Religious Double Standards ?

1. Declare interest – I’m an atheist
2. Start bitching – There’s a bit of a row going on in the Anglican Church because the US branch appointed a gay man as a Bishop Link. The European side of things wants an apology or they will take the matter further. From that link – “Many conservative clergy believe the Bible explicitly condemns homosexuality”. Now I couldn’t care what sexuality anyone is, but it seems this church does. But hasn’t this Church blessed killers ? Blessed terrorists ? Blessed people who have committed crimes (sins ?) that have damaged many others ? Is this church completely free of predatory paedophile priests ? I doubt it.

This Church has got it’s robes all rucked up simply because of a difference in ‘belief’, a difference of interpretation. There’s a commandment that goes along these lines – “Thou shalt not kill”. Isn’t there another about adultery ? Yet won’t these priests insist that their God is the final judge ? That us mere mortals should not proclaim on someone, that we should forgive, turn the other cheek, leave it until the Day Of Judgement ?
So basically, an Anglican priest / bishop / minister / whatever would defend a murderer, would defend a paedophile, would assist in hiding predatory behaviour, would insist that we forgive the adulterer yet when someone not of the sexuality they approve of gets promoted in their church, they have a hissy fit ? WTF ?

Reminds me of what my dad used to tell me: Do as I say, not as I do.

3 thoughts on “Religious Double Standards ?

  1. While I do agree with you about the hipocricies of the church. Although I think there is a distinction to make between how the church should react to people generally and how it reacts to it’s own members. The church should be loving and open to everyone. However, once a person becomes a member of the church, they are agreeing to abide by the rules passed down in the bible. Can you see that there’s a difference between not condemning people generally, but holding accountable those who are supposed to be faithfully being the church’s representitives and servants?

  2. Good point – I’d missed that in my shooting off :)

    It’s odd though how they derive these rules given the book they have, and odder still in that if they looked back over time and saw how their membership and practices had changed, how they are now is vastly different to how they where then – then being anywhere from 50 to 950 years ago.

    Progress happens.

  3. Remember a similar outcry here in Ireland last year. The President (Catholic) was at a Church Of Ireland ceremony and received communion. The head of the Catholic Church pointed out later that this was in contravention of the laws of the Catholic Church and people went mad about his sectarian and divisive attitude but at the end of the day you either believe or you don’t! Religion though who needs it!!

Comments are closed.