Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

About gay vicars.

396 replies

VivaLeBeaver · 12/07/2014 23:34

Now I admit I'm not religious so I don't really get the argument of breaking church law, etc.

But I think its crazy that in this day and age a vicar can be refused a licence to practice by the local bishop because he's gay.

I thought Christians were meant to be tolerant, compassionate, etc.

Its even more crazy when he wouldn't be working directly for the diocese but for the local hospital.

bbc news story

OP posts:
Icimoi · 14/07/2014 23:53

So the filarlil eye worm. The one that burrows into the eye and then eats it's way out

Answer is as Bardette says. Satan doesnt create. He corrupts.

So what exactly did Satan corrupt in creating the eye worm? What's the evidence for it?

And at what point does a natural organism fulfilling its biological imperative to survive and reproduce, often by apparently cruel means, stop being Satan's work and start being God's work? Where do we stand, for instance, on insectivorous plants? Poisonous snakes? Vultures? Carnivorous animals killing their prey?

And do we attribute everything bad that happens to Satan? If so, how can we say that God is omnipotent?

settingsitting · 15/07/2014 09:28

God is omnipotent.
But equally He chooses when to intervene.

All that nasty stuff, poisonous snakes etc is not God, it is Satan.

But the way I read Revelation, is that God is waiting until there are a set number of people saved, before The End part comes. And we dont knwo when that will be.

settingsitting · 15/07/2014 09:34

Blu.
We need vicars, some paid employees of churches, because.
Christians need them and appreciate them because some lead services, some teach, some are pastoral workers.

Non christians might need them because
funerals/weddings/school functions/social help
Adults may not appreciate teaching now, but may when they are older

And should add that ordinary christians, and the clergy pray for non christians. They pray for people in their communities.

settingsitting · 15/07/2014 09:34

I hope the op is ok about the thread going off topic?

whatsthatcomingoverthehill · 15/07/2014 10:18

I don't think 'The Problem of Suffering' is solved quite so easily as saying: Good = God, Bad = Satan somehow. And if God can intervene but chooses not to, what does that make him?

settingsitting · 15/07/2014 10:20

I don't think 'The Problem of Suffering' is solved quite so easily as saying: Good = God, Bad = Satan somehow.

Brilliant!
You have said it better than I ever could.

whatsthatcomingoverthehill · 15/07/2014 10:22

Are you intentionally misunderstanding what I'm saying?

settingsitting · 15/07/2014 10:24

The thing that has muddied the waters up to this moment has been people.

[I am aware that the next bit some posters are not going to agree with]

People are born into sin. They are not born sin free. [though admittedly a baby and toddler are blameless until they are older and start to sort out right behaviour from wrong behaviour]

settingsitting · 15/07/2014 10:25

hang on what. I am formulating my thoughts and posts.

VivaLeBeaver · 15/07/2014 10:25

I don't mind the thread going off topic at all. Even though I'm not religious it makes interesting reading.

I didnt say at the beginning as I didnt want to bias the thread was that I actually know this Chaplin. He's very good at his job and I think that's what frustrates me. As a hospital Chaplin I doubt anyone he comes into contact with would know he was gay. Its not like he has a parish, etc.

The people who will really lose out are the bereaved at this hospital where he may not be allowed to work.

But it looks like there's a possibility that he may end up being able to take the job anyway. Not quite sure how.

OP posts:
settingsitting · 15/07/2014 10:31

Adults, when they are fully functioning, have choices. Sometimes straight choices between right and wrong behaviour.

But also, God and other people are trying to help people make the correct choices in life.
And God wants people to be saved.
[to be saved there are only two things necessary. To believe that Jesus was raised from the dead, and say with your mouth that Jesus is Lord]

And he wants a vast number to be saved. So He is waiting. Patiently waiting.
I dont know all the ins and outs of this part.

settingsitting · 15/07/2014 10:35

I dont know enough about the situation or the CofE Viva.
But it seems to me that he needs the approval or whatever of the CofE. So as such he has togo by their rules, even though he does not have a parish.

settingsitting · 15/07/2014 10:37

Are you intentionally misunderstanding what I'm saying?

I realise you didnt mean to, but you crystallised something for me whatsthatcomingoverthehill.

I wasnt being obtuse

Icimoi · 15/07/2014 11:42

God is omnipotent. But equally He chooses when to intervene.

So, he could intervene to help a baby born with, say, epidermolysis bullosa - the genetic condition under which they are born with extremely fragile skin meaning that a minor rub results in sores that feel like 3rd degree burns, and which leaves them susceptible to cancer. However, he chooses not to. Great.

All that nasty stuff, poisonous snakes etc is not God, it is Satan.

As I asked before, at what point does a living creature killing other creatures in order to protect itself or to eat tip over from being Satan's doing to God's? How about birds eating insects, how about lions hunting their prey - and how about humans killing fish, cows, sheep and pigs for meat? Or is any carnivorous being one of Satan's also?

alemci · 15/07/2014 11:59

evil and suffering is very difficult and I don't think Christians have all the answers.
.we live in a fallen world and evil and suffering feature. horrible about the baby with disease.

headinhands · 15/07/2014 13:25

"Jesus' attitude to the mosaic law is complex".

Well he can't be that unhappy with it seeing is it's his law in the first place. What a head thrash. He writes a law, he breaks it. It could appear that he is deliberately trying to keep us on tenterhooks not knowing if he's bloodthirsty as in the OT or just racist as we see with his attitude to the Canaanite lady.

alemci · 15/07/2014 13:30

head I don't think putting a modern spin on Jesus works.

alemci · 15/07/2014 13:38

he healed woman's daughter. he was testing her faith. if he was 'racist' I doubt he would have done that and he talks about the parable of the good samaritan.

he's not here to askSmile

headinhands · 15/07/2014 13:40

adultery causes pain and suffering

I'm not saying sleeping with people without your partner knowing is great, if you want a harmonious family life then that's obviously not going to help. And people clearly don't have the right to have sex, but violent punishment is the last answer. And don't forget it's not like Jesus turned up all new and naive to the barbarism of the culture, *he set it up like that, violent punishment was his baby. He wanted it that way before he came over all chilled with the free-hugs campaign (so long as you're not a Canaanite woman)

When god decided to make adultery punishable by having stones thrown at your head do you think that was fair? Would a threat of stoning even put people off, it didn't then. Adultery is rarely the cause of relationship breakdown but the symptom that things have gone wrong somewhere. I wouldn't want to live in a society where having sex with other fully consenting adults carried a sentence. Even adultery. I would want nothing to do with a god (now) who had ever wanted rocks thrown at people's head for sexual stuff they did with a consenting adult(s)

Have I made that clear?

Adultery not a great idea if you want a good marriage. Yes it hurts people but the breakdown has usually happened before the adultery.

Adultery not a matter for the law in and off itself. And certainly never should have carried a death sentence.

headinhands · 15/07/2014 13:47

He likened her to a dog alem. Why would he test something he knew the answer too. Why test it via racism? Would it be acceptable for a dr to use racism to check that different ethnicities really really wanted treatment.
"Why should I give you antibiotics? After all, your skin's a funny colour and you sound forrin'"
"Oh please Dr, I really need it"
"Oh all right then"

headinhands · 15/07/2014 13:48

modern spin

But of a flaw in his plan there then.

alemci · 15/07/2014 14:10

it was 2000 ' years ago. also he refers to children and dogs in an illustrative sense not calling her a dog directly. it was a jew and gentile thing. I'm no bible scholar but I will look into it.

alemci · 15/07/2014 14:14

I think you're putting today's values on things which happened a long time ago. violence was the norm unfortunately. also Christianity has moved forward unlike other certain religions who don't tolerate adultery

niminypiminy · 15/07/2014 14:45

My experience of headinhands is that she will never, never concede a point -- she will never say, 'oh, I didn't know that', or 'ok, you have a point there', or 'yes, that's a reasonable reading of that passage'.

However, because there are other people reading, let's have a look at the Canaanite woman.

Here is the passage from Matthew, ch 15

21 Jesus left that place and went away to the district of Tyre and Sidon. 22Just then a Canaanite woman from that region came out and started shouting, ‘Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David; my daughter is tormented by a demon.’ 23But he did not answer her at all. And his disciples came and urged him, saying, ‘Send her away, for she keeps shouting after us.’ 24He answered, ‘I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.’ 25But she came and knelt before him, saying, ‘Lord, help me.’ 26He answered, ‘It is not fair to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs.’ 27She said, ‘Yes, Lord, yet even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table.’ 28Then Jesus answered her, ‘Woman, great is your faith! Let it be done for you as you wish.’ And her daughter was healed instantly.

So, the context of this is that the Jews considered the gentile peoples living in neighbouring areas to be unclean, and believed that God had made an especial covenant to protect the Jews (the house of Israel): they were God's chosen people. Jesus was, of course, a Jew he was brought up in his human family with these beliefs. But here, he is challenged by the Canaanite woman. He doesn't send her away, as his disciples want him to. He listens to her. And they debate: he uses an analogy to describe his mission he was sent to the lost sheep of Israel. They're not really lost sheep, but he looks after them like a shepherd does his lost sheep. Then he uses another analogy to describe the relationship of Jews and gentiles: the gentiles aren't really dogs but they come lower in the pecking order of God's family than the children, the Jews. But the woman challenges him, and says that in a family even the dogs get fed. And this argument sways Jesus: it changes his mind. She believes in him! She has faith even though she is not a Jew. He heals her daughter.

One of the great debates in early Christianity was whether it was a renewal movement within Judaism or whether the message of Christ should be spread to the Gentiles. Was Jesus the Messiah for the whole world or just for the Jews? We see Jesus here at a turning point, where he begins to change his mind and see that he has come to bring everyone, not just the chosen people, to God.

So he doesn't call her a dog. It's a figure of speech. The woman herself takes the figure of speech and uses it. She doesn't walk away saying 'you called me a dog you're a racist'. She has a more sophisticated understanding of how language works. It's a key moment when we see someone changing someone's mind by argument. And perhaps that's something we can all learn from, whether we are believers or not.

headinhands · 15/07/2014 16:17

a more sophisticated understanding

(He referred to her as a dog because of her race. He considered her inferior to his own race. I can't think of any sophisticated understanding that makes that anything other than racism. God allowed him to think that and say that. God could have said from early on, 'Jesus, you're here for everyone' from the get go. In fact, this brings up a great point. Why have a chosen people? What wisdom made god do that. He knew how flawed we were and he still picked one race out and then pitted them against all others demanding bloodshed after bloodshed.

(And what's with all the ad-hom all of a sudden? Play the ball, not the player)

Swipe left for the next trending thread