Posted on 06/14/2008 9:51:29 PM PDT by Raineygoodyear
LONDON — A "wedding"-like ceremony between two male priests broke the Church of England's rules, a spokesman for the Anglican body said Saturday. The two clergymen exchanged rings and vows last month at a ceremony in St. Bartholomew the Great in London, according to The Sunday Telegraph, a preview of which was made available Saturday. The paper said the ceremony included traditional marriage liturgy, hymns and a Eucharist. The ceremony took place in defiance of the Bishop of London, in whose diocese it took place. It is likely to embolden liberal clergy who have been reluctant to offer a full "wedding service" and will open the floodgates to other homosexuals who want a traditional ceremony. The Rev Martin Dudley conducted the ceremony and said "I believe that marriage is a union between a man and a woman, but I see nothing wrong with blessing a couple who want to make a life-long commitment to one another." Church of England spokesman Lou Henderson said the service described by the paper violated church guidelines "in just about every respect." Although civil partnerships between homosexual couples are officially recognized in Britain, the Church of England maintains that marriage should be between a man and a woman and its guidelines ask clergy not to bless such partnerships.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
A “wedding”-like ceremony between two male priests broke the Church of England’s rules,
****
Like that’s going to stop this “church” of degenerates.
It happened in Formerly Great Britain.
The Anglican Church was founded on a desire for sexual license.
Now it will be destroyed by a desire for sexual license.
Ironic isn’t it?
It just seems to me as soon as we accepted Homosexuality as
a right for people to marry to teach as a option in the schools, our world has slid so downward that we can’t get up, we just try to put out consistent fires of collapse daily, wether a natural disaster or economic gloom and doom.
More important than the Church of England’s “rules,” they broke God’s laws.
Is it just me or does anyone else think that gays seem to congregate in churches in numbers percentages greater than their percentages in the general population?
If so, does anyone have an idea or theory of why this is so?
Not at all. In fact, it seems to be typical of how God works. It pains me to see the church I was raised in sunk to such a level (and going lower all the time). But I have "swum the Tiber" and am gloriously happy at having done so. I can only pray that the few remaining real Christians in Anglicanism get their "water wings" soon.
Is it just me or does anyone else think that gays seem to congregate in churches in numbers percentages greater than their percentages in the general population?
*****
Based on my experience...yes. I attend mass at a church in Hollywood, and it is a liberal church to some extent. Some themes of the mass are: a diversity’(3 languages) mass, or a gay appreciation’ mass.
Based on observation, they attend in FORCE ONLY if it’s a “gay appreciation” mass, but if it’s not, the same “groups” don’t attend the normal mass. (for people who crave tolerance, they cant tolerate non-gay masses)
You’ll know they’re gaywads when they simply couldn’t even shut up during the sermon while they chatter on why the priest doesn;t “accessorize” his robe in relation to his shoes. (yup, they;re that freakin loud)
“Rule One...NO POOFTERS!”
I was referring to the preachers and priests rather than the congregations.
The same thing applies, unfortunately.
I also think that we’ve slid too far down the proverbial slippery slope to reverse course. I’m just speculating here, but I think that we will continue to slide into further degeneracy until the state of anarchy and weakness that we’ve brought upon ourselves becomes intolerable. I’m not sure what will happen at that point. I’m just speculating here. Possibly we could see some type of spiritual revival, although not necessarily evangelical. I don’t think that this country will be taken over by another country, but we certainly won’t be competing on the same level as the Chinese or Indians. They’ll gradually become a lot stronger than we are, in my opinion. We’re being way too stupid with our future to be able to compete well, say, 100 years from now.
Freedom lies between anarchy and dictatorship. People need some rules, regulations and boundaries, as do communities. Freedom stops when you move too far towards anarchy or dictatorship. The people pushing for more, more, more sexual freedom only think of themselves and not how all of this will impact the larger community. They’re not thinking of how much they depend on people completely unlike themselves to grow food, construct buildings, repair machines, staff hospitals and so forth. It’s all about them. We still need to do whatever we can to stop this self-centered agenda.
the desire for a child to carry on the line, yes, but, also, and importantly, to cut the ties with Roman Papal authority with it's arrogance and terrible excesses of the time.
the CofE may have fallen in recent years, along with the government with the devastating disease called liberalism, but in times gone by, it was a powerful instrument of God's work throughout the world. When one gets off message bad things happen.
I read somewhere that the Anglican Communion is the largest English speaking religion in the world. (Probably because of the large numbers in Africa)
First part right---last part wrong---at least on the part of Henry VIII. Read up on how he got the title "Defender of the Faith" from the Pope.
Henry VIII had no problem with "Roman Papal authority" until it got in the way of his sex life.
Then he started killing people whose opinion of "Roman Papal authority" differed from his newly-adopted one. Those are the actions of a statist and a revolutionary, somebody more in line with Che Guevara than Thomas Jefferson.
So, the renedgade priests were excommunicated, right? They at least were removed from their parishes, right? right? No?
If the priests aren’t severely punished for their actions, than the Church of England approved of them, but simply lied in their press releases. This isn’t akin to failing to uncover malfeasance, or even casting a blind eye towards it; the church ruled that the wickedness did happen. Any failure to now censure that wickedness will announce to the world that such wickedness is not worthy of censure.
>> the desire for a child to carry on the line, yes, <<
I’ve never understood this argument. Catherine had given birth to Mary. Why shouldn’t she be queen? And his mistress Elizabeth Blount had given birth to a son, Henry Fitz-Roy, whom Henry VIII was trying to get legitimized even after his marriage to Anne Boleyn. (Fitz-Roy died in 1533, so never would have reigned as king, but that hardly relevant to the king’s motives in 1525.)
The truth is that Henry VIII had many mistresses. The truth is that the King has a Clinton-like jonesing for sexual conquest, and Anne Boleyn’s condition for having sex with him was to be made his wife. But he continued to have mistresses to the point where Anne’s anguish probably led to her own infertility.
In the early 16th Century, it was no simple matter for a woman to inherit a throne. For Henry, it was a question of national peace and stability. Remember, it was his father who had finally put an end to the Wars of the Roses and brought peace to the kingdom. Henry feared that the succession of Mary would lead to another destructive civil war- just like the civil war between Matilda, only surviving child of Henry I, and her cousin Stephen of Blois. In an age when wives were to “love, honor and obey”, if Mary were to inherit the throne, then her husband would be seen as the de facto ruler (Elizabeth Tudor solved this problem by not marrying). Indeed, Mary did become ruler, and her marriage to Philip of Spain was seen as subordinating England to the interests of Spain. This act, and the introduction of the Spanish Inquisition, destroyed Mary’s reign and paved the way for the final schism between England and Rome.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.