Wingnut Anglicans Meet With Inquisition to Work Against Gay Marriage and Women Bishops

UPDATE: The Daily Telegraph is now reporting that the Church of England looks set for a damaging split last night after its ruling body agreed to press ahead with the introduction of women bishops without any compromise measures for opponents of the controversial move. This part of the story really makes me sick:

*

After six hour of emotional debate, one bishop broke down in tears saying he was ashamed of the church for ignoring the deeply felt wishes of traditionalists.

*
Would this bishop also condone slavery if a certain percentage of lunatics felt strongly about it? I cannot imagine being reduced to tears because no one would accommodate my desire to marginalize women and deny that they are spiritual equals to men. What the f*ck is wrong with these people?

*

The Daily Mail and other papers are reporting that ultraconservative members of the Church of England hierarchy have had secret meetings with representatives of the Vatican. Specifically, representatives of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, a/k/a the Inquisition. Sadly, instead of meeting to discuss ways to feed the hungry, cloth and house the poor or how to bring medical care to those without it, these "Godly Christians" are meeting in secret to discuss ways to thwart gays from achieving marriage equality and to devise a way to keep those pesky females from achieving the rank of bishops. What would Jesus say? Nothing good I suspect given his reported response to the Pharisees who likewise seemed more concerned about suppressing others and patting themselves on the back for being so much better than others. In many ways these anti-female homophobes and the fossilized leadership of the Roman catholic Church deserve one another. Here are some story highlights:

*

Senior Church of England bishops have held secret talks with Vatican officials over the crisis issue of homosexual priests and women bishops in the Anglican Communion. The bishops met senior advisers of Pope Benedict XVI to discuss the controversial topic, the Sunday Telegraph reported.

*

The group of conservative bishops are said to have expressed dismay at the liberal direction of the Church of England and their fears for its future. They met members of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which was headed by the Pope before he was elected Pontiff in 2005, it was said. The meeting was reportedly part of an attempt to build closer ties with the Roman Catholic Church. The Archbishop of Canterbury was not told of the talks, it was reported.

*

Up to 600 clergy have written to Dr Williams warning that they might leave the Church if safeguards such as dioceses for opponents of women bishops are not set up. The Sunday Telegraph reported that in a separate development, three diocesan bishops of the Church of England have written to Dr Williams supporting the threat and another has said he is preparing to leave the Church. The letter from the Bishops of Chichester, Blackburn and Europe - seen by The Sunday Telegraph - argues that traditionalist clergy will not be able to 'maintain an honoured place' in the Church without sufficient legislation.

*

The Rt Rev Kieran Conry, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Arundel and Brighton, said: 'A number of Church of England bishops are looking at the options open to them should things go wrong at the Lambeth Conference.'

Monday Male Beauty

Evangelicals and Obesity

Not only do evangelicals have the highest divorce rate of any Christian group (Baptists lead the way in divorce), but they seem to win for being the most obese as well. Baptists again win as the most over weight, followed by fundamentalist Protestant congregations -- Church of Christ, Pentecostal, Assembly of God, and Church of God. This map pretty much tracts obesity rates with where evangelicals reside in the largest numbers in the USA. Perhaps if they focused less on disparaging gays and spreading intolerance, they could spend more time dealing with their own serious problems. Just a thought.

Conservatives Ready To Battle McCain on Convention Platform

The Washington Post has a story today about the potenial for a strong confrontation between John McCain and the lunatic elements within the Republican Party over the re-writing of the Party's platform. Frankly, I can think of nothing better than a protracted and vicious fight over the party platform which will serve to remind voters of just how out of the mainstream the base of the GOP has become nowadays. The far right/Christianist obsession with immigration should go a long way to alienate hispanic voters since the GOP base is very hostile towards perceived brown skinned immigrants and/or Spanish speaking individuals. So too, the fanatics will be pushing for over the top positions on global warming, stem cell research, abortion and probably gay rights too which will again showcase the real GOP despite McCain's efforts to keep it hidden. Here are some story highlights:

*

McCain has not yet signaled the changes he plans to make in the GOP platform, but many conservatives say they fear wholesale revisions could emerge as candidate McCain seeks to put his stamp on a document that currently reflects the policies and principles of President Bush. . . . A platform fight at the convention could disrupt that carefully choreographed effort by highlighting the stark differences in vision for the party separating McCain from some of the GOP's most dedicated activists.

*

The battle may not be avoidable. The current GOP platform is a 100-page document, and all but nine pages mention Bush's name. Virtually the entire platform will have to be rewritten to lessen the imprint of the president, who has the highest disapproval rating of any White House occupant since Richard M. Nixon.

*

One main concern is immigration. The current plank on that issue calls for a temporary-worker program, something that both Bush and McCain have supported but that many conservatives view as unwarranted amnesty for people who arrived in the country illegally. Echard would like a much tougher position and is wary of McCain on the issue.

*

"We will never take that plank [on abortion] for granted. We want zero changes in it. We don't want a comma changed. We don't want a word inserted." Colleen Parro, executive director of the Republican National Coalition for Life, said her group will "cause problems" if McCain or his allies try to change that plank. But she's also focused on stem cell research, an area in which McCain differs with many anti-abortion activists.

More Sunday Male Beauty

Dobson Continues to Disingenuously Market the "Change Myth"

For someone who is having hissy fits over being rightfully castigated by Barack Obama as trying to force his sick version of Christianity on all Americans, James Dobson continues to demonstrate that he has little regard for truth and veracity. A case in point is Focus on the Family's dishonest presentation on its website about the ability of gays to "change." Were it not for the fact that far too many vulnerable and uninformed parents of gays and gays themselves fall for the bull shit peddled by Dobson (and fork over lots of money in the process), some of the information would be almost laughable. In many ways, FoF continues to act as if one's sexual orientation is akin to being an alcoholic or something similar to it. In addition, all regard for the opinions of legitimate medical and mental health proferssionals is utterly lacking form FoF's information. Some of this crap is so dishonest - e.g., that same sex attraction is an acquired habit - that one has to wonder how/why people accept any of it other than the fact that they have apparently been so brainwashed and inflicted with guilt. Here's a sampling of the bull shit offered up by FOF:

*

Male homosexuality is like any other sexual sin or temptation that a person may struggle with. Given that God works with us as individuals, there is no "formula" for the change process, nor is there typically instant freedom. Not surprisingly, each person’s path to liberty will be different. . . . The good news is that homosexual attractions and temptations do change, dissipate and even disappear for many men – as they cooperate with God in the process of becoming more like Jesus.

*

Change in behavior. For many men, this is of paramount concern. Some homosexual strugglers have struggled with fantasy, looking at pornography, masturbation and/or sexual activity with people of the same sex for years. Each time a person behaves in these ways, thoughts, feelings and actions are rehearsed in the body and in the brain. And these thoughts, feelings, and actions become more ingrained, more habitual.

*

Thus informed by Scripture, the man who wants to change will start thinking about himself differently – as part of fallen humanity, as a sinner in need of a Savior, as a redeemed child of God, as a man. He will ask God to change his self-image, from the world’s view to a biblical view. He must embrace healthy, God-given and God-ordained sexual identity and masculinity.

*
Change in relationships with men and women. Anyone who struggles with same-sex attractions will have to examine his relationships. This kind of thoughtful moral inventory will often involve confession and the willingness to grow, mature and cultivate new actions. Here are a few of the relational sins – often connected with the homosexual struggle – where God will empower change:

*
***Lust – desiring to use another man for one’s own pleasure and fulfillment;
***Envy – wanting to own another’s masculinity, wanting to possess another person’s attributes;
***Contempt – looking down on "straight" men or women, despising men who are unattractive, old, or effeminate, or fearing and hating women;
***Control – wanting to control another’s behavior, affections, time, or thoughts; and,
***Lying – not telling the truth about what one thinks or feels in order to maintain a relationship, not being honest about thoughts, feelings, behaviors or attitudes.

*
A man wrestling with homosexuality must also begin to develop healthy, non-sexual relationships with other men in the Body of Christ – learning to be a man amongst men.

*

Funny how I have never felt the envy, control, contempt, etc., feels outlined. It is also noteworthy that nowhere does the LOVE of same-sex partners ever get mentioned. It's all about lust, etc., and shows how utterly clueless this nutcase is about the true emotional aspects of being gay. Truth be told, it's Dobson and FOF that are the liars, seeking control and holding contempt for others, not gays and their supporters. In my opinion, Dobson is a dishonest charlatan and it is very sad that outfits like FOF - who typically use non-credentialed "ex-gays for pay" for their staffs - are not regulated by mental health licensing agencies. How many lives has this cruel and dishonest man ruined?

Neanderthals in Anglican Communion Not Just Anti-Gay

As if the controversy over gay clergy being fueled by knuckle draggers in the developing world - e.g., homophobe, Peter Akinola of Nigeria - is not bad enough, some of these assh*les in the Church of England are also anti-women. It's the Anglican version of keep them barefoot and pregnant. While I was only a member of the Episcopal Church for roughly a year and may not have standing to comment on another denomination, I view it as very sad that the rational element within the Church of England and the larger Anglican Communion are allowing themselves to be whip sawed by the worse elements within the Church who seem more focused more on who they hate and/or want to keep subjugated as opposed to preaching the Gospel and caring for those in need. I truly wish they'd tell the reactionaries in the Church of England (as well as Akinola and company) to go to Hell, literally and figuratively. The man is a monster, as are a number of his fellow African archbishops and bishops. My advice is to cast them adrift and have the western/moderate segment of the Communion keep its money and utilize it in non-wingnut areas. True, it may not be the most Christian thing to do, but eventually it might lead to an overthrow of the reactionary/Akinola crowd. Here are some highlights from the Independent on the increasing strife:

*

Divisions appeared to widen yesterday between senior Church of England clergy on opposite sides of the debate over the consecration of women bishops, as the issue dominated the agenda at the General Synod.

*

Traditionalists point to the Bible for justification. They say that since Jesus chose an all-male band of apostles as his first leaders, he must have seen the job as suitable only for men. Others simply protest that the Church of England would be going back on its founding principles. For a new generation of women in the church, however, the wait has already been too long.

*

The Rev Rose Hudson-Wilkin of Hackney, east London, was one of many female clergy who were concerned about the delay. "In 1994, when I was ordained in the priesthood, I remember a sense of excitement," she said. "I also remember the sense of overwhelming sadness etched on the faces of the women in their 70s who had served the Church over all their lives and were never allowed to exercise that ministry – and the great loss to the Church [that resulted].

*

A related editorial piece in the paper sets out a number of my thoughts on not only the infighting within the Anglican Communion, but also for denominations like my own Evangelical Lutheran Church where there seems to be far too much pandering to the unloving hater crowd. If one is a true Christian, the hallmark of your faith should not be who you hate and loath as is the case with the James Dobson and Peter Akinola crowd, but rather love of God and love of neighbor. Too much is being yielded to those who have no love of anyone except themselves (and power and money). Maintaining unity at the price of casting aside what is morally right is simply wrong headed in my opinion. Here are some highlights from the editorial:

*

The Church of England is fundamentally a theological peace treaty. As the Reformation plunged continental Europe into an ideological bloodbath, with Catholics and Protestants murdering each other by the million, England created a church that made the most remarkable claim for itself: both Catholic and Protestant. Sick of religious warfare, it invented the original big tent philosophy. Those of widely different philosophies could kneel together and worship God through the appropriately named Book of Common Prayer.

*

Two things have undermined this vision: the British Empire and the internet. In the days of the Empire, missionaries from the English church made faith our most successful export. Global Christianity mushroomed in the 20th century, with Anglicanism leading the way. There are now 77 million Anglicans. But what did not get exported was the very idea of Anglicanism as a peace treaty. Transplanted into different soil, Anglicanism grew hotter and more ideological, re-exposing deep theological fissures between believers that the C of E had agreed to set aside for the greater good. With the growth in communications technology, these differences could no longer be hidden.

*
Liberals were horrified to discover that some Anglicans were little more than fundamentalists in vestments; conservatives were horrified to discover that some Anglicans had gone native with secular humanism. Gay sex started it all. And the more the headlines rolled in, the more the cracks widened.

*
In fact, the fight over homosexuality exposed a darker side to the English reticence to confront difference head-on. We all knew there were loads of gay vicars; we all knew there were many gay bishops too – but it was a form of knowledge communicated in nods, winks and church code. But the spirit of "don't ask, don't tell" kept many of them stuck in the church closet. It took an American bishop first to be open about having a partner of the same sex. Gene Robinson's crime was his honesty. Likewise, the idea that the gay "marriage" that recently took place in St Bartholomew's church was a first is simply not the case. There have been hundreds of such weddings. It's just that they have been – and what a very English word this is – discreet.

*

But all that is over. The conservatives have decided that they can exploit the deep homophobia of many African Christians in order to stage a coup for the soul of the church. Suddenly, we are once again fighting the unresolved battles of the Reformation, with narrow-minded puritans seeking to impose their joyless and claustrophobic world-view on the rest of the church. The newly formed Federation of Confessing Anglicans (Foca) is seeking bridgeheads in wealthy evangelical parishes and the English ecclesiological peace treaty lies in tatters.

*

All eyes now turn to Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury. Is there anything he can do about these Focas? His track record isn't all that encouraging. Time and again, the Archbishop has given in to conservative ultimatums in the search for unity. And all that happens is that they come back for more. . . . But the current crisis needs him to care more about the condition of the Church of England. The open space that is the traditional mark of the English church is being undermined by a determined minority of well-funded extremists. It is time for him to fight back.

Sunday Male Beauty

American Energy Policy, Asleep at the Spigot

As I have noted in previous posts, the current energy crisis and soaring gas prices really should be a surprise to no one who has any knowledge of the last 35-40 years and any meaningful knowledge of the exploration and production segment of the oil industry. The USA now finds itself in more or less the same situation as at the time of the first energy crisis of the 1970's which saw gas rationing and a radical shift to smaller vehicles. Despite what occurred back then, the USA's political leadership in both parties chose to basically ignored the long term picture and out of perceived political expediency and deference to auto industry lobbyists and pretended that all could be normal again forever. The consuming public was no better as vehicles shifted back from smaller and more fuel efficient to the huge SUV so popular with the soccer mom set in neighborhood like the one I once lived in even though they have ZERO need for a huge gas guzzling off road vehicle. Yes, I confess to owning Jeeps, but each one of them has been actually used for off road purposes on many occasions, principally on the beach on surfing trips, and none of them come close to rivaling a Chevy Suburban for in terms of consumption.

*

Even now, most Americans cannot grasp that just maybe the oil prices we are seeing are here to stay, which is perhaps the ONLY thing that will force some sort of comprehensive energy policy to be put together. I believe the next few years will be turbulent economically, and if gas prices remain high, we will see a whole revamping of the US auto industry, assuming the domestic auto makers survive the change over since they put all of their eggs in the high profit gas hogs instead of making serious investment in more fuel efficient vehicle. As for living patterns, numerous stories are already cropping up as to the sudden loss of attractiveness of far flung outer suburbs which will likely have a negative impact on home prices in amny communities. In short, it's a mess that will not be rectified easily or quickly. Here are some highlights from a story that looks at the head in the sand approach that has been the USA's hallmark:

*

Over the last 25 years, opportunities to head off the current crisis were ignored, missed or deliberately blocked, according to analysts, politicians and veterans of the oil and automobile industries. What’s more, for all the surprise at just how high oil prices have climbed, and fears for the future, this is one crisis we were warned about. Ever since the oil shortages of the 1970s, one report after another has cautioned against America’s oil addiction.

*

Even as politicians heatedly debate opening new regions to drilling, corralling energy speculators, or starting an Apollo-like effort to find renewable energy supplies, analysts say the real source of the problem is closer to home. In fact, it’s parked in our driveways. Nearly 70 percent of the 21 million barrels of oil the United States consumes every day goes for transportation, with the bulk of that burned by individual drivers, according to the National Commission on Energy Policy, a bipartisan research group that advises Congress.

*
SO despite the fierce debate over what’s behind the recent spike in prices, no one differs on what’s really responsible for all that underlying demand here for black gold: the automobile, fueled not only by gasoline but also by Americans’ famous propensity for voracious consumption.

*

“Much of what we’re seeing today could have been prevented or ameliorated had we chosen to act differently,” says Pete V. Domenici, the ranking Republican member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and a 36-year veteran of the Senate. “It was a bipartisan failure to act.” Mike Jackson, the chief executive of AutoNation, the country’s biggest automobile retailer, is even more blunt. “It was totally preventable,” he says, anger creeping into his affable car-salesman’s pitch. . . . . the impact of that change will affect everyone from home builders and homeowners in exurbs to corporate leaders, landlords and commuters in cities.

*

[O]n Capitol Hill, members of both parties now say they are furious with Detroit for fighting so hard, and for so long, against higher fuel-efficiency standards. Though analysts say automakers who shoveled out highly profitable and highly inefficient road hogs like S.U.V.’s and pickups deserve much of the blame, they also criticize legislators who failed to provide an incentive for consumers to switch to fuel-sipping cars.

*

“We’ve got to fix it or our standard of living will change within a decade,” says Senator Domenici, who is retiring this year. “Oil was too damn cheap, it’s too high now and it’s going even higher. I hope I’m wrong, but the problem is, we can’t catch up soon enough.” According to energy policy experts, it was in the late 1980s and early 1990s — during the administrations of President George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton — that things began to go wrong. Before that point, the country reaped the benefits of the first fuel-economy standards, passed in 1975, known as corporate average fuel economy, or CAFE.

*

[A]dded drilling is unlikely to generate sharply lower prices. A recent study by the federal government’s Energy Information Administration estimated that under the best-case scenario opening up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would reduce prices by $1.44 a barrel by 2027. Drilling in broader swaths off the continental United States wouldn’t affect prices until 2030.

*

“The 1990s were something of a lost decade for American fuel efficiency.” With oil prices low, consumers began snapping up pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles, which were governed by less stringent fuel economy standards, thanks to a loophole in the original 1975 law. These carried higher sticker prices and profit margins, and both Detroit and foreign automakers were happy to oblige. Although oil prices remained low through the 1990s, consumption patterns were taking an ominous turn.

*

What Congress didn’t or couldn’t do, the free market is now doing in the form of higher gas prices: forcing Americans into more fuel-efficient cars. Ms. Cischke of Ford says that in the last two months, “We have seen more of a shift in the market than in 20 years of CAFE. People are buying what they need.” Unfortunately, the shift is happening too fast for a company of Ford’s size. That is among the reasons Wall Street expects Ford to lose more than $2 billion this year.

Find Sparks New Debate on Messiah and Resurrection

I'm not sure what this discovery will lead to, but it definitely could lead to some changes in Biblical history as it has been known to date. What is the discovery? A stone tablet that scholars believe dates from the decades just before the birth of Jesus is causing a quiet stir in biblical and archaeological circles, especially because it may speak of a messiah who will rise from the dead after three days. That's right - it references the Messiah's death and resurrection before Christ was born. The reality is that there were a number of death and resurrection themed religions before Christ and the onset of what became Christianity, aspects of the cult of the Egyptian goddess Isis being but one. There are also certain "sacrifice" parallels from the cult of Mithras which is thought to have originated in Persia. All of these historical realities, of course, are utterly ignored by fanatical Christianists who have - in my opinion - what is actually a very fragile and rigid belief system that affords no room for variance from their "infallible" Bible. In fact, as I view it, once a part of their belief system begins to unravel, the whole construct begins to collapse, which may be why they are so terrified of anything that doesn't fit their construct - e.g., that God made gays just as we are. Hence, it will be interesting to see what grows out of this discovery. Here are some highlights from the New York Times:

*

JERUSALEM — A three-foot-tall tablet with 87 lines of Hebrew that scholars believe dates from the decades just before the birth of Jesus is causing a quiet stir in biblical and archaeological circles, especially because it may speak of a messiah who will rise from the dead after three days. If such a messianic description really is there, it will contribute to a developing re-evaluation of both popular and scholarly views of Jesus, since it suggests that the story of his death and resurrection was not unique but part of a recognized Jewish tradition at the time.

*
The tablet, probably found near the Dead Sea in Jordan according to some scholars who have studied it, is a rare example of a stone with ink writings from that era — in essence, a Dead Sea Scroll on stone. . . . its authenticity has so far faced no challenge, so its role in helping to understand the roots of Christianity in the devastating political crisis faced by the Jews of the time seems likely to increase.

*

Daniel Boyarin, a professor of Talmudic culture at the University of California at Berkeley, said that the stone was part of a growing body of evidence suggesting that Jesus could be best understood through a close reading of the Jewish history of his day. “Some Christians will find it shocking — a challenge to the uniqueness of their theology — while others will be comforted by the idea of it being a traditional part of Judaism,” Mr. Boyarin said.

*

Ms. Yardeni, who analyzed the stone along with Binyamin Elitzur, is an expert on Hebrew script, especially of the era of King Herod, who died in 4 B.C. The two of them published a long analysis of the stone more than a year ago in Cathedra, a Hebrew-language quarterly devoted to the history and archaeology of Israel, and said that, based on the shape of the script and the language, the text dated from the late first century B.C.

*

[T]he specific messianic figure embodied on the stone could be a man named Simon who was slain by a commander in the Herodian army, according to the first-century historian Josephus. The writers of the stone’s passages were probably Simon’s followers, Mr. Knohl contends.. . . . He says further that such a suffering messiah is very different from the traditional Jewish image of the messiah as a triumphal, powerful descendant of King David. “This should shake our basic view of Christianity,” he said as he sat in his office of the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem where he is a senior fellow in addition to being the Yehezkel Kaufman Professor of Biblical Studies at Hebrew University. “Resurrection after three days becomes a motif developed before Jesus, which runs contrary to nearly all scholarship. What happens in the New Testament was adopted by Jesus and his followers based on an earlier messiah story.”

*

“His mission is that he has to be put to death by the Romans to suffer so his blood will be the sign for redemption to come,” Mr. Knohl said. “This is the sign of the son of Joseph. This is the conscious view of Jesus himself. This gives the Last Supper an absolutely different meaning. To shed blood is not for the sins of people but to bring redemption to Israel.”