Gay priests are fine. The dirty paedophiles are the ones that need shooting

Pretty much my opinion too, it's not like I'll ever be in church to assess the situation lol

I think the church is shooting itself in the foot by trying to ignore this issue. While they avoid conflict and remain united for the short-term, they will not attract new members (and will alienate some of their existing members) if they ignore it, or reject homosexuals permanently. The youngest generation of Christians in Britain generally are not prejudiced against homosexuals, not do they consider homosexuality sinful. The Church needs to listen to them if they don't want to lose the remainder of their influence.

I think Rowan Williams is acting politically, which doesn't really bother me, because I think he can do a lot of good for the Church of England. His comments thus far have been flawless whatever side you're on, but at some point he should stand up for what he believes in, and I think the church will benefit from it.

Needless to say, I don't have a problem with gay clergy, but then I don't believe in God.


[P.S. Am tipsy, take no responsiblity for words until I return to this thread sober]

---

by Demona
The youngest generation of Christians in Britain generally are not prejudiced against homosexuals, not do they consider homosexuality sinful. The Church needs to listen to them if they don't want to lose the remainder of their influence.

---

Hang on, I thought Christians had their morality handed to them by this god chappie? At what point did theological ethics become a democracy?

Christianity is homophobic. The Christian God really doesn't like queers. Or transvestites. Or even having sex for pleasure. Not my type of bloke, really.

To be honest, I have more time for the conservatives and evangelists in the Church than the liberals. At least they are honest. A gay priest makes no sense, and a bishop, who says there is no sin in homosexual sex, yet has abstained for many years because his church says he must, well he makes even less sense.

Go read Deuteronomy. Go read the bible. It's full of bigotry and hate. Women and Gay priests should be banned, because that is what Christianity preaches.

And yes, that would leave the church out of step, and maybe people would then stop wasting their time with a bunch of mindless claptrap, and stop listening to lessons on how to hate. Then the world would be a better, kinder, more understanding place.

To quote from Bill Hicks:

"I think what God meant to say was..."

---

by JayJay
Christianity is homophobic. The Christian God really doesn't like queers. Or transvestites. Or even having sex for pleasure. Not my type of bloke, really.

---

Farbeit from me to disagree with you, but the thing that gets my goat is that most of the bits and bobs "Christians" quote that are homophobic etc are from the *old* Testament. I am not a particularly active Christian, I have little time for organised religion, but I was brought up in the Christian ethic, and know enough to know that when Christ came to the world, his law (basically, love one another) was to *replace* the Mosaic law (all the stuff in Leviticus, etc etc). St Paul had his own problems, I don't want to go into them. But Christianity to me is about loving everyone, whether you agree with what they do or not, and I personally feel it's not my place to decide others personal lives for them anyway. Most of my friends are gay, I am generally indeterminate, so I don't mind either way. But it really annoys me when people select their own bits of the bible to back up their own position, Devil citing scripture for his own purposes, as the saying goes. Christianity adopted the NT as a replacement for the OT, the god of the NT is a god of love, not quite the hellfire and brimstone of the OT. If people are going to go down the Leviticus route, then I say we smite them for wearing polycottons... (2 threads mixed in one garment, another Leviticus prohibition, see the famous email to "Dr. Laura" )

So please don't tar *all* of us as hypocritical monsters. The god I know and was brought up to believe in (albeit sporadically these days) wouldn't give a monkeys about whether Dr. John was gay or straight, or be so horribly probing about what is obviously a deeply loving relationship, which has lasted longer than most church-consecrated marriages. He is a good man, and that is what the church and Christianity needs most of all if it isn't going to tear itself to shreds.

Perhaps prudent for all of us to remember the words of the divine Tom Lehrer (from "national brotherhood week" ):
"I'm sure we all agree that we ought to love one another and I know there are people in the world that do not love their fellow human beings and I hate people like that."



xx

(Edited by Bee 13/07/2003 16:54)

Matthew 5:17-19

"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets:I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven:but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

Jesus, according to the testament of the New Covenant, clearly states that the old laws of the old covenant still hold true. The laws forbidding sodomy (and demanding the stoning of rape victims) comes directly from God via his prophet Moses. These are no little matters; they are core to the Christian Church.

Understand that by this I refer to Christian Law, and its embodiment, The Church (in all its variations). There are plenty of people who describe themselves as Christian and do not take the Bible as Law and believe really in a beatific creator deity, and that Jesus was his prophet. Probably. They don't take the laws given in the covenants too seriously and think everyone 'should just be nice to each other'.

Which is all nice and good and if you're into that kind of opiate then fair enough. These are clearly liberal values that I agree with, I just don't need a creator deity to get there. But this really has very little to do with the teachings of the Christian Church, as presented in the only document we have in public, The Bible. The original covenant is clearly homophobic, and the second covenant says nothing against this and restates the validity of the old laws.

This may sound pedantic, but I am calling Christianity homophobic, not all Christians. I know plenty of (and like) Christians who would disagree. I just don't think they want to face up to the truth of what the Bible teaches. The Hate is there, if you're prepared to see it.

Of course when it comes to leading by example, Jesus never had a girlfriend and did spend most of his time hanging around with a bunch of similar guys...

Hidden message anyone?

---

by Jayjay

Which is all nice and good and if you're into that kind of opiate then fair enough. These are clearly liberal values that I agree with, I just don't need a creator deity to get there. But this really has very little to do with the teachings of the Christian Church, as presented in the only document we have in public, The Bible. The original covenant is clearly homophobic, and the second covenant says nothing against this and restates the validity of the old laws.

---

Hey, I've just spent the best part of a week convincing a religious fundamentalist that the Bible doesn't say what he thinks it says

And I can do that because - and I doubt I need to tell you this - the Bible is a big pile of balls. It contradicts itself, it's been translated by many different people through up to 5 langauges to reach english and it's relevant to a culture that stopped existing over one and a half thousand years ago. But try telling Christians that.

Christianity has not completely lost its hold on people's imaginations in this country, and there are many young Christians brought into a culture not only more tolerant than that in which the Bible was written, but more tolerant than that of the generation before them. They belive in God, and they don't want to believe that homosexuality is evil. So let's go with that - cultures change, and Christianity has changed, they just haven't managed to get rid of that pesky desert survival handbook.

Many people need religion - Christianity has failed to gain so many followers amongst the latest generation, but instead of turning atheist they've gone to Satanism, Wiccan and Buddhism instead. Christianity in Britain is still the default religion for many people, and though it's losing ground it's not going away quickly. So, given that it's there, would I rather have Bible-belt stylee creationists, or liberals who happen to believe in a God that resembles the embodiment of the message preached by Jesus? I'll go for the latter. And if someone is both homosexual and Christian and wants to hold a clerical position, of course I don't want them stopped. And it looks like maybe finally, and under the current archbishop of Canterbury, there's a chance that the attitude of the church can be changed to be more in accordance with what many, especially young, Christians already think.

---

by Incandenza
Of course when it comes to leading by example, Jesus never had a girlfriend and did spend most of his time hanging around with a bunch of similar guys...

Hidden message anyone?

---

isn't there some school of thought that suggest jesus was having a bit of fun with that mary lass?!

---

by willow_fantastico
(quotes)

isn't there some school of thought that suggest jesus was having a bit of fun with that mary lass?!

---

I'm guessing you don't mean that Jesus has a oedipal complex

Though the Bible is all for incest...

---

by Demona
Though the Bible is all for incest...

---

Well there's really not much choice when there are only two people around and an entire race to spawn...

As for Ms Magdalene... this is a pretty recent development but hey, I wasn't there to tell you one way or the other.

---

by Incandenza
(quotes)
Well there's really not much choice when there are only two people around and an entire race to spawn...

---

I'm not at all religious but I'm sure I remember from school that Adam & Eve were just an example and there were lots of humans around. On the other hand I may be just spouting crap

Remember that post earlier? Bill Hicks' "I think what God meant to say was..."?

If someone wants to believe in an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent and beatific creation deity, then fine. You want to believe that their was some Jew called Jesus a couple of thousand years ago that was the son of this god, then hey, that's up to you.

However, correct me if I am wrong, but the only record we have on what the Christian God and Jesus believe was the way people should lead their lives, is the documents contained in the bible? To then try and say "well, that was then - what God wants now is..." seems just a tad presumptuous to me. Unless you're claiming to be Christ reborn, that is. Then it would be reasonable...

What I am trying to say without too much sarcasm is, believe in whatever fairy tales you want, but why say you're a Christian when you do not agree with the teachings of the bible? If you don’t agree with the Bible, call yourself a Pantheist, or Self-Revelatory Monotheist. But you can’t, with honesty, call yourself a Christian.

Plus, even with the argument that Christianity needs to be ‘updated’, you are still basically saying that there are conditions where homophobia is acceptable, and that's just back handed bigotry.

Oh, and T, Genesis is very specific. First Adam, then Eve. Then two sons. Doesn't mention where their wives come from, but that's just one of the endless flaws in the Bible. That and missing out the Dinosaurs are a couple of my favourites.

In fact, fundamentalist Christians count up the ages of the characters in the Bible and calculate that the earth is about 4 and a half thousand years old. Give or take a hundred. And that three of the last four US presidents (including the current one, obviously) believe this to be the case. Along with Creationism over evolution. But that's a whole other load of .. tosh.

---

by Jayjay
That and missing out the Dinosaurs are a couple of my favourites.

In fact, fundamentalist Christians count up the ages of the characters in the Bible and calculate that the earth is about 4 and a half thousand years old.

---

From Revelations:

Okay I got one word to ask you, a one word question, ready?

"uh huh."

Dinosaurs.

You know the world's 12 thousand years old and dinosaurs existed, they existed in that time, you'd think it would have been mentioned in the $%&£ing Bible at some point.

"And lo Jesus and the disciples walked to Nazareth. But the trail was blocked by a giant brontosaurus... with a splinter in his paw. And O the disciples did run a shriekin': 'What a big $%&£ing lizard, Lord!'

But Jesus was unafraid and he took the splinter from the brontosaurus's paw and the big lizard became his friend.

And Jesus sent him to Scotland where he lived in a loch for O so many years inviting thousands of American tourists to bring their fat $%&£ing families and their fat dollar bills.

And oh Scotland did praise the Lord. Thank you Lord, thank you Lord. Thank you Lord."

I miss Bill Hicks.

You can just imagine it can't you.. Creationist to the Hindu.. "Sorry mate your religion can't have existed for 8,000 years give or take, because the earth was only created 4,500 ago..", at which point a Palaeontologist taps him on the shoulder "Erm.. excuse me.."

Quite how anyone can believe in any seriousness that the earth was "created" only 4,500 years ago is simply rediculous, and asking to be laughed at.. Anyone here still believe the earth is still flat?

---

by Jayjay
Oh, and T, Genesis is very specific. First Adam, then Eve. Then two sons. Doesn't mention where their wives come from,

---

Which is why I assumed they were one of many. Never mind, never gonna read the book.

No, T, you should! I mean, Revelations is a hoot! And then there's Jonathan and David, the young scamps...

Then again, very few Christians bother to, so why should anyone else.

And yes, I miss Bill too.