Response to Sandi Toksvig's Secular Sermon to Archbishop Justin Welby || Glen Scrivener Reacts

[@eimjabegg5943]

Such plainly spoken wisdom is much appreciated. The true church, made up of believers in Christ, must by necessity be different from the culture in which they live. Otherwise, they cease to be representative of the true church of Jesus Christ, which is his body on earth. ❤

[@dougalburrowes6898]

Thanks Glen. Good and helpful video. Sandy's problem was revealed when she said "the society the church purports to represent". The church should never "represent" culture, even with a state church that was never the point. Her whole assumption is that culture comes first.

[@Threemore650]

Our culture comes largely from Christianity

[@ClauGutierrezY]

Excellent response Glen. I'm convinced this will be the flagship of the upcoming persecution, we need to prepare to stand our ground whatever the outcome. Thanks for this.

[@Creature112]

This is utterly superb. Thank you. The hubris of Sandi is actually hard to watch

[@PennyLane1]

I think you are being kind. I thought it was condescending to anyone with different beliefs..

[@Threemore650]

She is coming across as an angry gay person who probably wants all the bakeries to comply too. Do they want us to just leave that bit out of the Bible. They seem to have left it out in the Vatican.

[@sarawoods1450]

You do an excellent job of explaining what should be clear issue for Christians and the true harder teachings of what is a holy and higher Love

[@Kelly-jg8gd]

Thank you for speaking TRUTH

[@richardhindley4459]

Two thoughts: first, why is she so desperate for the CofE to change its doctrine? As far as I'm aware she's not a believer, and western secular culture broadly endorses her beliefs. So what's the purpose of pressuring the church? Second, I'm more cautious about the apology. For the times when the church has mistreated or hurt LGBTQ people at all, yes, we must truly repent of that. But we mustn't apologize for upholding orthodox Christian doctrine, which is what the Bishops appeared to do.

[@RCC-cq8nb]

I don't know but maybe it is because it is, in her words, the 'state Church of England' so every citizen has a relationship with it whether they like it or not. One application of being the state church is that her heterosexual friends who are not believers and hold views and experiences of divorce that are out of step with Jesus and the Bible can get married in a CofE church today but she can't. She is finding it difficult to understand the theological basis for this and so am I.

[@paulapioan29]

@@RCC-cq8nb An ordained minister can pray for God's blessing on a non-believing couple getting married in a Church. We are people of hope, who can be optimistic that they may in time, by the grace of God, come into faith and experience the blessing on their marriage. We cannot pray for a blessing in agreement with scripture for two people of the same sex. It cannot ever be a Christian marriage as scripture makes clear "for this reason a man will leave father and mother, and cleave to his wife, and the two shall be one flesh."

[@RCC-cq8nb]

@@paulapioan29 Yes but the discerning of whether to marry a divorcee and in the context of that divorcee's faith (or absence of faith in Christ) is entirely in the hands of an individual priest, is it not? Every week there are priests saying yes to marrying divorcees when there are other priests in the CofE who would not marry that very couple, because they believe that scripture makes it clear. My main point though was in response to the original comment on Sandi's interest in the topic and the fact that the CofE is the established church so every citizen is granted some interest. Those of us outside the UK find it very strange why the appointment of Bishops is run through Rishi Sunak's office, why the head of the CofE is such because of a bloodline and not an apostolic faith and what that has to do with Jesus and the Bible.

[@briancarton1804]

@@paulapioan29 Is that in your buybull , I prefer Harry Potter myself.

[@paulapioan29]

@@briancarton1804 that's not even worth responding to.

[@charlestilbury]

Thank you for reminding us of the revolutionary, countercultural nature of our faith!

[@esthertrouton417]

Thanks Glen, this is extremely helpful.

[@jonpowell1872]

That was the clearest and most powerful bit of preaching I've heard from you Glen. Thank you. Solid stuff. Keep up the good work

[@katherinekingdom6450]

Thanks Glen. Really clear & helpful & being widely shared.

[@PennyLane1]

I was always told that love is tolerance, acceptance and respect . It seems to me that all three words actually mean "think the same way as me, conform to my wishes and agree to my wants or else". Well I am getting rather weary of this stance.... tolerance goes both ways....

[@liammccann8763]

Tolerance literally means 'to bear pain'. Western culture is currently infested with harm avoidance while possessing little willingness to embrace restraint. In hoc signo vinces +.

[@prayunceasingly2029]

​@liammccann8763 great comment. Thanks.

[@jonathanrussell4116]

Brilliant...thanks Glen for your great response.

[@samtoselow1253]

The heart of it. Can we love and disagree - I hope so!

[@Mark-kx1vq]

This is VERY good, especially the Buddist monk analogy and on loving while disagreeing. More on the latter please. So hard to get right.

[@Threemore650]

I think it’s perfectly possible to love people, but hate what they do… Like move next door to you when you were really happy loving them from a distance.

[@jim-re3oi]

Thank you for articulating my frustration and incredulity at how secular fundamentalism now sets the agenda for the church. This will be widely circulated.

[@timb6558]

"He's not embracing and celebrating a novel western elite view of sex and sexuality." Wow. 🤯 Well said!

[@sallycreswick-hall596]

Totally spot on mate👍 Keep up the good work.

[@bruceizzett]

Brilliant Glen! So wonderfully communicated.

[@HearGodsWord]

So true Glen. You were spot on.

[@CliffsofHope]

Hold Fast. Thanks Glen. Just started ‘air we breathe’🙌🙏🏿💯 well done

[@alexandraward1248]

Great to hear Glen. Thank you.

[@deludedjester]

I have watched the interview with the Monty Python contributors and find it fascinating because I think they are right. In fact, they are only saying a similar message that Jesus preached, that the religious don't always act as His would desire. The way that Sandi speaks is like a Pharisee; do what we say but not as we do.

[@emmajeanhop]

Superlative. Thanks Glen.

[@jeanbrown4736]

Very well said Glen

[@jacobbnjmn]

How is it that eternal wisdom is flowing from the church membership and not its leadership? Sad state of affairs.

[@debbiewoods2143]

Thanks Glen

[@jimturrent7838]

Well played sir.

[@everyshalalalala]

Well said Glen.

[@TheOriginalSOOTY]

Mathew Chapter 7 comes to mind when trying to discern positions of conflict between peoples ideals and beliefs. Great response Glen, to this challenging dillema.

[@Neil.Swinnerton]

A brilliant response to some vacuous and ill-informed comments from Sandi Toksvig. Thank you.

[@martingreen2449]

Superb response thanks Glen

[@enlewis2159]

Brilliant Glen!!!

[@fridge3489]

These people think they're "well-educated". It's ridiculous. I agree with the position you take in the video.

[@neilcameron7705]

I think one of the issues Toksvig didn't mention but which underlied her argument was the relationship between the CoE and the State. I think this is a legitimate issue that needs to be dealt with, namely the issue of disestablishment. If the church is so out of step with society, then is there a place for the church to be a state church? I'm a former Anglican, now Presbyterian, and I'm happy that many of my Presbyterian forebears stood up against the establishment of the CoS and became "Free". I'm certain that a disestablishment of the CoE will bring untold benefits to the church and make it more independent of the power and influence of the state which, as we know, is more influenced by the opinions of the population than by the Word of God.

[@Xackadee]

Watching her video, I knew something immediately rubbed me the wrong way about that "better things to talk about" comment. Thank you for addressing that so thoroughly.

[@cal_lywal]

Thanks Glen. Would be interested to hear your thoughts on Channel 4's "Everyone Else Burns".

[@algie-t2w]

When can we expect an apology from all these professed 'celebrity' atheists for Hitler, Stalin, Mao and all other secular leaders and movements that tortured and murdered millions in the name of a non or anti - religious ideology.

[@samruggiero1778]

History is repeating itself. Henry the 8th went against Christian teaching and set up his own church. Could a King or Queen of England who wanted a same sex marriage in the church not just set up a new CofE?

[@ashleymey3144]

Brilliant

[@helendeacon7637]

A very helpful video. It makes sense to call it the "novel view" of a first world minority. The comedians from Monty Python had a different point to make but perhaps the interview was an unhelpful precedent. Clergy generally have been for multiple decades at pains to "get with the times" and this has been an error. Dr D. Martyn Lloyd Jones in "Preachers and Preaching" makes solid biblical points on this issue. Videos like this are really worthwhile. Thanks Glen.

[@Bowdon]

I think a big issue for the Church is they accept the word setting of the person complaining. Marriage is about procreation and creating a stable society for any future children. In modern society people take subjects out of context, or single one issue out and act like it alone is an oddity. But when put back in to context we see it fits the rest of the narrative.

[@christianweishaupt-yq4db]

It looks that the gay community was able to bring Welbi on their side. Look at what the 15% of Anglicans where able to decide that it is alright for their pastors to give the same sex blessing on their on feeling. Bravo, you loving Curch of no trouble.😅

[@Wildnell]

Just watched thankyou. If the church should not be step why Rev. Bingo Allison who is transgender non binary queer an ordained minister in the CoE? I have stopped going to church for the time being as I do not trust who or what is serving holy communion. Its painful and very sad at the state the west is in. Lord have mercy on us.

[@bygrace24]

Sandi has guilt and wants it appeased by the CofE church 🤷‍♀️. The Christian church's message is the Good News of salvation, to love God, to love each other, and our eternal hope. Unfortunately for Sandi the church won't change it's teachings or scriptures after a cup of tea with the top bishop.

[@Ozgipsy]

It is one of the sins that “cries out to heaven for vengeance”. We have a rule book. And that’s that.

[@Heidindia]

Be holy. Set apart. Not for the world For Jesus🙏

[@normafarmer3254]

Spot on, Christians were told to have the mind of Christ. Not to conform to the world. Jesus spoke about marriage and divorce, but always in the context of male and female. He only had the OT and abided by that teaching. Why do the Homosexuals want to be married in a Christian church when they are not prepared to obey its precepts? They can legally marry in a civil court. They tell us to be loving when they are so unloving toward anyone who has a different point of view. Stop trying to change what God proclaims to be his order for marriage in the church.

[@Erik_mit_K]

Thank you. I been once to interreligious forum and the only one who could define what they actually mean was the secularist. She rather said that she thinks their is more than one truth than to disagree with the others. While a Muslim and a jew are very happy to accept that they have different fews.

[@bygrace24]

Happy to accept? I don't think so. Jewish yes but muslims? Sandi would be better to fight against the brutal treatment of gay people in Islamic countries. At least the CofE loves them

[@KJ-lb4tj]

Can you say more what you mean that the secularist defined what they mean? It seems from what you said that the Muslim and Jew seemed to be clear with their different views and the secular simply said anything goes, any truth is truth.

[@euanthompson]

There is an irony to Totsvig complaining about the church being out of step with the culture when she didn't know what Bake Off was prior to being asked to host it.

[@stcmattb]

Snap! 🤣

[@HearGodsWord]

Haha so true!

[@thomasarnoldcoe6527]

Pray for Church of England Justin Welby is under immense pressure

[@annieschlater1534]

If part of Glen’s argument is that the church can often be counter cultural, it also needs to be noted that for the last one and half thousand years until the last few decades the church’s views in western society on social mores sex and marriage were mainstream.

[@IamGrimalkin]

His point was that God's view is often counter-cultural, not neccesarily the churches: he acknowledges that the church can sometimes deviate from God's views as well. I don't think it's strictly true that society agreed with a bibical sexual ethic for 1500 years, and that's certainly not the case when it comes to all social mores. For example, I'm pretty sure in medieval/renaissance times, it was culturally viewed as acceptable for men to have mistresses, so long as they only slept with them at times they couldn't sleep with their wife (such as during her period). This explains the wide use of mistresses by noblemen in this period. Obviously that conflicts with the biblical standard of monogamy.

[@catieelizaraikes4900]

I want to know how you can serve a world without listening to it. Like it's really interesting to think about and I do think that going along with popularity is not the road to truth. But typically in marriage, in work, in friendship, in restaurants, in hospital we serve and are served by listening to what is needed and wanted. When do you cross a line and decide that to serve is to do differently and not listen? I'm genuinely interested, I'm not just being a troll. I find it so hard to find the right way to be a compassionate follower of Jesus and I don't want to win an argument, I want to find that honest, humble compassionate place of love grace and truth.

[@jmccullough662]

Listening to does not mean changing biblical teaching to bring it in to line with the world's view. What would the point of that be. Romans 12:2 deals with this. In accepting Christ we submit to his will, and he has made it clear that in the sphere of human sexual relationships, only a lifetime union of one man and one woman i.e. marriage, is acceptable. If we substitute our standards for those of God, we are no longer subject to his rules, but we are rejecting them. That is exactly what happened in the garden of Eden when Adam and Eve substituted their own authority for that of God's. If we conform to the world by listening to what the world would like the world to be, what's next? Should the Christian church accept adultery because the people committing adultery are in love? Should we accept dishonesty, abortion? Why not? If we are making the rules to fit in with the pattern of the world rather than following God's rules, anything goes. We are called to be light to the world, keeping God's standards, because it in within that framework that we can have a true relationship with God and know salvation.

[@SpeakLifeMedia]

Listening doesn't have to mean agreeing, does it?

[@streetaware]

It's not up to anyone to change the clear message on Homosexuality in the Bible. You either believe it or you don't. People who do not believe the word of God and who are apposed to it have no right to change it. The reason the attendance in the Church of England has fallen is because they are not following what the Bible teaches. They are going against the word of God.

[@tobiasjenny1807]

To be fair to allow a balanced discussion on this issue, I Transcribed from a youtube video by Emily Wanjiru I found today: Archbishop ‘made horrible mistake’ on same-sex marriage, says Sandi Toksvig Below is a more complete summary of Sandi Toksvig’s appeal to Mr. Welby, also including his message. I make a line break for each text frame of the video The resolution states that marriage is “between a man and a woman”, and that same-sex relationships are “incompatible with scripture”. Ms Toksvig said that Mr Welby has made a “mistake”, and offered to talk to him over coffee. She wrote: “So, you and your other religious pals got together at the Lambeth Conference and the main takeaway seems to be that Gay sex is a sin. It was a sin in 1998 and you just wanted to make clear in 2022 [2023?] that no one in your finely frocked gang has moved on from that.” “Seriously, with the state the world is in, that is what you wanted to focus on? You didn’t have other more pressing matters like, I don’t know, war, or poverty?” The former QI host, who refers to herself as a humanist, added: “This is a serious matter. The lives of LGBTQ+ people are at stake here. “I have had several credible death threats over the years, sometimes requiring the very kind assistance of the police hate crime squad. “Each and every one of those threats has come from an evangelical Christian. Inevitably they have wanted to kill me on God’s behalf.” Ms Toksvig also questioned the Church of England’s interpretation of Jesu’s views on homosexuality. She said: “There are seven texts in the Bible which are often pointed to as proof that God hates a homosexual, but everyone who has ever studied the matter knows that the ‘proof’ lies only in extremely fallible interpretation. None of it is clear cut.” She added: “Jesus doesn’t mention sexuality at all. It clearly wasn’t a big thing for him.” In a letter to Anglican bishops written on Tuesday, Mr Welby said: “I write therefore to affirm that the validity of the resolution passed at the Lambeth Conference 1998, 1.10, is not in doubt and that the whole resolution is still in existence. “Indeed, the Call on Human Dignity made clear this is the case, as the resolution is quoted from three times In the paragraph 2.3 of the Call on Human Dignity.” “The Call states that many Provinces - and I think we need to acknowledge it is the majority - continue to affirm that same-gender marriage is not permissible. “The Call also states that other Provinces have blessed and welcomed same sex union/marriage, after careful theological reflection and a process of reception.” Speaking at the conference on Tuesday, the Archbishop added that he could not and would not punish churches for conducting gay marriages. He said: “I neither have, nor do I seek, the authority to discipline or exclude a church of the Anglican Communion. I will not do so.”

[@mystifiedstill6795]

The Church has nothing to offer this world if we merely reflect the culture of our time. Yes, we need to have the courage to be weird.

[@edwardthomas6956]

Let us come out for fear of the Lord.. Let's get back to holiness, without which no one will see the Lord, as the New Testament book of Hebrews 12.14 promises

[@beryllaing6992]

Come out for love? Unloving is not to warn people that the sinful path they are on ends up in hell. Love is saying stop your sinful homosexual behavior.

[@CobinRain]

Isn’t the point that this isn’t about “gay” sexual activity at all; it’s about fornication. Sex outside of marriage.And that is most clearly a sin…back then…and now.

[@somekindoftony]

It is possible that being counter-cultural and following a narrow view of scripture is not following God and that God might be, for some at sometimes, an excuse to avoid a reckoning with justice. It is also possible that the real counter cultural Christianity involving radical sharing and humility is just not as attractive or fun to talk about for conservatives or liberals as sexual morality.

[@anthonyjemmott4152]

Would have been great if the church were counter cultural around the time of slavery and the dangerous extension of destructive capitalism. Divine love is something we are still learning.Jesus did say in John that we would grow into a fuller truth. Love is a relationship of seeing the core value of the othet

[@IamGrimalkin]

It was. Slavery was banned in England due to the influence of Ansalm (a church leader). Later, people tried to forget about that law and get around it by taking slaves from other countries (hence the translataric slave trade). From this, some tried to take these slaves back to the UK, this was legally challenged (and won) by Granville Sharpe, a prominent lawyer and bible translator. After this ruling, jt was reestablished at all slaves are free ipon landing on British soil. However, this kept the loophole which allowed the transalantic slave trade, which was caminged against by (among others) William Wilberforce, one of the founders of the Bible Society. Of course, not *all* of the church was against slavery during its era, just like not *all* of the church are against the culture when it comes to sexual morality now. But a significant and important portion of it was and is. No idea when it comes to 'destructive capitalism' since honestly I don't know how you define it.

[@Threemore650]

What an excellent observation! You must be very clever. So it’s come to the point where peak Englishness is 50% Danish? I can’t keep up.

[@brianmidmore2221]

why halt ye between two opinions, if the Lord be God then serve him... The Cof E is at crisis point and it will have to choose, the Lord or Baal.

[@Partyanimal1066]

Welby needs to keep out of politics and concentrate on the rapidly declining numbers of C of E

[@CadillacBunner]

How should he do that if everyone disagrees no matter what he does? This has nothing to do with membership/money. If you want money, start a cult or become a televangelist.

[@mortensimonsen1645]

Brilliant!! I don't get it, why is this "old aunt" is so eager to support the sexual rights for all "combinations". I wonder - is it really vital for herself to have more sexual rights, or should I say, approvals? I suspect it's not for herself - it's on behalf on someone else. Which is the absolute moral highground. There is no need to discuss this issue anymore. It has been settled. If the Anglican church will have a future it must resist this.

[@robbie_]

Who the hell does Sandi Toksvig think she is.

[@dianeandmark1054]

The Eternal Creator just might know more about sexuality than his creation who was born, in eternal terms, yesterday.

[@howardbabcom]

So I watched this straight after watching your response: kzbin.info/www/bejne/lZzEaXluqLSgbdE (GAFCON's analysis) and realised that, in respect to the response of the UK bishops, Sandy Toksvig had won the day, so the question is, where does the C of E here go now? It would appear that Rico Tyce's prediction of four years ago is about to be played out, because, will there really be an alternative?

[@simonskinner1450]

It does not matter what the C of E or RCC think of Gay marriage or LBGT, "We come to do thy will", not our will. They cannot be saved, we can, unless we go against Psalms 1. I have a Ytube video series called 'Myths in so-called Christianity', and show the truth over errors.

[@liammccann8763]

The word 'matrimony' means the office of motherhood; same sex couples will never be able to produce children. The nuptial union of man and woman and the potential for their union to procreate therein, reflects the creative union of the three persons of the Holy Trinity. This is an unchanging teaching of the Church. Of equal import, is the four types of love. Christianity recognises the value of all four while professing that same sex couples focus only on eros, the love of the flesh and are given over to themselves (Rm 1-24). In hoc signo vinces +.

[@RCC-cq8nb]

Thank you for this video. I think your analysis omits a crucial adjective which Sandi used - 'the state Church of England." I agree that the church should be out of step with society but the CofE also wants to continue to be of the establishment with various privileges such as joining the Islamic Republic of Iran as the only countries in the world with unelected religious leaders sitting in legislative houses. Sandi's heterosexual friends who hold views and experiences of divorce that are in step with UK legislation but out of step with Jesus and the Bible can get married in a CofE church and do every week. You are placing Sandi's views outside the frame in which the church wishes to express them (that's legitimate) while asking her to remain a citizen of a country where only one denomination of one religion gets the privileges of state (that's hypocrisy). Your analysis comes across as almost Anabaptist (and there is nothing wrong with that) while operating in a context where England is first among equals - a concept that has much more to do with Empire and colonialism than with Jesus and the Bible.

[@IamGrimalkin]

I think if you're in favour of disestablishement that's absolutely fine (or an established church, but without Bishops in the Lords). But don't use disestablishment as a stick to bash the church with when they don't do what you want them to. Be a principled disestablishmentist and advocate for it regardless of the C of E's views on same-sex marriage.

[@RCC-cq8nb]

@@IamGrimalkin I think Glen has every right to critique Sandi's assumption that the church should keep 'in step with society', I just think that one cannot ignore that she is in relationship with the CofE as a citizen of the UK and that that is a very obscure and outlying reality in the global Body of Christ. Honour that relationship by naming it, giving a view on how biblical it is, then critique her. I am all for a church that is out of step with society, I just think being Anabaptist by proxy is far less powerful a witness than being Anabaptist by Jesus.

[@IamGrimalkin]

@@RCC-cq8nb Personally (I'm not Glen) I don't think the bible speaks either way about a country having an established church, so there isn't much to talk about biblically. Pragmatically, it seems to me to make sense to have some church leaders in the Lords, since you also have crossbenchers appointed from the buisness world and such, although I wouldn't say they should be exclusively from the C of E. But nevertheless it makes sense to have an established church to look over state events like Royal weddings and Coronations, and since the whole thing is based around history and tradition the C of E and C of S are the best candidates for this (although Roman Catholicism might sort-of work too I guess...). I guess if there was a royal gay wedding on the cards I might understand that point more (although there's no reason they couldn't hold it in the Church of Scotland), but since there's not it just feels like using the church's established status to bash it. As I've made clear, I myself would support a... reduction in the establishment of the C of E. But the difference is, I'm not supporting it in a bid to try to get the C of E to do what I want.

[@IamGrimalkin]

Looking over your original reply again: In terms of remarriage after divorce I'd say the C of E should explictly spell out that it only allows it under certain circumstances. That's not going to happen this decade though, realistically. The establishment of the church of england has nothing to do with this issue.

[@simtime7591]

people like Sandy say this stuff for one reason and one reason only, its because they are in same sex relationships, and we all know what the Bible says about that, and it secretly makes them uncomfortable, because we all have right and wrong written on our hearts, and same sex relationships are a sin, a sign of a depraved mind, says the Bible. So they need to go on the attack to make themselves feel justified.. not fooling me.. its unfortunate that Welby and his stance on this, and is now causing a massive schism in the Anglican church and leaders are telling him to repent. welby is destroying the Church of England, well trying to anyway, but it wont work, we will just look to Archbishop Foley beach for leadership.

[@grannye7638]

Look if you don’t like what Christians think then stay away from the club. That goes for any members of any religious club. If you want to change the ideology go and start your own religious club. There’s nothing wrong with basic Christian beliefs. I’m not a believer just find all religions interesting.

[@revphilipjnott]

I think we should be weird we should call for celibacy outside marriage and the tough call of lifelong monogamy in marriage. We should call for love which is faithful, kind etc. But we should recognise that it can be expressed by people of a variety of gender and sexual identities. And then get on with explaining and living a gospel which is good news to everyone in our nation.

[@davebannister323]

Sandi Who ? Oh Yes i am sure we must listen and take advise from her ? I would like to ask Sandi to define " Love " ( I am sure she is not aware of the 3 different biblical translations of LOVE ) . Am affraid Sandi's views are flimsy , weak and poor . GOD IS SUPREME , NOT Sandi Toksvig !

[@mikecrees9715]

Careful you might end up on her "untenable" list... ...

[@catieelizaraikes4900]

Your views make sense in your world view and you communicate them clearly but also quite patronisingly. It's interesting but hard to listen to someone who's not being humble

[@simonbutcher8288]

Really good video Glen, but I guess that you are constrained not to call out (Mr) Welby on his total lack of leadership in this issue amongst others! If the church has had this wrong through the past 200 decades then he must come out verbally in support of the LGBTQ+ community, to do otherwise would be an appalling act of self serving cowardice. If the church has been right in it’s understanding of the Bible’s teaching on this issue then HE MUST STAND UP FOR TRUTH AND RIGHTEOUSNESS while preaching love and tolerance for those who disagree. To stay silent is not an option for someone claiming to lead a large body of Christian believers. Does he not realise that taking the path he has chosen makes him guilty in everyone’s eyes and will lead to his and his churches demise (Christians will go where there is true biblical leadership).

[@markmarley2556]

Sandi is right is pointing out the absurdity of the CoE being a state church. It is time to bring Henry VIII's petulant and personal rebellion to an end.

[@algie-t2w]

Good manners can also be an excuse for being gutless. Let's face it most C of E Archbishops and Bishops haven't got sufficient faith in their own religion to summon the energy to fight their own corner. I say this as an agnostic and observer of many years.

[@maddi62]

This is utter rubbish. In Matthew 19 Jesus was asked a question about divorcing a wife. We've gone way beyond what he replied, in this video. Sandy Toksvig is right, he just didn't address the issue

[@con_boy]

Erm, it's a Danish woman talking to an Englishman?

[@byke-j7l]

Does God love gays? Speak up Christians.

[@Mark_Dyer1]

Glen: you are confusing issues from the very start, because you are using the word 'gender', where you should be using 'sex'. It is SEX which is non-negotiable (until science is able to achieve the end of changing the chromosomes in every single cell of a human being): whilst 'gender' may be chosen. I'm an ordinary homosexual Christian MALE: who has no wish to change my 'gender'. I am content for my 'gender' to be reflective of my sex. BUT, "Here we go 'round the Mulberry Bush", Glen; because the issue which ought to be discussed by the Church (before human sexuality) is how we treat, read, interpret and apply our SCRIPTURES. Somehow, and at some time, in the history of the Church (or possibly Israel) some readers of our scriptures came to 'believe' (it is only a 'belief': not attested in any of our ancient Christian Creeds) that they were the physical manifestation of the "word(s) of God, himself". This is how the devout Muslim views his Koran: but it should not be the way the Christian views our scriptures. Not least because the end-product is a tendency to worship and adore our SCRIPTURES, rather than the God they help to reveal. That God came to be recognised by the Jews who comprised the Primitive Church as particularly active in the young male Jew, Jesus of Nazareth. His resurrection from the dead, manifest in all those appearances and dialogues with his followers 'clinched' the deal. As Paul says, without the resurrection, we may as well pack up and go home: for we would have simply been following "another enlightened Jew who taught and preached the faith of his forebears. It was the resurrection which caused it to SLOWLY dawn on those followers, in whome company they had been during the short period of Jesus' adult ministry. It was that event which brought forth all the great Christological Titles, which were seen as applicable to Jesus; including 'Son of God', and which turned the mission of a 'human being' into the 'activity of the God of Israel'. Christians treat our scriptures in a variety of ways: but - as long as they reveal "Jesus is Lord" - they are performing the task for which they were intended.

[@12091941]

As I say, after reading the gospel ," This is the word of the Lord" - that is what scripture reveals. As a Christian I need no more than that.

[@Mark_Dyer1]

@@12091941 I can state the same, were I to be part of the liturgy of my local parish church (usually you have to attend for YEARS, before you are invited to replace a 'regular'); but it would mean something differently from you, were I to state it. The word 'of' would be more akin to 'about'.