What is in Kelvin's Head?

  • What the Pope said was depressing not liberating

    Here’s what the Pope said today according to the BBC:

    Pope Francis said gay clergymen should be forgiven and their sins forgotten.

    “The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains this very well,” Pope Francis said in a wide-ranging 80-minute long interview with Vatican journalists.

    “It says they should not be marginalised because of this but that they must be integrated into society.”

    But he condemned what he described as lobbying by gay people.

    “The problem is not having this orientation,” he said. “We must be brothers. The problem is lobbying by this orientation, or lobbies of greedy people, political lobbies, Masonic lobbies, so many lobbies. This is the worse problem.”

    Well, we might have a slight change in tone from Benedict but this is a depressing statement not a liberating one.

    There’s nothing new here that is helpful and something that really isn’t.

    The bits that are not new simply follow the Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church Sections 2357-2359

    The bit that is depressing is the suggestion that gay lobbying is the real problem. In other words, gay people exist but shouldn’t do anything about their lives, should not advocate a better world for gay people, try to improve the lot of gay people nor try to save the lives of gay people in parts of the world where they are under threat.

    This is nasty stuff and I’m sorry to hear it.

    I’m even more sorry that the headlines that this has engendered will make people think there is hope when there isn’t really much hope to be had.

    Today the pope made an oppresive statement about gay people and the world’s media is reporting it as a great step forward for gay rights.

    Tell me, is saying bad things in a nice way better than saying the same old things in the same old way?

    I don’t think it is.

    And while we are at it, note that he condemned political lobbying. That’s chilling for different reasons.

    Of course, all this was in the context of being asked about the Vatican. (The existence of a “gay lobby” in the Vatican is currently much under discussion). All the same, these words are damaging words that will be read far from their original context. They do nothing to bring in the kind of world I hope for.

    , ,

8 responses to “A Christian Country?”

  1. Tim Avatar
    Tim

    Reality is pluralist; a secular basis is good to level the playing-field.

    I think Cameron is not so much failing to live in `now’ but hell-bent on dragging the country back to the 50s (mostly the 1850s).

    One of Blair’s very few positives was “we don’t do God”, or at least postponing doing God until mostly after he was out of Number 10.

    Reply
  2. Fr Steve Avatar
    Fr Steve

    Very good analysis. In Australia I still find I get prickly when people tell me I belong to the C of E! (It has not been formally such since the the 70s)
    It is good not to see ourselves in the light of another nation…England…but it is good to recognise to recognise our heritage …Anglican.
    I spent part of last year in Hawaii as a locum…..when asked last week by the Mothers’ Union..”What was the difference?” I was a bit glib…but could confidential say “Nothing at all!” Given the fact that 1/3 of the congregation were Filipinos it is an interesting reflection.
    Don’t think we should overstate it, but being Anglican is a great thing. But there is much about it that needs a good kick up the backside too!

    Reply
  3. Mark Avatar
    Mark

    Though we ought to, maybe proudly, remember that the SEC is not a daughter Church of the Church of England. I’m afraid Cameron isn’t doing himself any favours with the way he’s made these statements, and as far as Scotland goes there’s a large part that has been disenfranchised by any statements that Cameron or any English person says, because they view them as ‘english propaganda’. Sadly, I don’t view the Scottish Government with much love either, having used their position to unfairly tout their party’s stance. Between two opposite poles, both backed by Government, how is one to hear a balanced view, instead of that great love of Blair’s Government, spin.

    Reply
  4. Eamonn Avatar
    Eamonn

    ‘I do however have a big problem with starting up a new country and writing Christianity into the constitutional definition of what that country is.’ I agree totally. I lived for 26 years in a country where the constitution, in respect of family matters, reflected the views both of the majority RC church and the Church of Ireland. For example, in order to make divorce possible, an amendment to the constitution had to be passed by a majority voting in a nation-wide referendum. This was only achieved in 1995, and only by a margin of 50.28% to 49.72%. Constitutional definition of religious matters always leads to discrimination.

    Reply
  5. Robin Avatar
    Robin

    > ‘I do however have a big problem with starting up a new country’

    I have a big problem with seeing Scottish independence (if it were to be re-established following a YES vote in the referendum) as ‘starting up a new country’ . . .

    Reply
  6. Alan McManus Avatar
    Alan McManus

    I loathe the smug fortress mentality of many of my co-religionists in RC schools while noting that these schools perform at least as well as non-denominational. I loathe the cowardice of the Reformed churches in failing to speak out against the violence and prejudice associated with a certain group of charitable organisations every July and the complicity of local authorities who DO NOT assure the safety of citizens and of international visitors unused to the historical hatreds of the Scottish central belt. While the latter is true, I continue to support the former and look to Canada as a model of multicultural accommodation than to the aggressive laïcité of France.

    Reply
    1. Kelvin Holdsworth Avatar
      Kelvin Holdsworth

      Like this?
      [vimeo 69307025 w=500 h=281] 20130623 Kelvin Holdsworth Music Sunday from Kelvin Holdsworth on Vimeo.

      Reply
  7. Allan Ronald Avatar
    Allan Ronald

    Given the choice between the venomous and literally murderous hatreds of Central Belt sectarianism and ‘aggressive laicité’ I’ll take the latter any day.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • To Holy Mass

    To church this morning – a less complicated route than last Sunday – I was able to walk this week as I was going to St Silas.What a nice friendly bunch they are. And, Fr Gadgetvicar says a lovely mass too. Mind you, it is that long since I was at a 1662 communion service…

  • Change of Address

    "Yes, that is right – it is a G4 postcode, in Glasgow.""Thank you Mr Holdsworth, what is the post-town please?""Glasgow""Is that Glasgow, Edinburgh, Mr Holdsworth?""No, it is Glasgow.""Is that the town then?""It is the second city of empire."

  • National Lottery

    The word in the pews is this – apparently, the bishops have come up with a new way around the funding problems that the Scottish Episcopal Church has from time to time. Forget your stewardship campaigns and giving days – no, my brothers and sisters, we are onto a whole new thing,It seems that there…

  • Deep Rivers

    Just for the record, I crossed over the Clyde 3 times on my way to church this morning and crossed the Kelvin twice on the way back. I blame the 10K fun run, the collapse of Bridge Street under water and general incompetence.Also, for the record, the arrangement of Shall we Gather at the River…