Rowan Williams, are you doing this on purpose?

[sparkindarkness]

Because, y’know, I think you’re an intelligent man. I also think you’re an aware man. And when you were first chosen you were tipped to be liberal. I get that “liberal” from an organised religion point of view is certainly different from what I consider liberal, but I kind of hoped it would mean more than “yes you can toast marshmallows on the

Comments

[suryaofvulcan]

Warning - sweeping generalisation coming up.

Rowan Williams has a problem. On the one hand he has Anglican dioceses in the US ordaining gay and lesbian bishops. On the other, he has dioceses in Africa that are vehemently anti-gay. Above anything else, he wants to keep the Anglican church 'unified', so he needs to somehow reconcile those two extremes. He fears that if he appears to be too 'pro-gay' he will alienate the African dioceses so much that they will split away from the Anglican church. Similarly, if he opposes the US dioceses, he risks losing them. So he sits on the fence, doing his best to say bugger all.

It's entirely political, and for someone who sets himself up as a 'moral leader' not just in this country but in the Christian world as a whole, it stinks like a midden in summer. He's too concern with preventing the divisions within the Anglican communion to stand up and do the right thing.

All of which makes his 'morality' questionable at best, in my view.

[sparkindarkness]

The problem is he has looked at the two sides - and thrown in with not just homophobia but the grossest element of it. He openly criticises homosexual bishops, no delay, no pretention otherwise - then is silent or mealy mouthed when it comes to an openly genocidal bill. It doesn't even look like he's trying to balance to two factions - it looks like he's supporting one

In the end he's going to have to make a choice - because the the moment he seems willing to tolerate or endorse extreme persecution of homosexuals - which undermines him and his church completely