To think that the C of E church should not take a step back in time

[2beesornot2beesthatisthehoney]

So the bishops have made a statement that sex belongs only in a heterosexual marriage not in a gay relationship, marriage or otherwise , not in a civil partnership and not outside marriage. WTF
In an age where many have turned their back on religion aibu to think that they will alienate even more people
IMO the c of e used to be a broad welcoming church: it has become more and more conservative and evangelical in the last 10 years I don’t recognise it anymore.

I thought that was their stance on it anyway. More fool them, religion is becoming outdated.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/23/sex-married-heterosexual-couples-church-of-england-christians

Why insist that religion should suit modern tastes and values? Obviously it’s religion itself that is outdated.

In an age where many have turned their back on religion aibu to think that they will alienate even more people

Yes; good!

Why insist that religion should suit modern tastes and values?

I understand that sentiment, but it works both ways. 'Sex belongs only in heterosexual marriage' isn't saying that only those who follow their religion should live in this way, it's being applied as a blanket statement, it's saying that everyone should live according to THEIR beliefs. That's the problem.

Errol I don’t go to church myself these days and call myself an atheist as well but I don’t wish to see the demise of a place that many people seek and receive solace and comfort from. In their darkest hours some people seek out some form of religion. But to be there in those times they have to exist. Many churches are closing due to poor attendance and lack of clergy. I think this will alienate even more and congregations will dwindle or we end up with US style evangelical churches ( we have in my city in the southwest anyhow)

So a religion with it's basis in events 2,000 years ago - which themselves were predicated upon events 2,000 years before that is getting flack for not "changing with the times" ?

If people are allowed to pick and choose the bits they like, then whatever they think they're doing becomes more like a Christianity tribute act.

And if they're not allowed to pick and choose, then there aren't that many Christians in the world today that I can see.

I do wonder about mere humans who insist that their belief in a mythical being gives them the right to pronounce their feeling about other people's choices.

They do this knowing that all it will do is cause bad feeling. Literally no iota of good can come from it. Maybe religious people should shut the fuck up about other people's lives.

Being religious shouldn't be a free pass to piss your own thoughts and feelings all over society.

Christianity is an incredibly malleable religion. It has shapeshifted to gain popularity since it first began. So historically, it would make sense for it to become more inclusive and broader minded. Chosing not to make this shift shows the bigotry not the faith of those in charge.

Given I have already blotted my copybook by getting a divorce I’ll continue to have lots of sex outside of a relationship

The more backward steps religion takes, the more people will wise up and we can, hopefully, move towards being a more secular country.

i can see both points of view here, but I think some people are not understanding that values are fundamentally moral principles, not merely favoured choices, like say taste in food.
if I like curry and insist as that everyone else should also like it, or even eat only curry, that would seem ridiculous.
but supposing I go somewhere where they eat humans, and sacrifice them to do so, picking the smaller ones as tastier and easier to overpower.
now if go there and start a campaign saying this is wrong, no one should do this. they could say, be off, go eat you veg curry and don't impose your ideas on us. we don't belong to your sect, you don't have to eat humans if you like the taste, so don't be so arrogant to tell us what o eat.
thats the point with so many of these, religion, religious values are irrelevant, since we are not religious.
the values being put forward are believed to be of universal importance. not merely for members, like a form of dress, or customary greeting. it is to do with human values, the value we ascribe to human life, and the best way to live to enhance that life.

Considering the c of e was started by a king who was fed up with his first wife and I think got the second pregnant before off loading her. Our next king “indulged” and then had a marriage blessing which would not be available now to anyone having a civil partnership.
Effectively the church is undermining the new civil partnership legislation which at the very least assists people in “common law marriages “ to have security and rights.
This is on top of just the sex bit

Alex
the values being put forward are believed to be of universal importance. not merely for members, like a form of dress, or customary greeting. it is to do with human values, the value we ascribe to human life, and the best way to live to enhance that life

Surely the fundamental value of Christianity is showing love and kindness to others not about who we shack up with or choose to show sexual love to

I'm guessing this is to prevent schism of the world wide union of Anglican Churches.
I'm not religious but have attended church previously.
One thing that has stuck with me, whilst Christians aspire to live like Christ, scripture also tells us that it's not possible to live without sin.
The church will set out its stall - which should be according to scripture, but that shouldn't prevent them from being welcoming to all people. Jesus said to love the sinner not the sin.
I can see why this is a painful and unkind line to take for many church goers though as you don't choose your sexual orientation. It will also deny many people the opportunity to have their relationships acknowledged in the same way as their heterosexual friends.
For non believers this is largely unimportant, but further affects how some people will view homosexuality - the rejection of the Church in a way validates the view that gay relationships are lesser or other.
I wonder why the church feels entitled or obligated to say this.

Why insist that religion should suit modern tastes and values? Obviously it’s religion itself that is outdated.

It's not. Reform Judaism managed to update things - we have complete equality between the sexes, and acceptance of all sexualities. It isn't impossible. Don't tar all religions with the same brush.

I'm guessing this is to prevent schism of the world wide union of Anglican Churches.

Yes, that was my thought too. Your values are not necessarily shared by other cultures and Anglicanism is in competition with other denominations.

Pentacostalism is much the most prevalent strand of protestantism in the global south. The Anglican communion is struggling by comparison and the bishops probably care more about keeping the communion together than losing a few liberal types in England itself.

Christianity is an incredibly malleable religion. It has shapeshifted to gain popularity since it first began

"Popularity" is a questionable word when the alternative was a variety of nasty (albeit imaginative) ways to shuffle off this mortal coil for a long period of it's history.

Now most people in this country are educated we do not need religion so I wouldn't worry about it at all.

That's a matter of some debate, depending on what your views of education are ...

Reform Judaism managed to update things

when did they stop circumcision ?

Marriage meant men owned women. Obviously men can’t own men so of course the church are against it.

To be honest ,there is so much wrong in my view with the church’s beliefs that these attitudes just join the list.

OP - Christians who find the CofE's position on this intolerable do have the option of one or two other smaller but reasonably mainstream churches in the U.K.

That's nothing new, it's been their policy for a hike and why vicars like the Rev. Cole and his late husband were both celibate.

Hike? Clearly autocorrect doesn't like while

Reform Judaism managed to update things - we have complete equality between the sexes, and acceptance of all sexualities.

That's not the case in Orthodox Judaism though so it can be said that it's just some Jewish people just like it's just some C of E people who are moving with the times.