Gafcon versus Gay Pride

Have just found out that Gafcon clashes with next Thursday's Jerusalem Pride, the seventh Gay Pride march in the city. Is this an extraordinary coincidence or God's strange sense of humour? I always suspected He had one. If they need some moral support, Rabbis against Gay Pride won't have to go far this year. This photo by Noa Raz is from last year's march.

Comments

[saint]

Well I thought Akinola's visa gaffe sounded more like God's sense of humour (he is a master of irony).

FTR: Moore College (of which Archbishop Jensen was head for many years) is smack bang right in the heart of Sydney's gay centre, home of Sydney's Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras.

[Dr. Mike Homfray]

And Israel has equality policies protecting its gay citizens, for which it must be credited - and Sydney is a great gay-friendly city - in which Jensen and his crew are regarded as little more than a glee club for the discontented.

[Craig Goodrich]

Of course God has a sense of humor, Ruth, just look at the platypus. And the human race.

[Robert Ian Williams]

At least Israel is a democracy and allows a Conference dedicated to saving the Jews amongst other things and a gay pride march. Would Tehren or " liberated " Baghdad be as generous?

[David Palmer]

"Sydney is a great gay-friendly city - in which Jensen and his crew are regarded as little more than a glee club for the discontented"

Is this meant to be serious? Rubbish more like it.

As an ex Sydney Anglican (now a Melbourne Presbyterian) Jensen is a well respected figure even by homosexuals - witness a recent 4 page article on him by (homosexual) journalist David Marr in the Sydney Morning Herald.

Sydney Anglican Churches by and large are thriving and their numbers are growing faster than the general population growth.

Don't underwrite him: Jensen is a man of real substance and leaves the ABC and his windswept crew in the shade (excluding the Bishops of Rochester and Lewes).

Looking forward to your GAFCON blog Ruth. Whilst I wish GAFCON well, I think they will have to reach an accommodation on churchmanship if they are to stick together. Having had a quick look at what the GAFcon book has to say about worship, and knowing Sydney Anglican practice (how low church can you get?) - bit of a wide gulf I would say.

[Dr. Mike Homfray]

David: try talking to some gay people (who clearly wouldn't have a lot of time for anyone who thinks that bishops like Rochester and Lewes are anything other than swivel-eyed loons) and you get a very different story. {problem is, you evos don;t realise that everyone else regards you as deluded and slightly barmy.

As for the increase in congregation, largely from other churches, and making very little impact on what remains a liberal, gay-friendly city. I know its hard for you lot to realise how irrelevant and marginalised you are outside the third world, but truth does hurt....

[Rick Beekman]

"Gay Friendly Cities"??

Sodom & Gomorrah were "Gay friendly cities"

Genesis 19 v 24 & 25; "Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven. And he overthrew those cities and all the plain and all the inhabitants of the cities and that which grew upon the ground."

Footnote; Sodom And Gomorrah Were Located At Or near The Southern Part of The Dead Sea in Israel. Archeologists Found A place Literally Destroyed By A great amount of heat..And It Wasen't caused by "Global Warming".

[George Parr]

So, the lord rained fire and brimstone on Sodom and Gomorrah. The proof is in the digging. Once was enough and, having done it, he ignored the issue for ever more, leaving Rick to sort it all out - the history of homosexuality in humans having since spanned 2000 years.

Is this a form of escapism, living in a world of dubious historical fact, where possible cities bordered the Dead Sea?

[Robert Ian Williams]

Just read the GAFCON offcial hand book which has nothing to say what Jesus taught about divorce and re-marriage! As the attendees at the Conference are split on what his words mean about divorce. Reference is simply given to the Genesis creation account!

" Casual " divorce is criticised but not divorce per se.

The liturgical section air brushes out, Cranmer's rabid Protestantism..to keep the Anglo-Saxons on board. Indeed plural diversity of worship is enjoined.

There is interestingly no mention of female ordination...as this is the price of having Uganda, kenya and Rwanda on board. The Presiding Bishop ( TEC) is criticised , not for her gender but fir her liberalism!

Restoring Anglican ortodoxy.. I don't think so!

[Christopher]

I agree Robert Iain. Who was it in this blog who insists on calling is Gaffe Prone, or something like it? Is it both a gaffe and a con? The funniest thing I read was that Nazir Ali has decided to boycott Lambeth and go. I don't think for one minute it has anything to do with not being appointed to Canterbury or York - he wouldn't act out of such peek, would he? But it must put the other "senior" bishops with an eye on Canterbury in a dilemma. To go and miss Lambeth might be remembered later as unforgivably disloyal by the Establlshment when Cant. and Ebor come up again; on the other hand not to go could put one out of favour with Anglican Mainstream. Oh, decisions, decisions!

[Christopher]

George, dear old Preacherman Beekman can be relied on to come out with his usual unhistorical gossipy interpretations as to what the biblical accounts must have meant by "love surpassing the love of women" and "do not lie with mankind as with the lyings with womankind". He is sure that the first does NOT mean gay/homosexual love whilst the second decidedly does. The problem is that the language in which the texts where composed did not have a word for gay/homosexual. Without a word can we be sure they had a concept?

It is strange that when people comment on this passage they rarely refer to the morality of Lot being prepared to send out his daughters to be used by the men of Sodom as they pleased. It is curious that we are being asked to accept this text as part of the evidence for a biblical morality that condemns homosexuality (albeit it in the form of a rape which all parties would surely condemn) when that morality can accept Lot's treatment of his daughters.

The Patriarchal morality of the biblical story was clearly different from ours but such a morality is part of the culture of a patriarchal society in which male rape is the most extreme way of disgracing your enemy - reducing him to a female role and thus threatening his masculine status. The same thing goes on in American prisons, as any will know who have seen the HBO series Oz. With the ratio of homosexual to heterosexual being on average no higher than 5 in 100, is it likely, except for some divine suspension of this statistic, that all the men of Sodom were gay? They wanted to humiliate them in the customary Middle-Eastern way, asserting at the same time that women are inferior to men. That is what ought to be condemned, surely.

[Rick Beekman]

Christopher;
So..you've Got it all Figured out (About what Happned at Sosom and Gomorrah) Eh?

The Key word to cross check in The Bible Is "Know Them".

Whwn The two Angels Of The Lord arrived At Sodom and Gomorrah. Lot Begged them to come in his house while a crowd gathered ouside his door wanting the Angels of God to come outside so They could "Know them"
Genesis 19 v 5 6 7; "And they called unto Lot and said unto him where are the MEN which came in to thee this night? bring them out to us0that WE MAY KNOW THEM.
And Lot went out the door unto them and shut the door after him. And said I pray you Brethren do not so wickedly".
Then he offered his daugters to them as a substitute and they refused because they were Homosexuals...
"Know them" is also used in other Bible situations;
(1)Genesis 4 v 1 "And Adam KNEW his wife and she conceived...."
(2)Genesis 4 17; "And Cain KNEW his wife and she conceived..."
So your assertion about what you stated is again destroyed by scriptual evidence.
You and the others who like to Name Call and SCoff at God and his Word will have your day..Someday. Unless you and These others Repent It is not going to be a Pleasant Experience I Can Assure you. So enjoy your arrogant and pompous attitude...Lord have Mercy on These blinded people.

[Robert Ian Williams]

Slight faux pas from a Welshman, I meant Anglo-Catholics in muy previous posting not Anglo-Saxons!

[Christopher]

I've just read a comment on Rizah Butt's piece "An unheavenly silence on homophobia" in the Guardian. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jun/23/anglicanism.gayrights

It seems it could well be applied to preacher Beekman, judging from his last intemperate and threatening post; (yes Ruth, saying to another poster "Unless you and These others Repent It is not going to be a Pleasant Experience I Can Assure you" seems threatening to me, and Rizah Butt thinks in Africa they act on such provocative language from the pulpit).

Anyway, here's the comment:
"....If, like Akinola and co, your entire life ethic and purpose for living is enshrined in belief in a god who aparently destroyed an entire city, Sodom, because of homosexual behaviour, then you will naturally see no problem with gay people getting beaten up and worse just for being gay. God dit it, it's in the Bible, so that makes it OK..."

So Rick Beekman, if the cap fits, as we say in old England.....etc, etc.

[Rick Beekman]

Christopher;
What I stated about Repentance and "It won't be a Pleasant experience" has nothing to do with any personal agenda. It is what God's Holy Word says. If You don't Repent And don't turn away from Un-godly Behavior you will one day meet your creator as your Judge not your savior...Your choice now. I have stated several times I do not hate Gay People..I hate The fact they are being led by Satan. I'll i'm doing is trying to warn you and others of the consequences of your choices. If you don't agree fine..But don't throw rocks at me..I'm just the Messenger. If you only knew and could feel The Love for God you would never e er be involved with un-Godly behavior.

[Christopher]

Rick

Actually, what do you really know of me of my behaviour or for that matter my life choices that gives you the confidence to judge me? You have presumed that you know from reading my posts here and because you think your beliefs make you invincible, safe from any imagined Hell but actually if I were you I'd be very careful; Jesus said quite a bit against those who judge others and he certainly did not give YOU a free pass to do so, even if you think you are somehow "helping" me by doing so. (Not threatening you you understand, just pointing out the Word of God to you.) The fairly obvious fact drawn from reading your posts is that your religion seems founded on the need to rake the promises in the Bible to yourself and fling the curses at your neighbours. What a place your heaven will be, peopled only with the likes of Orombi and Akinola. There will be no gays (Christians and Muslims don't like them) so no fun, no humour (Puritans have none) no music (Puritans and Muslims don't like it), and no Jews (Muslims don't like them). Don't you know what Leonard Bernstein said? "To have musical genius you have to be Jewish or gay - I am both so I've got it in spades." Needless to say, Lenny was far too amazing to make it to your heaven.

[Rick Beekman]

Christopher;
Just to set the record straight regarding "Judging others";

John 7 v 24 "Judge not according to appearence; bit judge righteous judgement"
in other words...According to God's Holy Writ...I did that..Have a Great Day!

[George Parr]

Rick Beekman, you are becoming more offensive to homosexuals as the days go by. Who are you to devalue and judge Christopher, through some bizarre form of devine proxy?

There you sit, possibly on the edge of sanity, hiding behind your own self-righteous interpretations, which you appear to use liberally to beat others, in the guise of 'helping' or 'healing' them. How loud do you shout your message in the company of gays in America I wonder? Are they grateful for your intercession between gods and devils in their (obviously) evil lives? Or does common sense prevail and, sensibly, you scuttle past on the other side, tightly gripping your book? Is the hyper-sexual dimension of your 'ministry' actually achieved through the safe anonymity of distance preaching?

There are very few people in the world who are so self-assured or obtuse that they can see no benefit whatsoever in listening to the opinions of others; and none who are able in all cases to define 'right' and 'wrong', with no grey areas. However, ignoring other people's views and values, whilst at the same time strongly asserting a narrow clutch of perceived absolutes presents as unimaginably rude. (I wouldn't let you have a gun either!)