BigC Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 Brilliant piece of head-hunting from the Vatican! http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8316120.stm They realise that the CoE is trying to drag itself into the 21st Century by allowing women and gays the same rights as it's male employees (something which every other institution in the land has been bound to do for many years by law), so in order to boost their own numbers, they tell all the "traditionalists" that there is a place they can go where their views are still not only tolerated, but actively encouraged! I love how the Archbishop is just rolling over and taking it as well. You'd think he'd be upset, but then is he happy to see the back of all the bigots and mysoginists that have been stopping his church progressing? Despite being an atheist, the politics of religion fascinates me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Brilliant piece of head-hunting from the Vatican! http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8316120.stm They realise that the CoE is trying to drag itself into the 21st Century by allowing women and gays the same rights as it's male employees (something which every other institution in the land has been bound to do for many years by law), so in order to boost their own numbers, they tell all the "traditionalists" that there is a place they can go where their views are still not only tolerated, but actively encouraged! I love how the Archbishop is just rolling over and taking it as well. You'd think he'd be upset, but then is he happy to see the back of all the bigots and mysoginists that have been stopping his church progressing? Despite being an atheist, the politics of religion fascinates me! You might be onto something there! Despite being at the forefront of the ecumenical movement for the last few decades the Pope has set those efforts back by this ridiculous, inflammatory and divisive gesture. It's a real two finger salute to a church which has sweated and wept over issues such as ordaining women. It's very hard to progress and be progressive in an institution which takes to change about as quietly as a waiter falling down a flight of stairs carrying a tray of glasses. Although I have nothing whatsoever to do with either the Anglican church of the Church of Rome, being low church myself, I'm pretty disgusted with the Pope's attitude. It's a cheap shot from an increasingly irrelevant, out of touch and rightly criticised organisation. (I'll go for a cheap shot of my own.... I find it highly hypocritical that the Pope should be encouraging those traditionalists who oppose the ordination of homosexual priests to join the Church of Rome, still, what's done in secret..) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamboinglasgow Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 You might be onto something there! Despite being at the forefront of the ecumenical movement for the last few decades the Pope has set those efforts back by this ridiculous, inflammatory and divisive gesture. It's a real two finger salute to a church which has sweated and wept over issues such as ordaining women. It's very hard to progress and be progressive in an institution which takes to change about as quietly as a waiter falling down a flight of stairs carrying a tray of glasses. Although I have nothing whatsoever to do with either the Anglican church of the Church of Rome, being low church myself, I'm pretty disgusted with the Pope's attitude. It's a cheap shot from an increasingly irrelevant, out of touch and rightly criticised organisation. (I'll go for a cheap shot of my own.... I find it highly hypocritical that the Pope should be encouraging those traditionalists who oppose the ordination of homosexual priests to join the Church of Rome, still, what's done in secret..) as a christian I find this very sad that these are probably the most predejudced people yet they call themselves Christians. Jesus called for tolerence and he went among the most undesirable people there were and though he was scoffed at by the pharises he helped them. This group to deny even woman the chance to become a bishop is abhorent. Women were important figures in Jesus' group, though they may not of been in the twelve disciples the bible quite clearly states it was the women who he appeared to first. Christianty has always been accepting of anyone but sadly there are Christians who aren't. For the Pope to change some rules for the point of trying to nick a few followers and get it up the anglican church shows another fault of christianty. To many argue over the small differences in which to praise God but in that they forget who they are supposed to be the important part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 as a christian I find this very sad that these are probably the most predejudced people yet they call themselves Christians. Jesus called for tolerence and he went among the most undesirable people there were and though he was scoffed at by the pharises he helped them. This group to deny even woman the chance to become a bishop is abhorent. Women were important figures in Jesus' group, though they may not of been in the twelve disciples the bible quite clearly states it was the women who he appeared to first. Christianty has always been accepting of anyone but sadly there are Christians who aren't. For the Pope to change some rules for the point of trying to nick a few followers and get it up the anglican church shows another fault of christianty. To many argue over the small differences in which to praise God but in that they forget who they are supposed to be the important part. You're absolutely right, but I still have to convince several members of my own church that women should have equal standing, equal opportunity to positions of leadership. In fact I've lost half my eldership in the past three weeks, in no small part over this kind of issue. To be honest though, you can't lose what you never had and we move forward. The next church meeting (Thurs) will be a beauty though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Is it just me or is the Pope the spitting image of the Emperor from Star Wars? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigC Posted October 27, 2009 Author Share Posted October 27, 2009 You're absolutely right, but I still have to convince several members of my own church that women should have equal standing, equal opportunity to positions of leadership. In fact I've lost half my eldership in the past three weeks, in no small part over this kind of issue. To be honest though, you can't lose what you never had and we move forward. The next church meeting (Thurs) will be a beauty though! Good for you for standing up for equality! I've always thought that churches who don't conform to equality legislation should have their charity and tax exemption status removed. Your thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewart MacD Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 I wonder if they would take any of the "traditionalists" who frequent this august forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Good for you for standing up for equality! I've always thought that churches who don't conform to equality legislation should have their charity and tax exemption status removed. Your thoughts? Churches have a big issue with how far this goes though. They must retain the right, for example, to call to ministry whoever they wish, or conversely to refuse to call anyone they disagreed with, on whatever grounds they have, even if that goes against equality issues. For example, a church advertises for a new pastor and a Muslim cleric applies for the job, churches must retain the right to refuse him on religious grounds. You could argue that that's religious discrimination, but to do otherwise is nonsense. But what if it was a church secretary who was a Muslim, would it be appropriate to discriminate against him on religious grounds? What if as a member of staff he was required to take part in staff devotions? Should church membership be forced to be open to everyone? Essentially they're a closed group, with tax and charitable privileges, Is that an equality issue? I'm not sure churches should have charitable status only on account of them being churches anyway. Promotion of religion is not enough in my opinion to deserve charitable status, but then I think churches should doing more in the community anyway, real acts of mercy and charity. There's a lot churches could do and if they were doing that I'd have no problem with tax relief and charitable status. So I'd hang their charitable status on acts of mercy, or helping the unfortunate/underprivileged but not on equality issues. To be honest, any church worth it's salt should be promoting equality and doing merciful acts anyway. The bible makes this stuff fairly clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craigieboy Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Despite being an atheist, the politics of religion fascinates me! Me too. I think it's because that religious 'politics' generally has **** all to do with god. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2NaFish Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 Me too. I think it's because that religious 'politics' generally has **** all to do with god. . Matthew 16:19 "and I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigC Posted October 29, 2009 Author Share Posted October 29, 2009 Churches have a big issue with how far this goes though. They must retain the right, for example, to call to ministry whoever they wish, or conversely to refuse to call anyone they disagreed with, on whatever grounds they have, even if that goes against equality issues. For example, a church advertises for a new pastor and a Muslim cleric applies for the job, churches must retain the right to refuse him on religious grounds. You could argue that that's religious discrimination, but to do otherwise is nonsense. But what if it was a church secretary who was a Muslim, would it be appropriate to discriminate against him on religious grounds? What if as a member of staff he was required to take part in staff devotions? Should church membership be forced to be open to everyone? Essentially they're a closed group, with tax and charitable privileges, Is that an equality issue? I'm not sure churches should have charitable status only on account of them being churches anyway. Promotion of religion is not enough in my opinion to deserve charitable status, but then I think churches should doing more in the community anyway, real acts of mercy and charity. There's a lot churches could do and if they were doing that I'd have no problem with tax relief and charitable status. So I'd hang their charitable status on acts of mercy, or helping the unfortunate/underprivileged but not on equality issues. To be honest, any church worth it's salt should be promoting equality and doing merciful acts anyway. The bible makes this stuff fairly clear. That sounds pretty fair. I agree it shouldn't be awarded automatically. Are you going to name and shame the churches that do feck all? Are you thinking locally or are you thinking about the Benny Hinn/Peter Popoff types? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 That sounds pretty fair. I agree it shouldn't be awarded automatically. Are you going to name and shame the churches that do feck all? Are you thinking locally or are you thinking about the Benny Hinn/Peter Popoff types? I'm not going to sit here and slag off churches locally or anywhere else. I'm very happy to talk about principles or my own interpretation of things, I'm also very happy to talk up good stuff, but I've never been in a church where there haven't been a remnant of good, well meaning people. People who's hearts are for the lost, the poor, the marginalised. People who seek justice and parity. It's just that sometimes they're drowned out by people who seek self aggrandisement, power and status. I'm not in the business of having a pop at God's people, I'm sure you wouldn't expect anything else! Charlatans like Benny Hinn is quite another matter however... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigC Posted October 31, 2009 Author Share Posted October 31, 2009 Charlatans like Benny Hinn is quite another matter however... My Mum used to send him money. I had to show her a TV documentary about him and all the "Christians against Hinn" websites to make her stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 My Mum used to send him money. I had to show her a TV documentary about him and all the "Christians against Hinn" websites to make her stop. I'm sorry. There are bad things done in the name of Jesus, there always have been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.