Hi Another David,

Thank you for your response, though it isnt directly addressing what I wrote

Jesus didnt write any of the books of the Bible, the author of Romans, the apostle Paul preached what he received, not of what he received from man, but directly from the risen Lord. (Galatians 1);  probably a main reason why the epistle is in the Bible.

Thus his teaching from Christ, counts to believers followers and disciples of Christ.

pace DavidW-

those naughty, naughty homosexuals 

- so narrow-minded, prujudiced and giving the poor right thinking majority such a very , very hard time !

DavidW,

I was not aware that Jesus made any direct reference (which we can find in the Gospels) to same-sex sexual relationships. Any reference to general 'sexual immorality' does not count, as the moral status of some same sex activity is precisely the matter at issue.

What are you thinking of in this connection?

In a age of plurality, the LGBT movement seems to treat all disagreement with its ideals as bigotry. Not sure there is any other movement doing that.

http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2012/03/lgbt-an-open-minded-movement

Deception is where something seems to be the truth but isnt. Same sex relations isnt a deception, it is simply an obvious lie, it is only condemned and excluded in scripture. But its presentation can often be a deception.

Take for example the inlcusivechurch’s suggested service after a civil partnership. It declares something that is a blessing, not a blessing.

Take this...

N & M the covenant that you have made with one another and that you re-affirm today in the presence of God and this congregation is a union in body, mind and spirit.

Is that ok? No because it doesn’t specify the participants. If it were the man ‘N’ and his Son ‘M’ then they would be committing an incestuous act. Sure its same sex, but both incest and same sex relations are condemned in scripture. But it is made to seem like it is correct, especially when it refers to the assistance of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit reminds the believer of what Christ taught. (John 14-16) As Christ’s NT teaching condemns same sex relations, how could it be the Holy Spirit.

The inclusivechurch once came out with the idea that the gospel of Jesus Christ couldn’t be the good news to LGBT people if it condemned same-sex sexual relationships. As the gospel of Jesus Christ is good news and same-sex sexual relations are error according to Christ’s teaching, it suggests the inclusivechurch doesn’t know the gospel or rejects it. And of course this movement is as equally out to claim it is Christian as it is to justify same sex relations.

Hello all,

Brian Lewis, below, refers to Nigel Seed's argument; so I thought folks might be interested in this link to Peter Ould's blog, 

Very interesting and useful Blair.

many thanks.

In Ffriendship

where he gives the text of a letter from Nigel Seed to the Church Times. See http://www.peter-ould.net/2012/03/02/same-sex-services-in-the-church-of-england/

in friendship, Blair 

I see your point Brian but canon law in ordinary C of E pratice is as you know a wste of time and a joke. Progress has always been made by ignoring, circumventing or diverting it !

Think - advanced Anglo-Cathoic eucharistic pratice including vesture, rite (often RC or English Missal etc), ritual, bells and smells, Tabernacles, holy water etc.

Think - advanced evangelical eucharistic pratice including vesture - jeans and T-shirt, ritual, rites ( Trinity college's latest, Baptist formulas etc), disposal of elelements following the serice.

Can law always catches up --eventually ! 

Main thing is integrity and authenticity of thought and action.  We won't get (much of) that from the 'house of bishops'.

In response to User 3644 and Jason of course all of us including clergy are accountable to God before bishops but clergy take an oath of Canonical obedience to their bishops so it is important to reiterate that all this paper (and more importantly the advice of Chancellor Nigel Seed) attempts to do is demonstrate that services of prayer and dedication following a civil partnership do not contravene canon law and the clergy’s oath of obedience. Like “Jason” and “Origen Adam” I believe the service should be more, but it is still worth making the point that even now, divided on this as the church is, there can still be a joyful celebration of the couples love and commitment - and there is no reason why clergy or parishes should feel inhibited in that celebration - any more than St George’s Windsor felt inhibited when it celebrated a “Service of Prayer and Dedication” for the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall (though they may not necessarily have the resources or the guest list!) And Martin - thank you for that.

Brian Lewis

Brian, I was always taught that when lawyers described a colleagues argument as "elegant" it was cipher for bovine ordure.

Hmmm I can support Brian in his view of the English service, it was very much as he says at the time.

When we came to our Prayer Book revision in the early 80's I can remember the gathered liturgists rejecting this approach and going for the while enchilada which prominently and deliberately said something different.

http://www.churchinwales.org.uk/publications/downloads/sharedassets/marriage/new/mar5-en.pdf

But just a minute! This is not yet another example of the Norman Doe's attempted take over of the Church?

If I win big on Euro Millions I plan to make a large gift to Cardiff University - on the basis that they shut down this LLM course - there will be a nice waterfront property in the Bahamas with a generous pension for my confrere Norman and a flat in Tonga for Mark Hill.

Unfortunately my post had to be edited by Fulcrum to remove various ad hominems but even I couldn't have compared the author to Humpty Dumpty. Thanks for the link Blair. Very funny!

What is it with you people? Any gay couple with a modicum of self-respect is hardly going to ask a homophobic vicar to conduct their civil-partnership! The argument is a non-sequitur. They are going to ask a gay-friendly vicar to do it which is why Inclusive Church have helpfully provided an order of service.

What you seem to want is for gay couples to be refused to have our relationships blessed in church. Is this really what Jesus would be doing? Have you not got better things to exercise your mind and body? What about the state of the world today? Wouldn't it be better for you to be caring for the orphan or widow rather than getting upset about two people in-love?

Rather than short-circuiting the debate, gay people just want to get on doing the fundamentals of the Gospel. If Fulcrum wish to continue arguing for the debasement of gay people I guess that is up to them. But we want to continue to work out our salvation and live a godly life with the blessing of God and our church.

Permitted by whom?  Bishops or God?

If bishops well I don't know but as all are equal before God then the question shouldn't be what bishops beleive as much as what do we in the churh believe.  Of course I respect a bishop's opinion as I respect another fellow beleivers opinion- she or he may have much experience and we should respect that but that does not make her or his opinion of greater wieght.

If we are talking of God or Christ then what is important is the love and commitment between two people.  As Christians we should be at the forefront of challenging oppression and homophobia still sadly prevalent in society and even the church.

Brian Lewis of course I agree about it is perectly possible to have serice of dedication clebrating the friendhsip and love between two people.  But why tngle yourself in knots baout whether this is a blessing of the union?  If we are serious about challenging social oppression then why make this somewhat tortuous disticntion?

Wholeheartedly agree with the quote from Dr Ison, "“a commitment to lifelong chastity and being together is actually the best pattern for how to flourish if you’re going to be in a relationship… whether you’re gay or straight” and that “... the Church has had gay bishops... It’s about learning to live in openness with the reality of who people are"

To quote John, quoting Jesus, let us love another and abide in His love"