvious?

    Good ole CoE – although I shouldn’t be too smug; under Pope “who am I to judge despite the fact that making moral judgement calls in line with Catholic teaching is paragraph one of my job description” Francis, we Catholics are catching up rapidly.

    • Dominic Stockford

      Don’t you mean stick it up another woman’s bottom?

      • Darter Noster

        Good point that… er… thingy that happens to have been given male socialisation from birth based purely on the transphobic belief that external genitalia, a Y chromosome and the lack of ovaries and a uterus make one a “man”.

  • Dominic Stockford

    Looking more closely at the actual question being asked, the first three utterly miss the point. They all ask about whether a Christian today can be ‘allowed’ to be in politics and in a senior position – they all fail to mention that if you hold Biblical views of women in ministry and on homosexuality there is absolutely no chance of doing so.

    Furthermore, the answer from Sentamu carefully avoids going anywhere near what really matters, giving a bland and ineffective (probably inaccurate) answer. If, when a real issue crops up, the Synod chooses to avoid the reason WHY it is a real issue, then it has lost its purpose and meaning.

    • petej

      Lots of MPs/Lords in the Conservative Party and all of the DUP politicians believe these things.

      As does the current leader of the lib dems.

  • Merchantman

    On the subject of sex , I note there is no question on abortion. I suppose the answer is that in a post Christian church based on feminism and liberalism there is no question to be asked on the premature Deaths of 9 million innocents.
    As Len says its vomit.

    • IanCad

      Mr Peter Kay posed the question:

      “In October 2017 it will be 50 years since the passing of the 1967 Abortion Act, since which over 8 million abortions have taken place in the United Kingdom. Is the Church of England planning any central or national events to mark this sad anniversary?”

      A certain Mr Mark Sheard responded:

      “I am not aware of any plans by the Church of England for marking the 50th anniversary of the 1967 Abortion Act.”

      No big deal folks!! Equality, Diversity, Mutual Flourishing, Safeguarding, Strategic Development, Unconscious Bias Training, Transition to Low Carbon Economy. Those are the important issues.
      Abortion is so…. last year.

    • Plasterer

      For your shared disgust, from Facebook moderation guidelines: “Videos of abortions are allowed, as long as there is no nudity.”

  • Lucius

    Q21: “Unconscious bias training” = “re-education camp” ?

    • I discovered recently, thanks to my taking a free psychological test devised by some scientists at Harvard University in the USA, that I am (so-to-speak) “homophobic”. That is, as regards my unconscious bias, expressed thus on my certificate, “Your data suggest a strong automatic preference for Straight people over Gay people.” That’s what my certificate says.

      http://slavery.org.uk/Homophobia%20test%20results.pdf

      Apparently there is nothing I can do about my unconscious bias, in the way of training, to adjust my homophobia downwards. It isn’t just involuntary, it as actually unconscious!

      It therefore follows (if the scientists from Harvard who awarded me my certificate after I’d taken their psychological test are to be trusted) that the “unconscious bias training” of Q21 simply won’t work. It is at least as unproven an intervention as the Conversion Therapy that Synod also had a go at.

  • Marty The Legend Continues

    Faggots obsess about sex. At least the C of E is being open about it’s faggotry.

  • The Snail

    Just to remind everybody:

    X is not Y
    And Y is not X.
    You can try as you may,
    But you cannot change sex.

    It’s in the genes!!!