• Politics Just Became More Interesting

    There’s a lot of soul searching going on in the UK over the European Election results. Here’s my take on it all…

    • Those complaining most about the low turnout need to think about what they want to do in order to stop low turnout. The best thing to do is to join a political party and work to get people to the ballot box to vote for what you believe in.
    • Trouble is, I don’t find a party I want to belong to.
    • The above 2 points are the problem.  (Or at least, they are my problem with politics at the moment).
    • The media coverage from the BBC seemed particularly biased. I don’t like criticising the Beeb because I love it but it really did seem to have become the UKIP Broadcasting Corperation and I still can’t quite fathom why.
    • I don’t think I know a single person who has told me they were supporting UKIP. Now – is that because I’m in a little bubble and I genuinely don’t know anyone who votes that way or is it because voting that way is not socially acceptable?
    • Nick Clegg made a number of strategic errors in taking on Nigel Farrage in TV debates. Firstly it got Farrage even more coverage and allowed him to appear to be an equal when he wasn’t. Secondly Clegg failed to merge the UKIP and Tory brand. (People like me wonder whether he is opposed to the Tories at all – he just doesn’t come across as disliking what they stand for and someone in his position needs to be able to convey something a little stronger than dislike). Thirdly, he didn’t really do it well enough – die-hard party members were impressed by him but that’s not what the exercise is all about. Keep it Simple is still effective. (One of the posts that I had up recently which got lots of traction was about why I’m supportive of the EU because of mobile phone roaming, oh yes, and because we don’t tend to go to war in Western Europe with one another as once we did).
    • Policywise I hope that political parties concentrate on those who didn’t vote rather than those who voted UKIP.
    • I fear they won’t.
    • I was surprised that the SNP did not increase their share of the vote.
    • I wasn’t surprised that the Lib Dem vote collapsed.
    • I feel for the Greens who were struggling to get a word in edgeways. I kind of wish that I could vote Green but the trouble is, they’ve got their policies.
    • The Liberal Democrats are not going to do better until they have a change in leader and until there is obvious contrition. It is going to get worse before it gets better.
    • I can’t speak for the rest of the country, but I can’t take the leadership of the Labour Party in Scotland seriously.
    • Thank God there was no “Christian” party on the ballot paper.
    • Politics just got more interesting because people don’t know what it all means and don’t know what comes next.
    • That’s the best politics in the world.

    You got your own take? Share it in the comments below.

7 responses to “The Archbishop, the gays and their sins”

  1. fakepete Avatar
    fakepete

    Nicely put, he seems to feel entitled to freedom from criticism. It’s a censorious attitude that I thought the CoE put behind it when most of us learned to laugh at the Life of Brian and it is contradicted by the church’s own call to participation in democracy.

  2. Andrew Avatar
    Andrew

    The poor old Arch. He really is an old school establishment man who cant really understand where the deference has gone. The Green Report, the other Reports on the ‘future’ of the Church of England and the ‘Conversations’ all speak of a deeply controlling man who is deeply frustrated that there is no control to be had any more. When the split comes he will probably want to make what is left into a more confessional and defined group (the evangelicals have always wanted that) but I suspect the Church that will emerge will be more liberal than he likes even if it is outwardly more evangelical and enthusiast than the Church of England has been for a very long time

    1. fakepete Avatar
      fakepete

      @Andrew I’d switch that around. Justin Welby is someone who does not show deference to what has in Western society become The New Orthodoxy (definitions on a postcard please), this is why he provokes such puzzlement, and thus consternation and anger.

    2. Daniel Berry, NYC Avatar
      Daniel Berry, NYC

      Andrew, I don’t see how that can be, really: he hasn’t the pedigree to be “an old school establishment man.” He’s a late vocation who had been a high-power figure in the corporate world–meaning he’s undoubtedly accustomed to having the last word.

      As to his attitudes toward gay people, I’m disgusted with him and the many others who accept the natural sciences’ contradiction of bible, but just can’t bring themselves to the same place with the behavioral and social sciences, and even with medicine itself–ignoring along the way that homosexuality is found in upward of 450 animal species besides our own. Otherwise they seem perfectly comfortable with dispensing with the savagery found in much of “holy scripture.”

  3. Dharma Nicodemus Cuthbert Avatar

    I love the line “who am I to judge them for their sins, if they have sins” makes us seem angelic compared to those who have children. Only one problem we, according to the bible commit sin just by being together. Does this mean that he is disagreeing with orthodoxy, and we are not sinning by being together.
    God bless all and may his words of love bring more, troubled, souls to him.

    1. JCF Avatar
      JCF

      “Only one problem we, according to the bible commit sin just by being together.”

      I *think* you meant “according to false translations/interpretations of the bible…” (or should have meant).

      “Being together”: can we call sex, “sex”? If not, why not? [And can we call marital sex (same- or opposite-sex) “marital sex”?]

  4. Daniel Berry, NYC Avatar
    Daniel Berry, NYC

    best line for me:

    You say that stuff and you are going to get people observing that there’s a lot more archbishops who claim that gay people are their friends than gay people who claim archbishops are their friends.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • Here we go again

    Yesterday I was opining about the MU. Today I receive an invitation from another group which does good works. Would I like to go to their open day in November? Well, yes, probably. I would quite like to see what they do. Would I like to go to a celebration service that they’ve organised with…

  • The Mothers

    I was exhorted today to encourage the starting of a Mothers’ Union branch. I won’t be offering any such encouragement. Like some other clergy I know, I’ve no great enthusiasm for the MU. The odd thing is that one never gets asked why. I know the reasons that I’m not really into the MU, but…

  • Sites that have been linking here

    Here is a quick round up of sites that have linked here recently. The Church Times – Noting the story about Pip in the Pub. (Which reminds me, I never picked up my copy today) Blazing Indiscretions – picking up the Prop 8 video Mimanifesto – a committed edublog (and I can’t work it out…

  • Four quick theatre reviews

    I’ve been out quite a lot recently. Here are some quick reviews. Sunset Song at the Kings, Glasgow – excellent production which could perhaps have been improved with surtitles. The Doric became no easier as the night went on. Although I enjoyed this, I left the theatre delighted that the National Theatre of Scotland was…