The Next Twenty Years for Anglican Christians - Archbishop Peter Jensen

Dr Peter Jensen is the Archbishop of Sydney

‘Crisis’, ‘schism’, ‘division’, ‘break-up’ – this has been the language of the last five years in the Anglican Communion. Again and again we have reached ‘defining moments’, ‘crucial meetings’ and ‘turning points’, only to discover that they simply lead into another period of uncertainty.

Uncertainty is now over. The decisive moments have passed. Irreversible actions have occurred. The time has come for sustained thought about a different future. The Anglican Communion will never be the same again. The Windsor process has failed, largely because it refused to grapple with the key issue of the truth. A new and more biblical vision is required to help biblically faithful Anglican churches survive and grow in the contemporary world.

Some have still set their hopes on the Lambeth Conference. But that is to misunderstand the significance of our time. It can no longer either unify Anglicanism or speak with authority. The invitations have gone to virtually all, and it is likely that some of those not invited will still attend as guests. There are faithful Anglican bishops who are not invited, and there are others who cannot be present in good conscience. The solemn words of the 1998 Conference were ignored by the American Church in 2003, and any authority which we may have ascribed to the deliberations of the Bishops has been lost permanently. Not surprisingly, Lambeth 2008 is not going to attempt a similar exercise in conciliar pronouncements. Why would it? There is no vision here.

The key defining moment on the liberal side was the consecration of Bishop Robinson of New Hampshire. At first it was hoped that this was a mere aberration, that it could be dealt with by returning to where we were. In fact it was a permanent action with permanent consequences. It truly expressed the heart-felt views of the greater part of the leadership of the American Episcopal Church. The only way in which steps can be retraced is by repudiating the action itself, a development impossible to contemplate. That was the year of decision for the American church, and the decision was made in the clear light of day. They knew what they were doing.

The American House of Bishops has now responded to the Primates. Many have seen in their pronouncements sufficient conformity to the request of the Primates to enable the Communion to continue on its way. I do not read their statement like that. I think that they have failed to meet the hopes of the Primates. But the significance of the document at this level hardly matters. The document taken as a whole makes the real issue abundantly clear. Sexual rights are gospel.

The Americans are firmly committed to the view that the practice of homosexual sex in a long term relationship is morally acceptable. Not only is it acceptable, it is demanded by the gospel itself that we endorse this lifestyle as Christian. They are prepared to wait for a short time while the rest of the Communion catches up. But they do not intend to reverse their decisions about this and they do intend to proclaim this message wherever possible. They want to persuade us that they are right, and that the rest of us should embrace this development. Here is a missionary faith.

The biblical conservatives and their allies in Africa and Asia knew this. They did not need to wait for the House of Bishops. They took irreversible steps to secure the future of some of the biblical Anglicans in North America. I say ‘some’, because it is often forgotten that faithful Canadian Anglicans are living in a Diocese where the blessing of same sex unions is diocesan policy. What if TEC has been judged to conform to the Primates wishes? The Diocese of New Westminster certainly has not. What is to be done for the orthodox in that Diocese? What will happen if British Anglicans follow this route? This sort of question shows why a new vision and further action will be needed.

The response of the Primates has involved the provision of episcopal oversight. This, too, has changed the nature of the Anglican Communion. From now on there will inevitably be boundary crossing and the days of sacrosanct diocesan boundaries are over. Anglican episcopacy now includes overlapping jurisdictions and personal rather than merely geographical oversight. If the sexual revolution becomes more broadly accepted elsewhere, so other Bishops will be appointed as they have been in the USA. This is the new fact of Anglican polity. How are these developments going to be incorporated into world-Anglicanism? What future should we be thinking of? Where is our vision for them? Hand-wringing is not the answer.

The aim of the Archbishop of Canterbury was to retain the highest level of fellowship in the Communion. He believed that truth will be found in communion, in inclusion rather than exclusion. From his point of view, an extended passage of time is vital. What matters for the Archbishop is not this Lambeth, but the next one and the one after that. Will those who have initiated this novelty relent and give up their commitments? Or will the objectors tire of their fuss and concede the point? Since the likelihood of the American church repenting of its action is remote, the hope must be that those who now protest will eventually weary of their protest and learn to live with the novelty of active gay bishops.

The Archbishop has revealed his hopes through a lecture on biblical interpretation, ‘The Bible Today: Reading and Hearing’. delivered in Canada in April 2007. In this lecture he addresses the very heart of the controversy, by challenging conservative interpretations of Romans 1 and John 14, and thus raising the issues of interpretation, human sexuality and the uniqueness of Christ as Mediator. He has signalled the importance of hermeneutics for our future. His lecture shows that there is an unavoidable contest about the meaning of the Bible in these crucial areas ahead of us. It is a challenge which must be met at a theological level. We may think that this whole business is about politics and border-crossing and ultimatums and conferences, but in fact it is about theology and especially the authority and interpretation of Scripture.

That leads to this fundamental conclusion. Those who believe that the American development is wrong must also plan for the next decades, not the next few months. There is every reason to think that the Western view of sexuality will eventually permeate other parts of the world. After all, it has done so spectacularly in the West, and the modern communication revolution has opened the way for everyone to be aware of what happens in New York, London, San Francisco and Brighton.

Thus the question before the biblically orthodox in the Communion is this: what new vision of the Anglican Communion should we embrace? Where should it be in the next twenty years? How can we ensure that the word of God rules our lives? How are we going to guard ourselves effectively against the sexual agenda of the West and begin to turn back the tide of Western liberalism? What theological education must we have? How can we now best network with each other? Who is going to care for Episcopalians in other western provinces who are going to be objecting to the official acceptance of non-biblical practices? The need for high level discussion of these issues is urgent.

As an initial step I look to the Global South leadership to call for another ‘Blast of the Trumpet.’ The ensuing consultation must start with the reality of where we are now, and look steadfastly to a future in which the bonds of Communion have been permanently loosened. It has to strengthen the fellowship by which churches will help each other to guard their theological good health while engaging together with the task of preaching the gospel to an unbelieving world.

In any case, the basic issue is no longer how can the communion be kept together. It is, within the Communion as it has now become, how can biblical Anglicans help each other survive and mission effectively in the contemporary world? The Africans have shown a commendable concern for this very issue and taken steps to assist the western church. They have recognised that the gospel sometimes divides and sometimes requires new and startling initatives. We must now all take the actions and do the thinking required to safeguard biblical truth, not merely in the West but throughout the Anglican world. To fail here, will be to waste the time and effort which has brought us to this fateful hour.


92 Responses. Comments closed for this entry.

  1. Father Ron Smith Says:

    Armageddon? for Sydney and the Global South. Yes!
    At last Jensen declares his hand. Will the mainstream of the Anglican Communion bow down to them? I think not. The Anglican Communion is too Gospel-oriented to capitulate to the Fundies.

    May God preserve us all from the Scribes and Pharisees of the twenty-first Century.

  2. Fr Mark Says:

    Does Abp Jensen really think that Sydney, a city famous for its large well-integrated gay population, is best served by a Church which thinks it should adopt the sexual morality of the developing countries rather than the West? Come off it, you need to get your act together and be on the same wavelength as the society you wish to minister to. Is Australian society going the way of Europe/the US when it comes to accepting gay people or the way of Nigeria? You should start thinking how you can support and affirm those living in committed same-sex relationships in Sydney diocese: this is an urgent pastoral need.

  3. Andrew Southerton Says:

    Mr Smith,

    To quote a previous post of yours:

    ‘When serious theological dialogue descends into invective - in the guise of Gospel Truth - then this site perhaps needs to edit our more of its content.’

    Why do you then resort to immature name calling?

    Was it the Scribes or the Pharisees that were the hypocrites?

  4. James Jack Says:

    Some strange statements there from both Mr Smith and Fr Mark.
    Mr Smith’s name-calling of Archbishop Jensen and other conservatives masks a basic misunderstanding. He questions whether the “mainstream of the Anglican Communion” will follow their lead. But the fact is, by an quantifiable method, the Global South is the mainstream. That is where growth is occurring. In the Australian church it is almost exclusively in evangelical dioceses that growth is occurring - Sydney being the largest of them. The fact is that the average Anglican nowadays is black and conservative!

    Secondly, Fr Mark says that we should be on the “same wavelength as the society you wish to minister to”. In context, he clearly means that most of Sydney seems to embrace homosexuality so Sydney Anglicans should too. This is profoundly unbiblical. Has Fr. Mark never read Jesus’ statements that his disciples are not “of the world” (John 17), or Paul’s instruction to the Philippians to “shine like stars in a broken and corrupt generation”, or John’s warning that we cannot love God and the world (1 John 2). Just because our society thinks something is no reason at all to accept it - almost the opposite, in fact! As Christians we are challenged to stand out from the world as we live out and preach the gospel. And this gospel contains both a great hope of salvation AND a sombre warning of judgment for the unrepentant.

    Having sat under Peter Jensen’s leadership in the Sydney diocese for a number of years now, it is a privilege to be led by a man committed to the truth of Scripture and to the proclamation of the Word of God.

  5. Leonel Says:

    Peter Jensen is NOT committed to the work of the Gospel. He IS committed to homophobia, sexism, racism and classism. Evidence, you say? Ask his brother.

  6. Fr Mark Says:

    James, I agree Christians should be counter-cultural. We should be against the culture of trying to wield power by bullying, against the culture of trying to exclude the marginalised and the not-like-us, against the culture of passing judgement upon our neighbour. This is the Christian way to be counter-cultural, modelled by Our Lord. So why do these Developing World church leaders then employ all these unChristian methods? They are supporting a very nasty culture of discrimination and violence against the most weak and vulnerable in their own societies: the gay people they scapegoat. Saying they must be right because they have large numbers in their churches is just pandering to bullying, “might is right” Christianity. There could be many simple reasons why more people in the Third World practise religion than in the West. I just wish their church leaders would stop telling us how to be church for our society, and I wish naive people like Abp Jensen would open their eyes to the pastoral needs around them. In Sydney, you should be thinking “how do we affirm, support and attract gay people into our Christian churches?” Instead, this man is pushing them away, and consigning the Church to a future of social irrelevance.

  7. jos strengholt Says:

    Well said, Rev. Jenkins.  Those who have always had their mouth full of ecumenism and listening to the Third World, have suddenly decided that absolute truth is with some fringe churches in the USA after all.

    Ecumenism? Yes, said TEC. Until they realized that the rest of the Anglican Communion does not accept their views.  Immediately TEC is back at old-fashioned exclusivism.  They know better than the Worldwide communion of the Church.

    Well thanks TEC; you damage our ecumenical relations with the Catholics, with most Third World Christians, with the Greek-Orthodox and all other Orthodox.  What you lack is ecumenism and ecclesiology. 

    But does it matter for you?  Ofcourse not. Americans know best.  Americans ALWAYS know best.  Let the rest of the world follow your enlightened lead.

    No thanks.  No thanks.  Give me the Gospel of Jesus Christ to follow.

  8. Pat Ross Says:

    Hey Leonel - I am the son of a blue collar worker who struggled to understand my identity and direction in life. Peter Jensen invited me into his home (literally) and supported me, guided me and loved me. He isn’t homophobic, sexist, racist or classist. Evidence you say? Ask me. Oh and Leonel, once words are uttered or written it is hard to take them back so be very careful what you write and say.

  9. Fr Mark Says:

    Jos, I’m not American, and I don’t think they often know best. TEC did, however, press ahead with including women in the ordained ministry when noone else would, and now we’re all catching up with them. Interestingly, the most homophobic churches in the Anglican Communion tend also to be the ones who haven’t made much progress with ordaining women priests or bishops. Do any of the conservative African churches have women bishops? Strange that they don’t see that as a communion-breaking issue, but are content to live with a diversity of views when it comes to women priests/bishops. Didn’t the ordination of women throw more of a spanner in the works when it came to what the RCs/Orthodox would like us to have done than gay men ever could? Both RC and Orthodox churches are packed with practicing gays, as their regular “scandals” show. Isn’t it better,and healthier, to at least be open and honest about it as we’re doing?

  10. jos strengholt Says:

    Hello Fr Mark - I admit, I am not happy that the homosexuality issue became the bone of contention.  The ‘fight’ for the soul of Anglicanism is about how we read our Bible.  THAT is the real issue.  The fact that the ordination of women has not been such a major issue as the present one,  is that for many conservative Anglicans it is not so clearly non-Biblical.  Many very conservative African Anglican churches have female priests.

    RC and Orthodox churches are not ‘packed’ with practicing gay priests.  If they are indeed ‘packed’ their coming out would not be the scandal that it is.

    Yes we must be open and honest about what we are doing.  If it is wrong, we must stop it.

  11. Father Ron Smith Says:

    When will the Evangelicals (the fundamentalists I mean, not the proclaimers of the True Gospel) learn that the Word of God is not confined to THE BOOK any longer. At the Incarnation of Christ, the Word became Flesh and Dwelt Among us!

    The Sacrament of Christ in the Eucharist speaks more loudly than the inanimate words in a book - even the Bible, which is a way, not The Way, who is Christ himself.

    The Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld (behold) his glory - the glory as of the Only-Begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. The Sacrament of Christ is the Living Word and we are told by Christ himself in the gospels that “They will know you are my disciples by your love” - not by hatred and prejudice.

  12. jos strengholt Says:

    Dear Fr Ron

    As an evangelical I fully agree with your statement.  However, I do not like to allow the Christ who reveals himself most fully in the Eucharistic koinonia to be placed OPPOSITE to the Christian Scriptures. 

    He is the Christ OF the Scriptures, the fulfillment of the written Word. It is impossible to hold on to the Living Word if we purposely contradict the written Word.

  13. Rob Elder Says:

    Dear Fr Smith,
    it seems strange to me that you might write
    “the inanimate words in a book - even the Bible…” and then offer us a quote from the said Scriptures. In so doing you demonstrate beautifully how necessary the Scriptures really are. Not that Christ IS the Scriptures, but rather without the Scriptures we can have no true knowledge concerning him.

    This is why he authorised his apostles and why his Spirit inspired their writings, thus making “inanimate words” (are any words really inanimate?) “living and active” (Hebrews 4:12).

    Love is not true love which has no concern for clarity and truthfulness. This is why I am grateful to God for his Scriptures, for by what other means can we faithfully navigate our way through life?

  14. Russel Kester Says:

    The Anglican communion needs priests like Fr. Mark and Fr. Ron Smith.  These priests make my heart glad to be Christian and Anglican (Episcopalian).  To my humble way of thinking, this is an old argument in new clothes.  I see this as the people of the spirit of God vs. the people of the book.  We have the Holy Spirit within us to lead us into all truth.  It’s silly to think that even a book as inspired as the Bible could contain God’s evolving revelation to us as we grow to better receive the truth.  Look see God says, I have done a new thing and I make all thinks new.  The revelations 2,000 years ago were done in a fashion that fit the mindset of an middle-eastern culture.  But we now live in a new age with the aid of the sciences to help us understand just how wonderful, complex, and diverse God has made us.  Those of a conservative fundamentalist perspective would have us still live under the law, but Christ came and set us free.  Free to love God with all of our heart, soul, mind, and strength and our fellow beings as we love ourselves.  To Jos and Abp Jensen I respond, Christ has set me free and you will not chain my soul with your selective reading of the book (law).  I pray that you too will experience the Christ of love and freedom instead of the law and its dead works.

  15. James Jack Says:

    It’s a shame that reasoned discussion is so often replaced by name calling - “fundamentalist, homophobic, racist, sexist” or even “heretic,liberal”. I’m certainly tempted myself, but it really doesn’t do anyone any good.

    To say that homosexuality is sinful and outside of God’s will is not homophobic! Some may misuse such statements for their own sinful ends - just as certain atheists throughout recent history have misused statements arguing against Christianity to commit violent acts against believers. Do we just pronounce atheists and humanists as “Christophobic” as if this ends the conversation and after which there is no further need for debate? It is quite possible - indeed it is Biblical - to say that homosexuality is a sin and to call for repentance AND to pastorally care for homosexuals. In fact, to encourage sinful sexual relations shows not love, for it is encouraging behaviour which Scripture tells us excludes people from the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6).

    Mr Kester’s claim that those who follow the Bible are under law and those who reject the bits they don’t like are “free to love God” demonstrates an unsettling licenciousness. May I encourage everyone to read the Epistles, particularly Romans and Galatians where we can see the freedom we have in Christ is not a freedom to sin - it is a freedom FROM sin, so that we are now free to follow God. Ultimately, we are all slaves to something. The question is - will it be to sin and our own desire, to to the redeeming God of the universe?

  16. James Jack Says:

    This ongoing discussion has revealed what is at the heart of this debate - the authority of Scripture.

    On one hand some claim it is the Word of God. I am one of those people. This doesn’t mean that everything is to be understand at a simplistic face value. With the illumination of the Spirit we need to discern what God is telling us. The Old Testament needs to be understood in light of the New, for example - for Christ fulfills the law.

    But to dismiss the more difficult teachings of the Bible as something just a bit out of date and suitable only to a culture 2000 years old is deeply flawed logic.

    Firstly, God is not bound by culture. Nor was the Bible the product of a singe homogenous culture at one specific time. God speaks from eternal wisdom. His Word on the authority of women in church, for example (in 1 Timothy) appeals not to cultural norms - in fact it repudiated the cultural norms in Ephesus at the time - but to the very order of creation before any “middle eastern” culture existed!

    Secondly, to say as Mr Kester does, that Biblical teaching was just written “in a fashion to fit the mindset” of people 2000 years ago is just plain misinformed. If this was the case, would Paul and the other apostles have been arrested and beaten for the preaching the gospel? Homosexuality was not necessarily considered immoral in the Greek world. We see time and time again that the teachings of both the OT and the NT are counter-cultural, in the way we are to treat the poor, deal with money, organise our churches and order our sexual lives.

    Unfortunately, there is a profound parting of the ways in this debate. If we cannot agree that the Bible is the Word of God then continuing to argue won’t really get us anywhere - because the only authority we can appeal to is ourselves. This is the danger of rejecting selected parts of Scripture because they don’t fit with modern culture or our own sinful desires. Who becomes the authority? We do! And when we usurp authority from God the Bible has one word for that - sin.

  17. James Jack Says:

    In the way we deal with sin (sexual sin or otherwise) we need to follow the example of Jesus as he dealt with the woman caught in adultery in John 8. He said two things to her:

    “Neither do I condemn you” AND
    “Go and leave your life of sin”

    Too often we leave out one or the other.

    Some conservatives are so impassioned to protect sound doctrine that they heap condemnation upon people - and there is condemnation eventually for rejecting Christ but our response needs to be loving care and evangelism.

    Others seem to think that to tell someone a practice is wrong IS to condemn that person. So they encourage people to continue in their life of sin. Clearly Jesus didn’t follow that reasoning!

    Neither response is being obedient to the word or example of Jesus.

    How about we do what he did for a change??

  18. whb Says:

    Why doesn’t Mr. Jensen in his lovely coat and tie send some of his lay people up to North America to “preside” for conservative Anglicans and save them from all of our ‘innovations’.

    Unlike the contemporary Donatists of his day, I’d rather receive a valid-consecrated Eucharist from a gay priest (or bishop) ordained in apostolic succession and living in a committed same-sex relationship than a bible-thumping Anglo-Baptist “Anglican” lay person probably wearing a gown more suitable for a high school graduation in Hooterville, USA. 

    Now by dear Mr Jensen - Valid Sacraments - that IS a salvation issue.

    This may be the greatest blessing of the Anglican Communion - about every 100 years -a group of puritan evangelicals break off, form their own ecclesial community, and the Anglican Church is allowed to continue embrace an enlightened Catholicism.

  19. James Jack Says:

    So it would be better to receive communion from a priest (aren’t we all priests, though??) who deliberately and publicly sins against the Word of God than from a non-ordained righteous man, regarding an issue on which the Scripture is silent? This is very strange.

    Is it not troubling that we put more faith and import in man-made institutions than in the Bible?

    Despite the complete lack of Biblical grounds for denying non-ordanined people to preside at communion, the Sydney diocese has not gone forward with this innovation because we do not wish to alientate others throughout the Anglican world.

    Please explain, “whb”, why it is so important to wear robes and cassocks to remember the death of Christ for our sins. And please explain why ritual and church government is more important than the clear teaching of Scripture. Add to that a clear explanation of how the term “priest” is used in the NT (leaders of churches are always referred to as elders or deacons, NOT priests), and finally where exactly it is taught that only the apostles could celebrate the Lord’s Supper?

    Given that is seems “whb” thinks that taking communion only from a validly ordained “priest” in the apostolic succession is a “salvation issue”, it would be interesting to hear his/her view on whether people in Baptist/Presbyterian/Lutheran/Pentocostal etc churches can be saved at all.

    What is it that saves us? Taking part in a ceremony which has very little in common with the original remembrance meal? Or having a genuine faith in Christ, imparted by the Spirit, and in that taking part in the death of the Lord Jesus.

  20. Fr Mark Says:

    James, it is rather unsettling to see you equate “non-gay” with “righteous”. There are plenty of unrighteous Christians, including priests, both straight and gay, and you have, thank goodness, no way of prying into the state of their souls when they lead the liturgy. The unworthiness of the minister hindereth not the efficacy of the sacrament, if you read the oh-so-Protestant Book of Common Prayer. It is also a bit odd that most of the comments on the conservative side here gloss over the biblical teaching on women so conveniently: women are very clearly to be subservient in church and family, if you are a biblical literalist. Now I am thankful that Anglicanism has traditionally saved us from intemperate literalism and allowed us to change our teaching on the place of women. Whether you like it or not, we are a liberal church in that respect. So then, I don’t see how you can be so wounded when gay people expect the same degree of commonsense applied in their case when it comes to interpreting the Bible. The only explanation would seem to be that gay people are a numerically smaller group, and traditionally ground down into silence by threats and violence. And some men are clearly very threatened by gay people’s very existence, presumably due to some sort of sexual/gender role insecurity of their own.  Did you know there was even an Anglican bishop in the 17th century (John Atherton) who was hanged in England for being caught in flagrante with another man? Not a very good record on the part of the Church, is it?

  21. whb Says:

    “Please explain, “whb”, why it is so important to wear robes and cassocks to remember the death of Christ for our sins.”

    It isn’t - one can remember the death of Christ for our sins butt naked.  However, robes are for putting on after one takes a shower or coming out of a swimming pool.  The Holy Eucharist, of course, can be celebrated in blue jeans.  But there is Anglican decorum - and the Geneva gown isn’t it for Anglicans- thats for graduation commencements - and BTW the Chasuble and stole is the Western Christian attire to celebrate the Eucharist…Not some 16th century choir dress that one wears for the daily offices.  And there is more to the Faith than “Remember the death of Christ for our sins”...The Christian Faith is based upon the Incarnation, Death, and resurrection.  Why must you put so much emphasis only on the last three hours of Christ’s life when his Atonement reaches back from his conception and into time??  Billy Graham once said that one time after his crusade in Greece I think, he asked the Patriarch what he thought of his sermon.  The Patriarch replied - it was good but you need to emphasize the Resurrection more.

    “And please explain why ritual and church government is more important than the clear teaching of Scripture.”

    Ritual connects us to our past - human beings need ritual - it allows us to express ourselves beyond words - even the Baptists and Pentecostals have their own ritual.  I think you just don’t care for Western Christian Ritual handed down through the centuries -  which at least in the US - folks like you are the victims of taught bigotry against Roman Catholicism.  Anything that is deemed “Catholic” is evil or wrong or not necessary.  I never hear any Protestant say - Gee - thats so Eastern Orthodox.  Get over it - the Lutherans have.  As for “Clear Teaching” - I think we are still working on that one.  At one time - the clear teaching of the scriptures was to support slavery, keep women in their ‘place’, require male circumcision before Baptism, deny the facts of science when they are advanced, etc.  As Anglicans, we use Scripture, Reason and Tradition.  And yes - I do believe Scripture to be authoritative and the inspired Word of God (not Words of God).  Authoritative in that no one can require an article of Faith as NECESSARY to salvation that cannot be proven in Holy Writ.  Not sure where your anti “Church Government” question is coming from…I assume you mean the ministry of Bishop.  The Early Church had Elders as you pointed out.  (And no they didn’t wear mitres and copes)”

    “Add to that a clear explanation of how the term “priest” is used in the NT (leaders of churches are always referred to as elders or deacons, NOT priests), and finally where exactly it is taught that only the apostles could celebrate the Lord’s Supper? “

    A priest is the extension of the Bishop.  Just like in the US today - Nurse Practioners, some Pharmacists, and Physician Assistants are extensions of the physician and work under their prescriptive authority since the physician can’t be everywhere all the time.  And they take oaths too.  The bishop cannot be in every congregation every Sunday.  As the Church grew…well you know the rest of the story. 

    Given that is seems “whb” thinks that taking communion only from a validly ordained “priest” in the apostolic succession is a “salvation issue”, it would be interesting to hear his/her view on whether people in Baptist/Presbyterian/Lutheran/Pentocostal etc churches can be saved at all.

    I will leave that up to God’s mercy and love. There is a wideness in God’s mercy.  As an Anglican, we hold that the sacraments are vehicles of God’s grace and necessary to Salvation. Period. I believe you will find that in any Anglican Catechism. The Lutherans (ELCA) here in the USA allowed us to give them the gift of Apostolic Succession as part of our Full Communion agreement.  Maybe one day we can give that give that to the Baptists and other Protestant sects -and yes - they can wear their Geneva Gowns

  22. Fr Mark Says:

    My goodness, whb, some good theology in your post there. You’re doing Abp Jensen’s job for him much better than he is.

  23. James Jack Says:

    Not sure where the good theology was, Fr Mark.

    Firstly, I never equated non-gay with righteous. Your point is a good one that there are many non-gays who live lives in disobedience to God as well. My point was simply that it is strange that we would prefer the ministry of someone living in a sinful relationship to someone not doing so on the basis that the former has gone through a church ritual.

    To respond to whb - I’m still struggling to understand why “Anglican decorum” as represented by clerical dress is so important. To be honest, it’s not Anglican decorum in the vast majority of Anglican churches that I have been to. That may well be different to your experience. I’ve got no problem with wearing robes and the bishops having a mitre and all that if that’s helpful to you and to the mission of the church. But where did it become inappropriate to wear other clothes? To this day I don’t think I have ever received communion from a pastor wearing anything other than modern smart casual dress or a business suit. Does that make the sacrament offensive to God?

    I’m sorry, as Anglicans we do not hold that our sacraments are vehicles of God’s grace and necessary for salvation. that is entirely a Roman Catholic idea which was repudiated by the 39 articles. Article 25 says that the sacraments are “signs of grace”, not vehicles.

    WHB sounds like he/she (I’m sorry if that sounds impersonal by the way, but I really don’t know!) wishes that the Reformation didn’t happen. We’re all anti-Catholic bigots, apparently. Read the 39 Articles (if anywhere, that’s where you’ll find a traditional Anglican catechism) to discover just how bigoted against Roman Catholicism that our church is supposed to be (given that Anglican clergy swear an oath to uphold those articles).

    Furthermore, Article 34 points out that the “traditions and ceremonies” of the church are open to change and that any particular church or national church can choose to change them as long as said tradition is not specifically ordained by Scripture. Doesn’t this mean the Sydney Diocese is permitted to change this tradition???

    To clarify what I meant by church government, I was referring to the system of church governance whereby only those who have gone through the nordination ritual can preside at communion.

    But as to the bishop. I’m no expert on Greek, but I regard the word “elder” a far better translation of the Scriptural word than bishop - and the vast majority of more modern translations translate it that way (or similar like an overseer). the context is setting up leaders for small, local churches not vast institutions. The “bishop” can be everwhere at once if by “bishop” you mean what I think the NT means - local elders.

    As for continuing to persist with priests, Hebrews is so clear in saying we no longer need priests because Jesus is our great high priest. For that reason we have free access to God and as such are all priests. It is a misleading word that conjurs up images of people mediating between humanity and God - but Jesus is our mediator.

    This isn’t about church practice or worship styles. High church or low church - whatever floats your boat. But when we start making statements about the way we do sacraments being a salvation issue and about certain rituals being necessary for salvation (that’s just the truth “Period” according to whb - well, not to me and not to any Anglican high church or low where I’m from) then we need to stand up and preach the great truths of Scripture - that we are saved by the grace of God, through faith in the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ.

    And one final note - if it seemed I was only focussing on the death of Christ, I should correct myself. Of course the Incarnation and Resurrection are incredibly central. I was only talking mainly about the death because the Lord’s Supper is primarily a remembrance meal of Jesus’ death.

  24. Gary Morrow, Dahlonega, Georgia. USA Says:

    Titus 1:

    9 (8) Holding fast the faithful word according to doctrine, (9) that he also may be able to exhort with wholesome doctrine, and convince them that say against it.
    (8) The third admonition: The pastor must hold fast that doctrine, which the Apostles delivered, and pertaineth to salvation, leaving behind all curious and vain matters. (9) The fourth admonition: To apply the knowledge of true doctrine unto use, which consisteth in two things, to wit, in governing them which shew themselves apt to learn, and confuting the obstinate.

    Boy, how the non-fundamentalists(revisionist, perverts) hate the Gospel, Word, Laws, Commandments of God.

    Ron Smith and Company, read what you hate so much about the Bible. The Bible haters-socialist(Liberals, Prgressives), Communist, Revisionist, Humanist, Atheist, Militarist, etc.

    If they can find Scripture within the Bible to fit their twisted agenda-the simple go outside of doctrines for support-re:post #11, “The Sacrament of Christ in the Eucharist speaks more loudly than the inanimate words in a book - even the Bible, which is a way, not The Way, who is Christ himself.”

    “...inanimate words in…the Bible…not the Way…

    in·an·i·mate–adjective 1. not animate; lifeless. 
    2. spiritless; sluggish; dull.

    Please Ron Smith, keep talking. People need to understand the mind of the Socialist Liberals. The ones that rule over Europe.

    Europe Socialist European Rulers remove God permanently from Europe:

  25. Gary Morrow, Dahlonega, Georgia. USA Says:

    re:24, If they can’t find Scripture

    I know, I know…my English is bad, but hey, I am a Southern American—I can’t even speak the Kings English.

  26. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:

    To Mark & Ron:

    It never ceases to amaze me how you inevitably always switch your program to the ordination of women to get away from the homosexual, gay, lesbian, transvestite stuff.  Talk about throwing up smokescreens.

    Back to Scripture and the Supremacy of Scripture.  Please show me in the Holy Bible (not some book) where it states that homosexual, Lesbian, transvestite, etc. acts are good in the eyes of God…........You Cannot! 

    Unfortunately for your arguments, it is clear in Scripture where arguments against such acts are stated.  We do not need to point them out to you, after all, you have read them enough times trying to figure out just how you can blow enough smoke to make things go your way.

    Take the Eucharist from a homosexual or lesbian priest ~ Not likely.  Scripture tells us in Ezekiel that whatever unholy hands touch becomes unholy also….not a chance.  I will leave the Church before I will do that.

    It is good to see the Diocese of Sydney standing tall on the Supremacy of Scripture.  Do not falter Sydney, Global South, Southern Cone.  Press on towards the Prize.  Do not be misled by the wolves in Sheeps clothing who call themselves TEC and the Anglican Church of Canada and the European Revisionists.

    It would do Mark and Smith both good to read   2 Peter 2:10-16 and then go on to Jude and read it completely.  In those two letters are enough words to keep wanderers straight and happy.  Also, 1 John 2:16-17 says “For everything in the world—the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does—comes not from the Father but from the world.  The world and its desires pass away, but the man who does the will of God lives forever.”

    Hmmmmm ~ anyone out there interested in eternity?

  27. Father Ron Smith Says:

    Gerry, you just asked “Is anyone out there interested in eternity? Good Question! And those of us who embrace the theology of the faith once delivered through Christ in the New Testament, definitely are.

    “I tell you solemnly, if you do not eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you will not have life in you. Anyone who does eat my flesh and drink my blood has eternal life, and I shall raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood lives in me and I live in him.

    “As I, who am sent by the living Father, myself drawe life from the Father. so whoever eats me will draw life from me. This is the bread come down from heaven; not like the bread our ancestors ate: they are dead, BUT ANYONE WHO EATS THIS BREAD WILL LIVE FOR EVER” (Jn. 6:53-58)

    These words from the Gospel of Saint John (the Theologian) are God’s Word being ‘made flesh’ by Christ, and in Christ, for all who believe in him and do what he asks of us in this passage.

    In the Eucharist, we have an anamnesis - a Greek word meaning ‘ever-presence’ of Christ - bringing the past, present and future together in the Sacrament of Christ’s (and therefore God’s) love.

    This Eucharistic (Thanksgiving) element of the re-enacting of the Last Supper, sanctioned by Our Lord Himself on the day before his Crucifixion, is already the promise of Eternal Life - given to us by no less than the Son of God. This liturgy
    (work) is the highest ongoing worship we can offer to God, through his Son, Jesus Christ.

    That this sacrament of Jesus was the only act of worship instituted by Christ, and should be at the heart of Christian worship - is a fact known in the whole of the Catholic and Apostolic Church, whose practise of the Liturgy is central to our life and witness.

    This is why the Anglican Hymn Book states that Jesus provided the ‘one true, pure, immortal sacrifice’ for the sins of the whole world. It is on the basis of Christ’s sacrifice alone that humanity (identified with Christ Incarnate) in his human life-time, is now united with Christ in his death and resurrection.

    The Eucharistic celebration, therefore is now the ‘Eternal Moment’ bringing Our Lord’s Death, Resurrection and Glorification into perspective, and with it, the experience of eternal life in the here and now of our lives. This is one of the reasons why it is normally clebrated with all the dignity at our disposal - with the preaching of the Word in the Presence of the Word-made-flesh, and in response to the command of Christ.

    “The Kingdom of Heaven is among you” - Jesus

  28. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:

    Smith:  From the Book of Jude

    4 For certain men have crept in unnoticed, who long ago were marked out for this condemnation, ungodly men, who turn the grace of our God into lewdness and deny the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ.

    Old and New Apostates
    5 But I want to remind you, though you once knew this, that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. 6 And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; 7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
    **8 Likewise also these dreamers defile the flesh, reject authority, and speak evil of dignitaries. 9 Yet Michael the archangel, in contending with the devil, when he disputed about the body of Moses, dared not bring against him a reviling accusation, but said, “The Lord rebuke you!” 10 But these speak evil of whatever they do not know; and whatever they know naturally, like brute beasts, in these things they corrupt themselves. 11 Woe to them! For they have gone in the way of Cain, have run greedily in the error of Balaam for profit, and perished in the rebellion of Korah.
    12 These are spots in your love feasts, while they feast with you without fear, serving only themselves. They are clouds without water, carried about[c] by the winds; late autumn trees without fruit, twice dead, pulled up by the roots; 13 raging waves of the sea, foaming up their own shame; wandering stars for whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever.
    14 Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men also, saying, “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints, 15 to execute judgment on all, to convict all who are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have committed in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.”
    16 These are grumblers, complainers, walking according to their own lusts; and they mouth great swelling words, flattering people to gain advantage. 17 But you, beloved, remember the words which were spoken before by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ: 18 how they told you that there would be mockers in the last time who would walk according to their own ungodly lusts. 19 These are sensual persons, who cause divisions, not having the Spirit.

    “The Lord rebuke you!”

  29. Father Ron Smith Says:

    “Alas for you Pharisees, you who pay your tithe of mint and rue and all sorts of garden herbs and overlook JUSTICE and the LOVE of GOD! These you should have practised without leaving the others undone”.................(Luke 11:42)

    When Jesus left the house, the scribes and the Pharisees began a furious attack on him and tried to force answers on him on innumerable questions, setting traps to catch him out in something he might say. (Luke 11:53,54)

    A New Commandment I give to you, said Jesus,  That you love one another as I have loved you. By this, shall men know you are my disciples, that you have love one for another!!

    All of these words are from the Gospel, the Good News of our Lord Jesus Christ, who came into this world to save sinners, like you and me, Gerry!

    “I came not into this world to save the righteous but sinners”  - Jesus

    Walk the walk, not just ‘talk the talk’.
    Mishpat (Hebrew for Peace and Justice)

    Where Charity and Love are - there is God!

  30. Fr Mark Says:

    Oh dear, we’ve got some real old-fashioned Puritan Bible-bashing going on here. Which is fine in its place, but remember that place is not the Anglican Church. We were suppressed by the Puritans during Cromwell’s Protectorate, and, thank goodness, most of the Puritans then left the country at the Restoration in 1660. Puritanism is not pleasant: it always ends up in holier-than-thou finger-pointing, as some of these posts indicate. In turn, this leads to witch-hunting: the next stage from that is witch-burning. If you want to be a Puritan, that’s fine by me, but please don’t then claim to be an Anglican. Anglicanism has always been characterised by its stress on reason, and has always been broad and inclusive when compared to the other major denominations: that is our particular charism, our “niche” in the market, if you like. So, if you are really interested in biblical fundamentalism, you will never be happy with the Church of England, and should probably look more towards the Southern Baptists. But please do not tell me, an English Anglican, that I have to subscribe to a literalist view of Scripture, as I simply don’t accept that intellectually.
    Someone earlier made a point about vestments and the 39 Articles. The famous Ornaments Rubric in the Book of Common Prayer sai, if I remember rightly, that the ornaments in use in the Church of England were to remain those used in the second year of King Edward VI. That means candles, incense, bells, full Eucharistic vestments.

  31. Gary Morrow, Dahlonega, Georgia. USA Says:

    RE: Posting # 30. I think it is time to send African missionaries to Europe.

    Mark states, “But please do not tell me, an English Anglican, that I have to subscribe to a literalist view of Scripture, as I simply don’t accept that intellectually.”


    You see people, the intellectual Elite’s knowledge, does not allow them to accept the strict Word, Laws, and Commandments of God. They are just far too superior-enlightened. Modern education from Socialist Liberal elites, guarantee a more superior intellect than of God, Jesus, and the Apostles—the Bible.

    “...literalist view of Scripture[in other words, there are hundreds of way to interpret a Scripture, for example, when God commanded that Man shall not lieth with man as he lieth with woman;it is abomination—that could be interpreted to mean to lie down and go to sleep to get some rest].”

    “...literalist view of Scripture.”

    Main Entry:  literal
    Part of Speech:  adjective
    Definition:  exact
    Synonyms:  accurate, actual, apparent, authentic, bona fide, close, critical, faithful, genuine, gospel, methodical, natural, not figurative, ordinary, plain, real, scrupulous, simple, strict, true, undeviating, unerring, unexaggerated, unvarnished, usual, veracious, verbal, verbatim, veritable, written

    Antonyms:  figurative, loose, metaphorical

    Did you get that people—Mark and Ron come before God with a figurative, loose, metaphorical interpretation of God’s Word, Laws, and Commandments—non-Puritan, non-fundamentalist.

    Why have God’s Word, Laws, and Commandments if you are not going to walk the walk-why even have a Bible if you pick and chose only specific scriptures to live by-the Scriptures that don’t fit your lifestyle?

    Thank God that I am a fundamentalist. Can I get a A-men.

  32. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:

    Gary ~  AAAAAAAmen!!!

    Ron & Mark:
    I guess “Mainstream” Anglicans will be leaving you behind since the Global South and some of the European and North American and Aussies and Kiwis have chosen to follow the Supremacy of Scripture. 

    That is the true Anglican Church…..not some bent, perverted, twisted thing called TEC, etc. (Hey notice how TEC and ETC are the same letters, I guess that could mean you are all the same).

    Ronnie, you still haven’t shown me the scripture that supports the Gay, Homosexual thing as being a good thing in the eyes of God.  Til then,
    Ta La!!!

  33. Gary Morrow, Dahlonega, Georgia. USA Says:

    I’m sorry, but I just have to do this. I want people of faith to see what Socialist Liberals, Humanist rights leaders have in store for all Churches:

  34. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:

    Ron said: 
    “I came not into this world to save the righteous but sinners” - Jesus

    Walk the walk, not just ‘talk the talk’.
    Mishpat (Hebrew for Peace and Justice)

    ~~~~ True words Ron, except you leave out the part about sinners being told to “Go and Sin No More” - Jesus to the prostitute.

    Walk the walk, not just ‘talk the talk’  absolutely Ron, when are you going to start both?

  35. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:

    To Ron and Mark & the followers of the Eli system (The Mainline Churches that have forgotten the Supremacy of Scripture)

    Jesus Said in John 8:43-44 NKJV ~ 

    ” 43 Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word. 44 You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it.”

    The devil is not only a murderer but he is the one who leads us to break ALL of the commandments. He is the father of all lies and this is where the mainline, unlistening churches that follow the Eli System become confused (a work of the devil) and start following ideas, thoughts, etc that are against God’s Word.  Please don’t talk down to Believer’s of Scripture as though we know nothing.  We know plenty as do you, only we try our hardest to follow Scripture, not chew it up and spit out what we don’t want.

  36. Fr Mark Says:

    Oh dear, Gary and Gerry, you are clearly very much threatened by this whole debate. It’s really not going to work in the modern Western world to push fundamentalist views of Scripture: can’t you see that Muslim fundamentalists are doing exactly the same thing, and consequently discrediting the whole idea of faith? (Read Richard Dawkins’ “The God Delusion” if you want to see how hard-line religious people are the cause of anti-clericalism - the book contains some scary accounts of American fundamentalists, many of whom seem obsessed with other people’s sex lives.) I am not persuaded by the sort of rhetoric that blames everything on some evil liberal conspiracy and then pulls the wagons around in a circle for a final shoot-out. What I hear from you is fear and anger at a world you don’t seem to understand, one which is trying to end the long shameful history of the Christian persecution of minorities. The new Barna survey just out in the USA charts a recent massive increase in negative perceptions of Christianity among American young people. One of the main reasons they give for this negativity is the perceived homophobia of the churches in America. 91% of young Americans believe Christians are homophobic, including 80% of young churchgoers. These people are your future: if you alienate them now, you will not have much of a church at all in a generation’s time.
    I know one you lives in Georgia, so perhaps I shouldn’t be surprised, as creationism seems to be alive and well down there, but the other is in nice liberal Canada, of all places, a country which is so forward-thinking and accepting of diversity!

  37. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:

    Mark wrote:
    91% of young Americans believe Christians are homophobic, including 80% of young churchgoers. These people are your future: if you alienate them now, you will not have much of a church at all in a generation’s time.

    Gee Mark, I wonder why 91% of america’s your think Christians are homophobic…..whatever, pray tell could have got them to think that way.  I wonder, does it have anything to do with the site of gays, lesbians, transvestites, etc. being seen openly on television doing their perceived, normal thing?  Does it have anything to do with the britney spears syndrome?  Does it have anything to do with what some priests, bishops and laity who agree with the Hollywood syndrome of free sex, homosexuality, etc pushing their thinking down the unprotected throats of the youth.

    Oh, I have no doubt that the way of the world is going on it’s merry way, doing it’s thing and I also have no doubt that when Jesus Christ comes back (I personally can’t wait for that day) that there will be a terrible gnashing of teeth and roaring as one after another, people who don’t agree with Supremacy of Scripture will be shown the door to you know where (Check Revelations).

    Unfortunately the youth of america are the future of america.  That does not bode for a great future for the American or Canadian people if we continue to go the route of liberal Europe.

    The Youth are already alienated…unfortunately they have been led astray and if people like that fine southern American Gary and others don’t keep on evangelizing or whatever you want to call it, then there will be no hope whatsoever for them.

    You sense fear in me…so much for your gift of discernment Mark.  I am not afraid of you or what you represent….I do have reservations for those weak enough minded to fall for your sweet talk.  Angry….no….disgusted is a better adjective for the way I feel.

    Hope is all there is… and Faith in God the Almighty because I know that He will stand by His Word and that means All of His Word.  Amen.

  38. Gary Morrow, Dahlonega, Georgia. USA Says:

    re: posting #36.

    Just like a socialist Liberal. Trying to parallel Christians who obey God’s Laws, Word, and Commandments-the Bible, to Muslims-the Koran. Notice how this Bible-hater, or Mark who has Biblephobia, labels Muslim who cut off peoples heads, and God-obeying Chrisians as fundamentalist. This is there MO.

    Don’t let these Atheist define us, or you who stands up for God’s Laws, Word, and Commandments.

    So Mark has read Atheist Oxford biologist Richard Dawkins’ “The God Delusion”.

    So Mark spits out the garbage, or Atheist pornography he has read from Dawkins’ Book. You are doing a good job carrying the water for him, Mark.

    People, Fr Mark, and Ron Smith are Socialist Liberals who are on this site pretending to be something they are not-the are either secular Atheist, or humanist at best.

    This should expose Fr. Mark:

  39. James Jack Says:

    According to Fr Mark there will be no church at all if we don’t just roll over and agree with what society thinks on a whole range of issues, most noticeably homosexuality.

    If that were true, then you’d expect to see people flocking to churches which embrace “diversity” (that’s apparently a euphemism for practices the Bible calls sin).

    Is that the case?

    By almost any measure churches which are identified as liberal are dying. TEC is haemoraging people. Where is the growth? In Bible-based churches which teach something different to the world. They stand OUT because they stand FOR something.

    But even if Fr Mark’s hypothesis about church death seemed correct Scripture constantly reminds us that we are to please God and not men.

    It bewilders me, to be honest, how the same individual can criticise Bible-believers for being behind the times and then claim that Anglicans need to get fully robed up with all the bells and smells to take part in a ritual which he claims is necessary for salvation.

    We’re taking the Bible too literally when believe it when it says that those who commit fornication, adultery and have homosexual sex will not inherit the kingdom of God - and yet Fr Mark basis his sacramental works-based gospel on a incredibly literalistic reading of Jesus words at the last supper and in John 6??? I just don’t get it.

  40. James Jack Says:

    I do agree with Fr Mark that ranting and raving about coming judgment won’t really get anyone anywhere (that’s not to say it’s not true, you just have to read Jude and 2 Peter 2 to get an idea of that). It’s not going to convince anyone.

    On the other hand, could we also stop just pulling out that inaccurate and emotive word “homophobia” all the time (see post 15). Could somebody who wants to use the term please explain exaclty what you mean by it? Is someone who thinks that homosexual sex is sinful automatically homophobic? I think that homosexual sex is wrong, but I do not run away in fear or form a lynch mob if I see a gay man approaching - I work with and minister to a number of homosexual people and I doubt any would say that I was “homophobic” in the proper definition of the term. Yet they also know I think it is sinful, just like my colleagues who fornicate know that I think that is wrong. I don’t keep harping on about it - instead I keep harping on about Jesus and his offer of free forgiveness.

    I think lying is a sin. Am I then lyophobic? Am I advocating the villifcation of liars?

    If we use the reasoning about “homophobia” then we can never encourage anyone to repent of anything because then we’d be condemning them and making them feel unwelcome in our churches.

    What rubbish! Jesus had tax collectors and prostitutes following him around because he welcomed them AND called them to transformation and repentance.

    If someone is not prepared to change their lifestyle in obedience to God then it demonstrates a lack of faith. Christians who actively try to believe all the teachings of the Bible are often accused or arrogance. But how arrogant is it to say that modern society knows better than the Word of God? How arrogant is for someone to say “I’ll be a Christian, but only on my terms.”

    Let’s humbly submit to God and to each other.

  41. Gary Morrow, Dahlonega, Georgia. USA Says:

    A-men, don’t stop now James Jack-you are on a roll. James Jack-kinda rhymes. Jesse James

  42. Gary Morrow, Dahlonega, Georgia. USA Says:

    Just when you thought that Socialist Liberals where finished with perversional ideas—just read an article about, MAASTRICHT, Netherlands, Oct. 11 (UPI)—The University of Maastricht in the Netherlands is awarding a doctorate to a researcher who wrote a paper on marriages between humans and robots.

    David Levy, a British artificial intelligence researcher at the college, wrote in his thesis, “Intimate Relationships with Artificial Partners,” that trends in robotics and shifting attitudes on marriage are likely to result in sophisticated robots that will eventually be seen as suitable marriage partners.

    Have you ever noticed that it is Socialist Liberals that get awards, NOBEL, for new kooky perverted Socialist Liberal ideas-Socialist handing out awards to Socialist.

    Soon, fundamentalist will be called robosexualphobic. Don’t think it can’t happen. Homophobic was their launching pad to secure no human limitation into the realm of sexual insanity.

  43. Gary Morrow, Dahlonega, Georgia. USA Says:

    Think about this for a moment- a doctorate writing a paper on marriages between humans and robots.

    I wonder who got a doctorate for writing a paper on marriages between two men, or two women.

    Maybe, some Socialist Liberal Bishop could write a paper on marriages between humans, and goats, sheep, dolphins, dogs, etc.

  44. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:

    Dear Father Mark ~ I have always wondered why some priests insist on being called and on calling themselves “Father”. 

    Now, I’m not trying to be smart here because I really don’t know but I’m not convinced that there is anywhere in Scripture that says such is to be done.  If I am correct on that point, then the term “Father” is something that man has bestowed on himself to help lift up his level of self respect and respect of others for him.

    To me, I always figured I had two Fathers and Two Fathers only….(1) my fleshly father adn (2) My Heavenly Father.  That leaves me wondering why should I address Ron or Mark as Father. 

    Perhaps one of you so learned men could enlighten me as to why I should address you as “Father”.

    Oh Yes, by the way, Canada is unfortunately becoming a very liberalistic country which I think is a real shame and a sham.  We have an Anglican Church that is going the same way as TEC and we have youth that is being led astray by the “idiot box” (TV for those who don’t recognize the term) and by what is being spit out by the free wheeling free sex, sexual revolution supporters.  My country is in a mess with it; the USA is in a mess with it; Europe is in a real mess with it and so are many other areas of the world.  Thank God for Global South, that’s all that I can say.

  45. Gary Morrow, Dahlonega, Georgia. USA Says:

    In Northern Michigan, Everybody is God:

    Hey Gerry, this is the smoking kook gun!

  46. Fr Mark Says:

    Gerry, if you want to see what a real mess of a society is, you need to live for a while in a developing country, as I have done. Then, when you experience every kind of rampant corruption, high mortality rates and appalling leadership, you will be grateful for Western values, believe me, one of which is honest articulation of sexuality. Beyond that, I don’t think there’s really much point in me addressing the ungrammatical ravings of Gerry and Gary. If some evil socialist liberal European atheist monster conspiracy is about to whisk them off before the Rapture, I’ll leave them to their Tolkienesque fantasising until then.
    To James, though, who does seem to be able to enter into rational discourse: I suppose homophobia is used as the equivalent of “racism” or “sexism” to mean discriminatory/ derogatory treatment of people on the basis of their sexuality. If you ever hear someone say “I’m not a racist, but…” then they generally are. As a white middle class man, I didn’t understand the insidious way racism operates until I took time to listen to the experiences of a black friend growing up in the UK in the 70s. The countless small knocks that person had to learn to deal with on a daily basis shocked me, and I realised how naive and unaware I had been of what so many people have to cope with, and shouldn’t have to. I think gay people are a parallel group: many of them suffer a great deal from angry hate-filled men venting violent language (and worse) at them. Bullying, even lynching, of gay people is endemic across the world, even in Western countries. (Watch Brokeback Mountain: the author of the book said that after the film was released, she began to get masses of heart-rending correspondence from across North America from men saying “You have told my story.”) When this violence and anger comes at them in the name of Christianity, I think that is inexcusable, scandalous behaviour that churchpeople have a duty to resist. The anger that even some of the postings here display is frightening, and I think we Christians need to courageously distance ourselves from it. Hating people, even under the guise of self-righteousness, is NOT Christian. It is very strange, because gay people are such an unthreatening group: by their nature, they are hardly likely to take over the world, which is already overpopulated anyway. What we see is merely the need to point the finger at someone different and say “I thank God I’m not as bad as he is” (See the parable of the Pharisee and the tax-collector in Luke 18).
    With regard to Catholic ritual, yes it does seem weird that a liberal might think it important, I imagine. I suppose it’s to do with a sacramental life that reflects the fullness of God’s world. I was brought up in an Evangelical church, and always found it so dull and unsensual, all those dire choruses and ugly buildings. I don’t think Catholic ritual is going to attract everyone, and I’m not bothered whether it does, but it works for me, and is open to all.

  47. Gary Morrow, Dahlonega, Georgia. USA Says:

    I don’t know where to begin; this man is all over the map.

    re:posting 46, states, “Watch Broke Back Mountain”

    Yelp, this is a sick puppy. Here we have a so-called Father Mark watching the perverted rape of the Marlboro Man.

    Someone always trying to make the Western White Man feel guilty about something.

    Try this bonehead. There is still slavery today in Africa, Middle East, and in Haiti. This slavery in not in the hands of White people, and there has always been slavery in Africa. This you will not learn in White guilt government schools.

    There are no homosexuals per se in Iran because they are murdered by brown people [I know, political incorrect to state the truth].

    There are more blacks in America killed by blacks ‘each year’ by blacks than the total number of blacks killed by Whites during and after slavery.

    There are more Whites Murdered in Ameria by Blacks than by Whites[I bet your White guilt would not let you say this].

    No one race owns the corner of slavery, all races have been in slavery-get over it and stop trying to pin it on White people-whites, Asian, Blacks, Browns, etc have been in slavery.

    There where over a million whites in slavery at Tripoli in the 1700’s by brown people.

    Get over your White Liberal Guilt.

    Premise: “It is very strange, because gay people are such an unthreatening group: by their nature…”. I am so glad that this White Liberal brought this up. They do it over and over again. It is time to bury the pristine homosexual:
    I can give you more links of homosexuals killing heterosexual if you want?

    ...unthreatening group…, really, I can remember in the 70’s when homosexuals where spreading aids in metropolitan communities at an alarming rate because of their so-called drive-by unthreatening group sex, and unlimited number of sexual partners, that resulted in the rampant spread of all kinds of communicable diseases—today as well.
    Homosexuals are performing drive-by single and group sex in parks, local restrooms, rest-stops, airport bathrooms, etc. with stranger on stranger.
    This so-called unthreating groups behavior has resulted in the spread of various forms be diseases such as AIDS (need proof-go to the Center for Decease Control (CDC) and look it up. The deceases are nothing less than human ““torture”” on the human body. I have seen an AIDS patient suffering with AIDS, and it isn’t a pretty site-a slow death. Unthreating groups-right, it is a group of immoral decay within a society.

    Premise:” As a white middle class man, I didn’t understand the insidious way racism operates until I took time to listen to the experiences of a black friend growing up in the UK in the 70s.”
    You need to go and talk to some black and brown people and you may find that some of these people are racist as well. Make sure you understand the classical definition of racist-not the new politically correct definition. Racist means that a race think that it is “superior” to another race.

    Premise: “I think gay people are a parallel group: many of them suffer a great deal from angry hate-filled men venting violent language (and worse) at them…”
    You cannot parallel how people are and have been treated by how the sun reflects off of a person’s skin, to how people perform animalist sex acts with one another-you are insulting all people of all races who have been under slavery.

    Premise: “The countless small knocks that person had to learn to deal with on a daily basis shocked me…”
    Maybe you should get out more-every human being goes through small knocks and some people go through large knocks. For example, ugly, thin, fat, one-armed, long-nose, short, tall, white, black, brown, yellow, smelly, no-teeth, beautiful (people jealous of beautiful people), poor, rich, no-legs, wheelchair bound, bald, etc. people.

    Premise: “If some evil socialist liberal European atheist monster conspiracy is about to whisk them off before the Rapture…”
    I suppose Hitler doesn’t count (NAZI) National ‘‘Socialist’’ German Workers’ party of Germany killed a lot of homosexuals.

    “Bullying, even lynching, of gay people is endemic across the world, even in Western countries.”
    Please give me the list of lynching of gay people in White Western Countries, because I know you mean White when you say Western. Your White Liberal guilt is showing again. Boy, you have been indoctrinated with White quilt-that is the best way for Muslims to conquer Europe, and they will with you spineless attitude. For example, Muslims say they feel offended by the story of the three little pigs, and Europe jumps to change the story to the three little calves.

    Premise: “The anger that even some of the postings here display is frightening, and I think we Christians need to courageously distance ourselves from it.”
    Standing firm with the word of God is not anger.
    God had his commandments and instructions pertaining to human sexual behavior, and informing people of God’s Word, Laws, and Commandments is not anger, but mandated by God.
    No one here is requesting that homosexual be killed, but informed of God’s, Law, Word, and Commandments. Christians are not killing people engaged in perverted sexual lifestyles-go and sin no more.

  48. Fr Mark Says:

    Matthew Shephard is a widely-reported example of a young gay men lynched recently in the USA on account of his sexuality. Pastor Fred Phelps has a lot to say about why he deserved it over on YouTube.
    Gary, your offensiveness speaks eloquently of how Neanderthal Christian homophobia is.

  49. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:

    Perhaps you should contact Rev. Mario Bergner of Wheaton, Illinois.  I think he might be able tohelp you get over yourself and to deal with where some of us are coming from.

    I don’t hate gays…..I hate what it is that the gay, lesbian, transvestite, transexual persons do…Why do I hate that…because it is sin.

    One of my dear friends has his son in hospital at this time in the terminal stages of AIDS.  I pray for this young man daily and I pray against the illness that has put him where he is.  Ask his father how he feels about AIDS and teh gay lifestyle….you would get the same answers as I have given to you.

    I have been to Africa Mark and I have seen much of what goes on in the third world.  That is not an excuse for what is going on in TEC, Anglican Church of Canada, etc.  Ask the Christians in Africa what they think…..THEY ARE ALREADY TELLING YOU….Some of the Christians in that continent and other parts of GS are Anglicans who know the Truth….not anglicans who are trying to promote a new false truth…..

    Again Mark and Smith, don’t come down on people who recognize the supremacy of Scripture with your new world revisionist junk….it won’t work now and it won’t work in the future.

    Broke back mountain…..something that is helping to break the back of a great country called the USA.  Everything that the USA represented for many decades, even two centuries is dissipating into oblivion because of the new world agendas of love in your world means sex ~ in mine it leans more away from sexual love towards loving God and loving ALL that He commands of us.

  50. Fr Mark Says:

    My advice to you is to pick some different sins of other people to have a go at them for. Reading Leviticus should give you a nice long list (don’t forget to get equally worked up about wearers of mixed-fibre garments; and please stone a few adulterous women to death). Alternatively, just concentrate on getting angry about the sins that you yourself are most prone to, and leave God to deal with other people’s.

  51. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:

    Good advice Mark, however, it seems that the issue here is Supremacy of Scripture AND that my friend covers all of Leviticus and the other 65 Books of the Holy Bible.

    It seems to me Mark that this website was designed to let the people of Global South and other Believers World Wide know what is going on in the worldwide Anglican Communion.

    You and I both are doing our part…..Your part is against what Global South and Gary, James Jack and I and multitudes of others who don’t write on it how they feel.

    Seems to me that your efforts would be better spent vocalizing on some website where most people would like to read your junk mail.

  52. Gary Morrow, Dahlonega, Georgia. USA Says:

    For America, it boils down to this-because of the U.S. Constitution, and Bill of Rights reminding of our Governments of some of our rights, one of them being freedom of Religion, Socialist Liberals no longer can put Christians heads on polls, martyr, imprison, for our faith in the Word, Laws, and Commandments of God, so Socialist Liberals have decided to infiltrate our Churches with Social Liberalism to dillute, and destroy everything we Christians thought we believed by the creeping in of UnGodly men, and women turning the Grace of God into lasciviousness-Father Mark, Ron Smith, Schori, Susan Russell, Williams, etc.

    They mock God’s Word, Laws, and Commandments as homophobic, out-dated, hatefull, foolishness, wicked, unenlightened, old-fashion, prehistoric, etc, but all of this will never change the Word, Laws, and Commandments of God-this to shall pass.

  53. Fr Mark Says:

    I can hear the foaming at the mouth from you two. I thought, however, we were discussing Anglican issues here. I can’t believe either of you are actually Anglican, are you? You sound as if you must be from some extreme fundamentalist sects. I am an Anglican priest, and have spent time in the Global South, which, by the way, includes such liberal Anglican churches as the South African one, so I don’t feel any need to disappear, either from this site or from my own Anglican Church. I want to make sure the intolerant fundamentalists don’t take it over.

  54. Gary Morrow, Dahlonega, Georgia. USA Says:

    God did not, nor does not tolerate Wolves such as Mark, Smith, Schori, Russel, in his Churches, and the God fearing men of the Churches need to push you pervert pushing Liberals out. Any person pushing homosexuality is not a Christian-you are a Gentile:

    28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, whereof the holy Ghost hath made you Overseers, to (g) feed the Church of God, which (h) he hath purchased with (i) that his (*) own blood.
    (g) To keep it, to feed it, and govern it. (h) A notable sentence for Christ’s Godhead; which sheweth plainly in his person, how that by reason of the joining together of the two natures in his own person, that which is proper to one is spoken of the other being taken in the derivinative, and not in the primitive; which in old time the godly fathers termed a communicating or fellowship of proprieties, that is to say, a making common of that to two, which belongeth but to one. (i) This word, That sheweth the excellency of this blood.
    (*) That which appertaineth to the humanity of Christ, is here attributed to his divinity, because of the communion of the proprieties, and union of the two natures in one person.
    29 (9) For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.
    (9) A prophecy of pastors that should straightway degenerate into wolves against such as boast and brag only of a succession of person.
    30 Moreover of your own selves shall men arise speaking (*) perverse things, to (k) draw disciples after them.
    (*) Through their ambition, which is mother of all heresy and wickedness.
    (k) This is a great misery, to want the presence of such a shepherd, but greater to have wolves enter in.

  55. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:

    Mark wrote:  “I want to make sure the intolerant fundamentalists don’t take it over.”

    I guess that means you are fighting against more than a couple of simple folks like Gary and I Mark.  I guess that means your fight is against Archbishop Akinola and all the others outside of free wheeling South Africa.  I’m quite sure that you might have difficulty being posted into a church in Nigeria or Uganda or Kenya or perhaps even Sydney or Hong Kong.

    I think you may be biting off more than you can chew when you take on Global South Mark.  I hear you accusing me of foaming at the mouth but you know what….I’m not.  I am not the wolf is sheeps clothing.  I am not pushing non fundamentalist theory (yes theory) at people who don’t want it AND I am not speaking out telling people that they should break God’s Commandments.
    If I’m not mistaken, that is what you and smith and Jeffers-Schorri are doing.

    Am I an Anglican?  Yes, have been likely for more years than you…..One of the first priests that I remember was one of the forerunners of your craft….that is breaking the Church apart…He thought that throwing dice (Playings craps) was better for the Youth on sunday nights at Youth Group than learning Scripture.  Maybe there is a similarity somewhere in there to what you are promoting.  Angry…Nope..just want to stand up for God’s Holy Word….when are you doing that?

    Your agenda and that of your cohorts is moving right along and without people fighting against it, it will succeed…that is why I fight..I fight to try and ensure that young people at least know that someone cares enought about God’s word to stand up for it. 

    Why not tell us where your home parish is now Mark.  You must be sure enough of yourself to at least do that much.

  56. 1`Barbara de Weever Says:

    How uninformed you are! Yes, Matthew Shepard,a gay man,was beaten to death by two young men. ONE OF THEM WAS ALSO GAY. The gays did not want that to be known at the time, because they wanted to use the crime as an example of a hate crime. Turns out it was not a hate crime at all as was recently revealed. It was done for some other reason drugs, if I remember correctly.See how they propangandize! See how they lie to push forward their cause and their agenda. The truth is not in them!

  57. Gary Morrow Says:

    re:posting #56-Bingo-you hit the target dead on.

    The perverted Socialist Liberal news media put out only what they think will push their agenda.

    The media never reported how Jesse Dirkhising was totured by these perverted homosexuals fullfilling their perverted fantasies on a 13 year old heterosexual boy. That would not fit their template to push the homosexual agenda on Americas. The media tries to tie White Liberal quilt of slavery to quilt for homosexuals perverted causes. They do this by trying to find any minute crime on a homosexual and splash the crime on the news day and night for months to garner sympathy for the homosexuals. The media could care less that Matthew Sheppard was killed because of robbery-that did not fit their agenda for another victim of homosexual crime.

    There where Mathew Shepard memorials and aniverseries every year for years, but total silence on the heterosexual 13 year old boy.

    There are not many people who really knew what happend to Matthew Shepard-I am glad that you, Posted by 1`Barbara de Weever know the truth.

    How many of you have heard of Jesse Dirkhising ?

    May he rest in peace and never be forgotten:

  58. James Jack Says:

    Glad somebody likes my name - thanks Gary!

    Also, thanks to Fr Mark for your reasoned response to my question about homophobia.

    On your definition of “discriminating” against homosexuals then I suppose the vast majority of people even in western societies are homophobic. For even when people accept that homosexual sex is morally neutral, most still do object to homosexuals adopting children, for example. Polls have demonstrated this in Australia - I can only guess the USA is similar.

    Still, discrimination is not always wrong. We discriminate against 10 years by not allowing them to drink alcohol or drive a car -for their protection and ours! Discrimination can be logical, moral and necessary. We discriminate against thieves by charging them with crimes. To discriminate just means to treat differently, and God treats people differently all the time. Even if you don’t accept the Biblical injunctions against homosexual sex then you’ve still go to admit that God discriminates against homosexuals - he made it so they cannot reproduce!

    I think we often use the term “discrimination” to refer to treating people differently in a way that is unfair, unwarrented and morally unjustifiable. On these grounds, treatment of homosexuals and whether it is discrimination all comes back to whether we think homosexual sex itself is morally neutral or sinful. Having said that, all Christians need to repudiate in the strongest terms violence against homosexuals. But just become some misuse the Bible’s teachings on sex to justify their own violent behaviour does not mean that Bible’s teachings have no value.

  59. James Jack Says:

    I think a good way to test whether is Christian is actually “homophobic” or not is to see what their attitude to heterosexual sexual sin is.

    Do they have the same anger against those who have sex before and outside of marriage? Is that just as repulsive and sinful to them as homosexual sex?

    In Australia at the moment we are having a debate over whether homosexual couples should have the same legal rights to superannuation and other such things as defacto couples. Myself, I don’t see why not, if we accept that non-married cohabitation should be legally recognised. I think it’s incredibly inconsistent for Christians to attack homosexual couple’s legal standing while being silent on the rights of fornicators. My position is that there should be no legal recognition for relationships where people are no willing to commit to each other in marriage - that is, marriage between a man and a woman. I realise that this would put certain individuals at risk of defactor partners leaving them with nothing, but this needs to be weighed against the damage done to children, family stability and relationships that the advocacy of defactoism has caused.

    Sorry about that tangent - back to homophobia. The other test for homophobia I have is one’s attitude toward a person who is attracted to members of the same sex but who commits to celibacy due to a desire to please God. Is there a fear and loathing directed toward that person? Or are they encouraged and upheld and loved all the more for the fact that have so obviously “died to themselves” to follow Christ?

    I think the Bible’s teaching on sex is fairly simple, in the end. Sex within marriuge, and celibacy outside of marriage - whomever one is attracted to.

  60. 1`Barbara de Weever Says:


    I think we in America may be viewing this whole subject of homosexuality through the prism of our Puritan forefathers, and nothing is wrong with that! But we are forgetting that Great (?) Britain has long enjoyed the notorious reputation of being a nation which has, ever of old, indulged itself greatly in these practices being second only to the Greeks. Their boarding schools are known to be breeding grounds for this activity and its original loci operandi. Why, there have been bishops and archbishops, priests and deacons who perhaps haven’t lived openly with same-sex partners,but as rumor would have it, their proclivities are legendary. No wonder ++A would welcome Gene Robinson with open arms—- and I hope sincerely only arms. Robinson fits right in with the rest of the crowd! What’s strange about that?

    Gays protest that if one objects to same-sex marriage and the ordination and consecration of gay priests one is homophobic. Gay people object strenuously to labeling but look how free they feel to brand people who disagree with them. The activist element of the gay community, that is!

    In my extended family (which is huge)there are members who are gay, as one might expect in a large family. We do not hate them, we have never rejected them, we do not criticize their lifestyle and we do not condemn them—-that’s God’s job, not ours. Their intimate behavior is a matter of conscience and between themselves and God. They are our flesh and blood, part of our ourselves and we do love them. Similarly, I have gay friends. One man and his partner just became parents of triplets through a surrogate mother. I attended the(naked) babies’ baptism in the local basilica cathedral. Nobody anticipates that the Catholic Church will bless their parents’ union let alone marry them. Their fathers have their hands full and I wish them well. In America they have a right to pursue happiness like anybody else. My concern for the children is how the world will treat them for coming from a different family structure. Also, the lesbian daughter of a dear friend just gave birth to a son conceived by artificial insemination. I have similar concerns about the manner in which he will be treated at school. Those are familial and societal concerns. All of the children are gorgeous! The triplets look like my friend and his mother and carry his surname. The little boy is the spitting image of his mother’s brother as a baby and carries her name. I think that is good if the parents ever part ways. In turn, these people have never forced their credo upon me, live quiet daily lives minding their own business and doing the best they can. 

    What people do as individuals living in a society is nobody’s business, as long as they are not breaking the law. What we are doing here is discussing whether our church should be blessing and sanctifying that which is proscribed by the Bible. As Christians we are required to follow the rules laid down by our faith, thereby abiding by our baptismal and confirmation vows. If we don’t like those mandates we are free to leave. Instead, we are being bullied to accept what is anethema to our beliefs. What good is a church if it refuses to abide by its own teachings and doctrine? Pretty sorry and desperate for validation I would say. In the eyes of the world we are being viewed as having lost our rudder in the stormy seas of dissent and appear to be either insane or inept or both. At the very least we are seen as confused or suffering from dementia. Deservedly so!

    I have been cursed as being both conservative and liberal by different people. I have lived long enough not to be frightened by hateful people, so labels do not matter.I see no hope for resolving this crisis—a split is inevitable. Where I will go has not been yet decided but this I’ll say. The corruption and wickedness in the TEC is more than I stand. The church has become most irrelevant to my life and wellbeing. The practice of religious rites can be done alone or with two or three gathered together. All I need from this point forward is for a clergman to commit my ashes to the grave. I have enough ordained relatives in various denominations who may vie for the honour to do so. As the OT sage observed “I would rather be the gatekeeper at the house of the Lord than dwell in the tents of wickedness.” In my case I would substitute the word “palaces” for “tents.”

          Oh Lord save thy people and bless thy heritage
          Govern them and lift them up forever…

    Peace and comfort. Goodbye.

  61. Gary Morrow, Dahlonega, Georgia. USA Says:

    re:post #60 Barbara states, “One man and his partner just became parents of triplets through a surrogate mother. I attended the(naked) babies’ baptism in the local basilica cathedral. Nobody anticipates that the Catholic Church will bless their parents’ union let alone marry them. Their fathers have their hands full and I wish them well. In America they have a right to pursue happiness like anybody else.”

    So much blasphemy in this one paragraph—I don’t know to begin.

    “One man and his partner just became parents…”
    Barbara has been indoctrinated and is spewing out the what the Social Liberal revisionist had hope for-that two men would be labeled a “parents”. The revisionist have won with her in redefining parent. God’s will and purpose was that “parents” was to be one man and one woman joined in marriage.

    “Nobody anticipates that the Catholic Church will bless their parents’ union let alone marry them.”

    There she goes again. She has redefined parents as one man and one man joined in a union or a marriage. If the Catholic Church does bless them as parents, we can bless the Catholic Church to hell-God is the head of the Churches not man-his will be done on earth…”

    God has never joined two men, nor has God unionized two men for partners.

    “...triplets through a surrogate mother…”
    I am sure that this is one of God’s purpose in Genesis-to create Children for same-sex perversions to make perverts happy by using God’s Children as pawns to make man’s perverted minds and fantasies happy-Man’s plans,not God’s plans.

    “Their fathers have their hands full and I wish them well.”
    Their(Children use as pawns for perverted human social experimentation) fathers—no we have fathers redefined(revisionist) not as fathers from different marriages, but fathers being defined as two men engaged in sodomy with innocent children falsely being used to created Man’s definition of family as opposed to God’s definition of father and family.

    She has been hooked boat, line, and sinker. She uses traditional definitons the way the Socialist Liberals had hope for-revision of tradition definitions.

    “Their fathers have their hands full and I wish them well.”
    She wishes them well, in othe words, she is given them her blessings. She does not condemn them for engaging in Sin against God. She wishes them well.

    “In America they have a right to pursue happiness like anybody else.”

    Pursue happiness like anybody else—what about those Childrens rights to pursue happiness the way God intended by being raised with knowing the love of a Father and a Mother. Man is denying to the Children what God had intended for Children.

    Nobody is denying these two men the right to marry women like every body else. How ironic, the Children of God have become a toy, or puppy to give happiness to man’s follies, but the Children must be made to play the games that men have invented with their worldly desires.

    God, please have mercer on these innocent children, for man has taken upon himself to build a tower to heaven made of brick that he may get himself a name-For man is playing God and has now set the rules. God, man believe your laws are no longer valid. Children will live in accordance to man’s wishes and desires. May God have mercy on our souls-A-men.

  62. Father Ron Smith Says:

    “All shall be well, all shall be well, all manner of things shall be well” - Dame Julian of Norwich - to the Church and the world.

    There is far too much frettin’ and fussin’ and hissy-fittin down in Dahlonga, and da longa I examine Morrow’s saga, da longa I wish he would just hush-up all there!

    God is LOVE, and the sooner you get this under your belt, Gary, the calmer this world will be.

  63. Gary Morrow Says:

    re: posting #62 Smith states,“God is LOVE, and the sooner you get this under your belt, Gary, the calmer this world will be[in other words, there is no right or wrong, and man should be able to do as he pleases-whatever feels good. That God and the Bible are just theories].

  64. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:

    GOD IS LOVE ~  Yes, correct

    Gee, the only thing missing is that you forget that God does not condone wrongful sex!!  Homosexual sex, transvestite sex, lesbian sex, adulterous sex is just that Ronnie…..SEX NOT   LOVE.

    God has never said in His Word that this is Love, indeed, he has openly stated that it is an ABOMINATION in the eyes of God.  How much more plain can it be for you than that? 

    My son, you are some stunned!!

    Gary has it right Smith, You’ve got it all wrong!  Now, just suppose a homosexual or a lesbian says “I want to turn away from this life and I confess this to my fellow Christians and I repent of this SIN and I ask GOD for HIS forgiveness AND I turn from my sin and will not go back to it” 
    What do you think happens then Ron? 
    They ARE forgiven; They are a part of God’s Church and WILL be accepted fully at the alter to receive The Body and The Blood.

    That my friend is it,  nothing more to say about it except, please GET IT RIGHT SMITH!  Please stop trying to shove this distorted thinking down the throats of Scripture Believing Christians.

    Oh yes and also take note of 2nd Peter 2  
    Major Ian Thomas in the book ‘If I perish, I perish’, has a great chapter on mans fleshly desires.  It is called ‘Pig is Pig’.  In it, he shows you can tidy a pig up, throw a dress on it if you like, and even allow it to eat at your dinner table.  But the fact remains that pig is pig and before long that pig will be heading back to what it enjoys the most…the mud! 

    Well, the false teachers of 2nd Peter 2 and Jude are just like that.  They might change their appearance for a while, but pig is pig and before long their desire to follow and indulge their fleshly nature will become evident.  So, enough’christianese’.  What does the Bible mean by ‘indulge their fleshly nature’?  probably the best definition is given in
    1 John 2:16-17
    “For everything in the world—the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he had and does—comes not from the Father but from the world.  The world and its desires pass away, but the man who does the will of God lives forever.”

    These same persons also Despise Authority, they are Boastful, they are up to their ears with lust and sex and they have a greed for money….Wow, does any of this sound like TEC???

    These false teachers prey on the weak, they are arrogant, they thrive on lust and they consume themselves with ownership of properties or money….Sounds like TEC to me.

  65. Father Ron Smith Says:


    “Full of sound and fury. Signifying NOTHING”  -
    - William Shakespeare

  66. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:

    Ron:  I didn’t expect that you would “Get It”.  You cannot.  We shall all pray for you that eventually you will understand the Word even when it is so blatantly spelled out for you.

  67. Grace Kelly Morrow, Dahlonega, Georgia, USA Says:

    Ron Smith

    Full of false doctrine and scripture—signifying evil—reference Holly Bible.

    I will stick with God, and you can stick with Shakespeare.

  68. Gary Morrow, Dahlonega, Georgia, USA Says:

    Ron Smith

    Full of false doctrine and scripture—signifying evil—reference Holly Bible.

    I will stick with God, and you can stick with Shakespeare.

    Correction: forgot to change posting name. My wife was dealing with an irrate(de Weever).

  69. Father Ron Smith Says:

    To Gary and Grace Kelly of Dahlonga:
    re the ‘Holly’ Bible, posts #67 @ 68:
    A timely reminder of a Christian Hymn -

    The Holly bears a prickle, as sharp as any thorn;
    But Mary bore sweet Jesus Christ on Christmas day in the morn.

    The Holly bears as berry as red as any blood.
    But Mary bore sweet Jesus Christ, to do poor SINNERS good!

    Jesus Christ came into this world to SAVE SINNERS

  70. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:

    Smith aka father Guido Sarducci—both are jokes!

    Did you hear the one about the Episcopalian priest who didn’t understand what the word sinner meant…..His name is smitty or guiddy or someting
    like that. 

    Go and sin no more…..repent..confess…turn away ron… then you won’t be the comedian you are trying so hard not to be anymore.

  71. 1`Barbara de Weever Says:

    Gee I wasn’t the irate one!
    Her Serene Highness,Grace, couldn’t control herself with righteous indignation, probaby eclipsing Jesus in that respect. And to think the vitriol began because I noted her husband is a “hell-fire Baptist”, ignoring everything else that I said.

    I have known such people well;the preachers of fire and brimstone sermons. American “Holiness” missionaries often stayed in our home during my childhood. One lady missionary even lived with us for years and didn’t allow me to attend the Anglican Church.(Too bad the best school was run by CofE!) They called down the wrath of God on the local sinners. They turned up their noses at native unwed mothers and their illegitimate children. But they couldn’t wait to get their hands and parts into poor, simple townswomen and brawny young lads! But no! They were saved and on their way to Glory. They let their victims think it was an honor to be seduced or raped by them, because it would bring them closer to God.

    And oh the gold! They broke man’s laws and got indigenous people to raid gold depositories and they smuggled precious stones and gold into the home country. But the earth is the Lord’s and as His children they were rightfully entitled to the “fullness thereof.” Native people were told it was a sin to wear their customary jewelry but the missionaries’love of gold was obscene—-the sanctified of God who are on their way to crowns of gold! Shades of Jimmy Swaggart, James and Tammy Faye Bakker et al. those hypocrites! They are all over!

    Well Princess Grace curse me if you want, you’ll do it at your own damnation if you aren’t careful! I have no use for Christians like that. Genuine Christians are humble and just, irrespective of denomination, whether they are Fundies or Catholic.

    What does it mean? We have not yet reached perfection, but we should keep praying and working towards that end.
    God save our souls.

  72. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:

    Posted by 1`Barbara de Weever on 10/21 at 03:13 AM
    “Well Princess Grace curse me if you want, you’ll do it at your own damnation if you aren’t careful! I have no use for Christians like that. Shades of Jimmy Swaggart, James and Tammy Faye Bakker et al. those hypocrites! They are all over!
    Genuine Christians are humble and just, irrespective of denomination, whether they are Fundies or Catholic.
    What does it mean? We have not yet reached perfection, but we should keep praying and working towards that end. God save our souls.”

    Dear Barbara:  If genuine Christians are humble and just, where are you?  You have judged Jimmy Swaggart (A self confessed sinner who apparently has repented and turned away from his sin); even Tammy Faye Bakker (God rest her soul), who are you to be judging them?

    I thought I had a bee in my bonnet ~ Wow, nothing like the forest fire that seems to be burning within you.  I wish you well and wellness and I hope you find both.

  73. 1`Barbara de Weever Says:

    Thank you for your good wishes Gerry. But I know what Canadians and others think of Newfies. Sounds like you are typical so I wish you the same as you wish for me. You are in need of blessing!

  74. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:

    Barbara wrote: “But I know what Canadians and others think of Newfies.”

    You know Barbara, you are so misinformed.  While I live in Newfoundland, I live here by choice.  I am a Newfie BY CHOICE having been born and brought up in Ontario (that’s Toronto to you uniformed people and Ontario to those with brains).  I have lived on the Island of Newfoundland for over 30 years of my life and what I have a challenge with is the ignorance of people who they say things like not even knowing or understanding who they are speaking of.

    “But I know what Canadians and others think of Newfies.”

    Your statement is one of uninformed ignorance and not only that it is one of arrogance of someone from somewhere else who really has no knowledge of This Island or it’s wonderful people.  I am disappointed but not surprised by your judgementalism.  Hmmmmm I bet you are bigoted towards Blacks, Reds, Yellows, Poles, Ukrainians, Romanians, and whatever else it is that you are not.

    I feel blessed to know just what kind of person would say what you have just said.

  75. Father Ron Smith Says:

    “See how these ‘Christians’ love one another?”

  76. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:

    Point well taken Ron, but at least I try (note try) to uphold ALL SCRIPTURE, not just that which suits me at any given time.  We sometimes fail in our humaness, but we try. 

    YOU ALSO express judgementalism with your last pointed words…

  77. 1`Barbara de Weever Says:

    Poor Gerry:
    I wasn’t referring to any ethnic or racial group only to geographical location. I am a member of a multi-ethnic, multi-racial family, for generations. I use no racial slurs nor do I judge people based upon ethnicity because I am many different ancestries for starters.Besides it is just plain ignorant to say nothing of being irrelevant.

    I have pictures of grandparents surrounded by family to show how far back this goes,it is not recent at all. However,recent DNA tracing has shown even more diversity than we suspected. How about Eastern China 10,000 years ago, then a long walk through the Middle East and North Africa, Europe and more to be determined? No wonder there has never been room for racism in our family.Just came back from a family reunion, both my husband and my son-in-law had never experienced a family as diverse as ours…put simply as the whole United Nations, by one cousin. You might learn a lot about tolerance from us. All faiths are represented too and we respect each other’s right to serve God honestly , sincerely in spirit and in truth. We don’t hold anyone’s conscience. As the priest told the doctor (John Rock (?))who invented the first birth control pill. “Let no man keep your conscience.” The good doctor, a devout Catholic went to mass EVERY DAY. God gave all a free will. I cannot try to violate that in any way, But I do know what Canadians think of Rufies. I have visited all over Canada but can only look down on Newfoundland when I fly to Europe.
    Have a good life.

  78. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:

    Barbara: Again in your last line you say “but I know what Canadians think of rufies. (spelling)and then I have visited all over Canada but can only look down on Newfoundland when I fly to Europe.

    Poor Barbara, you know your explanation is just about one of the most feeble I have ever seen when it comes to worming ones way out of their judmental, bigoted attitude and then you have the nerve to say “but can only look down on Newfoundland”.

    No, sorry, not poor Gerry on this one…worm on.

  79. Barbara de Weever Says:

    Well Gerry:

    I wouldn’t dignify your comment with an answer except to say no wonder I look down on Newfoundland. By the way, I never knew there was an official spelling for the name of its inhabitants. It’s so remote I couldn’t bother to check that out.

  80. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:

    “Heavenly Father, forgive us when we look down on others.  Forgive us when we bite those who bite us.  Forgive us when we deny what we have said and call others liars.  Forgive us our sins Lord, and Dear Lord, forgive me my trespasses against those who attack me.  Let me learn better Lord how to turn the other cheek.  Give me the strength and the humility Lord to forgive those who barber and weave untruths in so many areas.  I ask these things in the name of our Savior, Jesus Christ, Your Son, Amen”

  81. Barbara de Weever Says:

    That very nice prayer is for yourself isn’t it?

    It is impossible to look up at Newfoundland when flying overhead, or haven’t you realized that to see it one is compelled to look down?

    I’m giving up this blog because I am tired of the hypocritical utterances of those who call themselves Christians here with their sounding brass and tinkling cymbals. I joined expecting to find thoughtful discourse but instead I have had to read some rather vicious comments when people disagree. Unexpectedly, I found I was being increasingly drawn into defending myself against barbs, yes barbs, directed my way by using equally harsh comments.

    I have learned from all this that I do not want to associate myself with such people. No wonder devout Christians are experiencing much world-wide hostility and persecution! Yes, I believe in God and Christ but not that this generation of vipers from the bishops to the Sunday pew warmers are representative of either Divine Being. Not everyone who says “Lord, Lord” shall enter the kingdom. So get thee behind me Satan. You are in a desperate fight for my soul which you will most certainly lose in the not-too-distant future.
    You might as well tell your agents to back off! You may be mighty but God is Almighty!

    Gerry, I do not offer prayer on a blog site, like the Pharisee in the temple so others would view me as being pious. I do as Jesus asked: I go into a quiet, private place and with prayer and supplication I let my requests and confessions be known unto God alone. You have elevated yourself to the position of the omnipotent as knowing the heart of another person. I think you should be careful, but it is up to God to judge and impose sentence on you for the sin of blasphemy. You are arrogant and pompous but I find your play on my names to be nonsensical. Your aim is to hurt me but I do not hurt easily so your efforts are in vain. I have to view your exercise as the slightly amusing efforts of a child or someone who is simple minded. That person needs to be corrected or pitied and at best, deserve compassionate education.

    By the way you are the first person in my entire lifespan, all of 71 years, to call me a bigot. In that you are unique! How judgmental, but nevertheless how remarkable since you know almost nothing about me. Perhaps as you grow older you will find out a few things about life and living and yes, the tolerance and respect you so strongly proclaim and at the same time demand. By the way I am not white, thank God, so I’m not accountable by association to God for that race’s manifold transgressions against the rest of the world for the past millennia. I wish you a quiet mind and thankful heart with wish to serve your Lord.
    God’s Peace.

  82. Barbara de Weever Says:

    Correction: “I wish you a quiet mind and thankful heart with which to serve your Lord.”
    And yes. I have been to Toronto MANY TIMES (my brother and various cousins live there,)also to Stratford to the Shakespearean festival, London and Windsor Ontario. I ‘ve been to Quebec City in summer and winter (Jean Bonhomme festival) I love Montreal, and the most magical place of all in Canada Whistler B.C. and of course Vancouver and Victoria too with its wonderful climate. How uneducated about Canada would you call that? (By the way I do have a Doctor of Laws degree, what about you?) Haven’t been to prairie provinces because I now live in the Western U.S. but am not too keen on cowboy culture. Anyway good luck. As I said before “Goodbye”

  83. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:

    Dear Barbara:
    The following was your post #71 above:

    Thank you for your good wishes Gerry. But I know what Canadians and others think of Newfies. Sounds like you are typical so I wish you the same as you wish for me. You are in need of blessing!

    Posted by 1`Barbara de Weever on 10/25 at 03:39 AM

    I stand on my thoughts Barbara, your statement was judgemental and yes, even bigoted….many people in this Province of Newfoundland have been the target of similar pointed judgemental statements.  I am sorry that I had to bring your statement to the forefront, however, I could not let it pass.

    I don’t have a Doctorate in Law and don’t need one if being “highly” educated will do that for me.  Scripture speaks to such things.  I am not however, uneducated.  I have lived in four Provinces of this Great Country, have experienced the different cultures of Canada and have loved every bit of it.  In your statement of travels across Canada, you did not state that you had visited anywhere in Atlantic Canada let alone Newfoundland. 

    Barbara, I have met bigoted people that belong to different races, different tongues, different colors, these things make no differences.  To make racially directed slurs towards a people is still being bigoted.  You made such a statement towards the people of Newfoundland and that is where I take a stand for them. 

    I can and do forgive you for your statements and I pray that whatever your education is, that you will not continue to believe that it and your worldly travels will impress me, because those things do not.

    I leave with this thought for you….please do not talk down to, look down upon or make derogatory remarks about places or people in my Country or Province.

    If you choose to respond to this, it is up to you, however, I will not be drawn into this discussion again by you. 

    In Christ’s Love,

  84. Barbara de Weever Says:

    I notice that you have posted a long comment on the site. I cannot read it because I am babysitting my precious granddaughter and have left my glasses at home I can barely see to type this comment so it may be full of the misspellings you so hate. When I was an attorney for the government I did not have to worry too much about my proficiency in touch typewriting because the skillful eyes of my paralegals would be sure to catch errors if I did not before handing over the work to them.

    I am not answering what you have said for reasons stated. Before I forget, again, let me say that visiting Niagara Falls from the Canadian side was awesome! A week spent high in the Laurentians was refreshing and delightful, Not too limited a sampling of Canada with all the rest included, I would say,

    If you ate wondering how a non-white person could be as forthright as I, let me share with you a true story. My grandfather, Peter Moses de Weever was a music composer, botanist and educator among other fields of endeavor. If you want to verify the salient facts you are welcome to do so wherever such documentation is kept in England.

    In the early 1930s Grandfather was honoured for his work in music by King George V, the Queen’s grandfather. (Botany was a hobby though several species of tropical plants bear his name and he was able to grow apples and wheat in the rain forest belt.) Music was his heart.soul and life, for which he is best remembered still. When he went to England and was presented to the king he was dumbstruck by His Majesty’s exclamation, Of course the House of Windsor is not noted for its intellect anyway but that monarch could also be seen as the bigot you have accused me of being. Obviously believing he was paying Grandfather a compliment the king said he had never met a genius such as he, ?Do you realize how far you could go if the circumstances of your birth were different? What a pity it is that you were born with a black skin!You could have gone very far otherwise. How very unfortunate that Nature was so unkind to you”  My grandfather kept his composure “Yout Majesty, if I may respond: the fault therefore the pity, does not lie with an undiscriminating Nature. The pity lies. rather.with the inability for mankind to benefit because of prejudice against people such as I”
    I probably would have told His Majesty to shove his Imperial Service Medal up his royal butt.

    Now I ask you. why should I care what you think of me? But rest assured you are in good company with people in high positions in this country who have felt the barbs which are ALWAYS well deserved. I sent my fair share of criminals to jail as a prosecutor in my time, Sometimes I run into them in town and they are never hostile because they know I was fair yet compassionate in my bid to do justly and to love mercy when pleading the case for the State.

    Go in peace to serve the Lord. I don’t know if I have the time to read your comment, I always skim them for content and tone. If they are ridiculous, as some have been, I I wrote this so you might know who you were talking to, Perhaps you are intelligent enough to appreciate that, If not,
    well goof luck all the same.

  85. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:

    Dear Barbara:
    Your Grandfather was a well spoken and gentle man whose statment to The King was a truthful one.  His words stand today as they did then and if you were to really read them and then read your words about Newfoundlanders, you would realize that the people of Newfoundland could indeed reiterate your Grandfather’s words and direct them to yourself.
    Go in peace Barbara and like all of us, let us realize that while we are flesh and bones, we will continue to sin and hopefully we will continue to confess, repent and turn from our sins.

  86. Barbara de weever Says:

    I am at home and have my glasses. I see you have another rant on the blog but before reading it let me finish what I began to say yesterday.

    Had I been in my grandfather’s shoes I would have had to temper any response to His Majesty’s inadvertant(I am sure) insult. I would have used language other than I indicated to you, but the meaning would have been the same. It is impossible to refuse or decline an honor granted by one’s sovereign, I am sure and in the 1930s British racism was probably seen as quite proper. After the Brits ruled the world which was, in their view, populated by inferior beings. They could be as arrogant as they pleased, especially the king.

    I first heard that story from a member of my mother’s family. Aghast, I asked my paternal grandmother if it were true, because Grandfather died when I was a few months old so I couldn’t check with him. She confirmed it, reluctantly and with sadness. She was a lady who had great respect for ‘The Throne’, expressed affection for Queen Mary, King GeorgeVI and his family and, of course, Winnie Churchill. I do not recall such affection for the late GeorgeV. I therefore have to believe her word. They are all dead now, but the award of the ISM can be researched, as I stated.

    I have certainly told off people who, because of political appointment or election, consider themselves to be somewhere above ordinary people and therefore legends in their own minds. For example, one such official demanded that I do something which he had no statutory authority to demand. When I refused he seethed and vowed to get me. You can image my great satisfaction and relief when he was recently arrested, charged and convicted for urelated criminal activity. He is now cooling his heels in federal prison and probably doing the “humpty dance” or “tossing salads” for his fellow inmates.

    “To do justly and to love mercy” translated for me in the plea bargaining process as a win-win situation. I do not know whether that happens in the Canadian judicial system. If crafted skillfully it results in justice for the victim and the state (do justly) and mercy in punishment for offenders (love mercy) However, that depends on the circumstances of each case, but ordinarily jail time is reduced or deferred with the understanding that the threat of future incarceration will become reality if the offender violates the terms of the plea agreement. How difficult a concept is that to understand: Justice for victim, mercy for defendant? The choice of doing right remains with the defendant. That’s the law here.

    Now maybe I’ll get back to your several rants which have remained unread throughout this discussion. Maybe I won’t waste time to read them.
    Go in peace and love and serve the Lord.

  87. Barbara de Weever Says:


    I was scanning the blog looking for anything new. As I scrolled past your last comment, which I still have not read, my eye caught your comment that you realize that bigotry is not confined to any one race of people. Just in the West it’s more pronounced and far-reaching in its impact wouldn’t you say? Well, Gerry just so you know my husband is Irish and German and we wouldn’t have married and remained together all these years if either of us were a bigot. I mean, this is something we would have discovered after almost thirty years, you think?                              I also am not “pure” African, but a very exotic mix with complex racial DNA so I can’t afford to be prejudiced and have never been. Be careful throwing slurs and accusations against people you do not know. I’ve found some great people to talk on another site so you won’t hear from me anymore.  Ta ta.

    Go in peace to love and serve the Lord.

  88. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:


    I really am not concerned about your husbands racial background n’or your own.  I stand on my statement about bigotry and against your statement of such against “Newfies” which started all of this dialogue for lack of a better word.

    I know that there are bigoted people in New Mexico, in the West Indies, in south America, in Ireland, in Germany, in any country in this world.  I know that bigots come in all flavours so to speak.  I know that bigots are in every workplace whether it be in law offices, prosecutorial offices, police offices, real estate companies, whatever, it doesn’t matter.  I don’t need to talk about myself or my professional background to try to impress or unimpress, whatever. 

    May God reach down and bless you today and may He help you with the anger that is overflowing from within you.

  89. Barbara de Weever Says:

    Hi Gerry:
    I saw “what concerns me…” as I scrolled along.
    I did not know that Newfies are a race of people or an ethnic group. Thanks for enlightening me.
    What do they look like? Have they three eyes and purple skins? Or do they have umbrellas growing out of their heads, like the Conquistadors reported to Queen Isabella of Spain?

    I am not angry though I have every reason to be, considering all that I have endured in this country and at the hands of British colonials. Having triumphed over injustice I feel very proud of my accomplishments. Why should I feel differently? God has blessed me with an indomitable spirit and a brilliant mind to survive and overcome almost anything. Otherwise the viccitudes of life would have gotten to me by now. People with far minor problems have caved in. Angry? I don’t waste time on anger I just say what I think if someone tells me a load of bs. If they start it they get it.

    This world is too beautiful for me to bother with those who would do me harm, including you. I aim to enjoy it as long as I live. Maybe even go to Newfoundland if I live long enough, but it’s not high on my list of priorities. Gallapagos and Egypt are far ahead of Newfie Land. So is China, where I began 20,000 years ago. Maybe my ancestors helped build the Great Wall at some point. Had an opportunity a couple years ago but the Bird Flu scare was a deterrent. I must see the Taj Mahal to quieten my ancestral urges. Some of these sites may seem like deja vu, I think, because I’ve had such vivid dreams of being in some of these places.DNA can talk!

    Go in peace and maybe when I have nothing better to do I’ll read your stuff.

  90. Barbara de Weever Says:

    Oh-oh! I get it. In your book if somebody points out the wrongs being done by a group of people he/she is a bigot! To repeat Biblical pronouncements against homosexual behavior makes one a bigot.!For gays to label a person as a homophobe is not, because it is politically correct speech. To say Europeans did a lot of horrible things to the other people in the world,including slavery , genocide etc. makes one is a bigot. But the horror of the various holocausts must be belittled or denied, regardless of ethnicity or religious hatred. A person who protests these things when they are race-based is playing the “race card.” How typical it is of you who has perhaps not faced the horror of race-based persecution and discrimination, how typical of people like you to call victims bigots. I don’t see myself as a victim because most bigots have not bothered to get the level of education I have and are a bunch of Archie Bunkers! Poor fools. All they have is the colorof their skin and nothing in their brains.

    You know what the Dean of my cathedral said when I told him I was being discriminated against for a federal job? He was from Chicago and told me that I hadn’t experienced discrimination at all. True discrimination and prejudice was between the Poles and Germans who hated each other. What Black people faced and experienced was nothing in comparison. What do you call to that? I hadn’t ever heard of white lynchings in Illinois. Have you? The Mob is all-white and their executions aren’t race-based.

    Well what do you know about bigots except that you think I am one because I spoke of diverse natives in a PLACE in unflattering terms? Suck an egg, I hope it will be rotten.

  91. Barbara de Weever Says:


    Who is trying to impress whom? I’m not in the least bit interested in impressing someone like you. People who are impressed do so because of their knowing me, not because I set out to impress them. Frankly, I do not care as I’ve said many times. People may like me and a lot of them do. Those who don’t are insecure about themselves and somehow perceive me as a threat. But to what I do not know. Perhaps I am very comfortable in my skin and they are not. I am very happy with who I am and they might resent that, especially since I am not a white woman.

    But this thing about bigotry has my curiosity. Have you had to live with overt and subtle discrimination on a daily basis? Have you been subjected to machinations to get you out of your job after having to prove yourself day after day? Have people looked you in the face and lied about you only because they don’t like the color of your skin and lump you into some stereotype? Has prejudice affected your ability to provide, as a single parent, for the basic things of life for your children? I don’t think so, or you wouldn’t be so glib in your comments or fast in your assumptions.

    I have walked through the fire all my life and it hasn’t changed because I have three degrees and two professions. All people see is a little brown woman and draw their conclusions. Their attitudes are thinly disguised, if so. Even in shopping sales people ignore me thinking I can’t afford certain merchanise or else they walk behind me making sure I won’t shop lift anything. It’s no picnic. It is real life for me every single day and not some fiction to be read about in print. If you find my travelling to Europe offensive and boastful ask yourself why? Do you think that after sacrifice and depravation for many. many years I do not deserve to enjoy a modicum of pleasure in my life? Have I deprived you of something you are more worthy of? Have I snatched your children’s birthright from their hands? Seems you have a problem with a black woman achieving more than you have. Nobody gave me anything on a tin platter, let alone a silver one! I worked hard, gritted my teeth and worked some more. I swallowed lots of insults and injustices. Have you? And always six children were at the core of my life. I brought them into this world and by golly I was going to see they were properly taken care of. When other women were siting up in bars or laying up in bed I worked. I was an RN for many years and worked my fingers to the bone at night because I took care of my kids by day. I hardly slept for years. Bet you don’t envy me that! Bet you wouldn’t care if you saw some of what I was subjected to! You’d probably laugh as so many did when they saw civil rights activists have the dogs turned on them and their heads bashed in by the Bull Connors and Jim Clarks of the 60s. 

    Because of the discrimination and uncompensated time spent in nursing, the long hours and frequent weekends, not to mention the harrassment, I applied for financial aid and went back to school with the six on my back! It was daunting but God saw me through because I hadn’t much moral or financial support from anybody else. Now I can take life a little easier though, believe me, I am no stranger to heartbreak and despair. Put that in your pipe and smoke it! My children face discrimination also and it has taken its toll on them. I hope for my beautiful grandchildren that life will be easier. They are little but they are exposed to prejudice already—the little boy who has my paternal grandfather’s very dark colouring and the little one who, though white as milk, realizes that not everyone likes Jewish people. He will learn his relatives were shoved into gas chambers and that’s why hardly any of his father’s kin remains.

    So tell me about bigotry. Tell me about prejudice. We live it, we don’t just hear about it. I was affected by it before I was born. My father earned and justly won our colony’s only scholarship to an English university of his choice. But the damn Brits gave it to white boy instead. Dad missed his chance to go to Oxford and to meet H.G. Wells with whom he corresponded—he was a history buff. The effect of that blow was devastating. Everybody knew he deserved the scholarship. That was in the ‘30s. Had he gone his life, and consequently mine, would have been very different. So tell me I’m a bigot! I’ll tell you to stop your projection and see yourself for what you really are. Maybe you would not just be angry if that happened to you, you would be enraged! But I play the deck of cards that fate has dealt me and make the best I can of whatever may befall me.

    I applied to St. Luke’s Hospial School of Nursing, right opposite the Cathedral of St. John the Divine in NYC. Know what the Director of Admissions in her rejection letter told me? (I found it among papers recently) She said that my mother probably could not afford the $5 weekly allowance their students needed, so why not seek admission to Harlem Hospital’s school? Truth was those lilywhite Episcopalians did not accept non-white students. When told to comply with later NY state law St. Luke’s opened the Muhlenberg School of Practical Nursing obviously for “Negro” nursing students. NYState shut them down for discriminating and they were compelled to accept people like me into the RN program. But I by then had long graduated from Brooklyn College which had offered a fledgling program. The thing was I had taken a job at St’ Luke’s to get a close look at the workings of a hospital before applying. How well they valued me, a member of the highly-touted St. Luke’s family!

    As for Newfies! You can afford to fret about trivia. I never said a disparaging word about the inhabitants of the island, just refered to CANADIANS’ attitude towards them and that apparently makes me qualify as a bigot. How absurd!!! Like any other passenger—and there are thousands who do this every week—I do look down on the island when I fly to Europe. I look down on a lot of places, but a simple observation sent you into a tizzy. Are you a man or some simpering sissy? You should spend less pontificating and more time at your job , if you have one. I am retired and my time is my own to spend as I see fit. Do you have the luxury of time to blog such trivial nonsense?

    If I remeber my history lesson, seems like Newfoundland was settled in part by nondesirables from Europe. Gaols (jails) were periodically cleansed of their less-violent prisoners as were asylums and almshouses. These unfortunate people, (lepers, tuberculars, mentally retarded and others among them)  were loaded onto ships and set adrift upon the high seas. Nice and kind Christians weren’t they, those members of proper British society? Even in one of my readers as a child there was an illustration captioned ” Ship of Fools” pretty terrible picture for a third grade reader, wouldn’t you say? Well some of those ships were wrecked but some, mercifully, reached shore—including Newfoundland. I suppose that is why superior-thinking Canadians disparage Newfoundlanders. Don’t put me in that category because I said I look down on the country. Why would I want to go there? It doesn’t look particularly attractive from 3600 feet.

    Satan find work for idle hands to do so just…
    Go in peace to love and serve the Lord.

  92. Gerry O'Brien, Newfoundland, Canada Says:

    Hi Barbara:

    There are a lot of “rotten eggs” in this world.

    I am so sorry that you are so angry… Usually anger rages out at people and we point fingers. In saying this, I realize that when I point a finger, I have three pointing back at me.  A good lesson for both of us to learn.

    Barbara, in all of your hostility, anger, rage, bitterness, etc., I see most of all exceptionally deep pain and hurt.  I pray that The Lord will help you find your way through it.

    In retrospect, I apologize for bringing the bigotry to light since it has caused so much upset in you.  I will be judged, I am sure for having done so, just as the rest of the world will be judged for all of the wrongs that it or they have committed against you and as will you for the disparaging words that have spewed forth from you against many others.

    May the Lord Jesus Christ bless you this day.