By accepting you will be accessing a service provided by a third-party external to https://blog.alor.org/
LGBTQ+ and Intolerance of Traditional Christianity? By Chris Knight
The view of evangelist Franklin Graham, son of Billy Graham, after having his planned tour of the UK objected to on “hate” grounds by LGBTQ+, is that The Lobby is intolerant of traditional Christianity:
“Prominent evangelical pastor Franklin Graham said Sunday that LGBTQ activists are trying to ban “the truth of the Gospel” from British society by having him barred from preaching in the UK. In parallel posts on Facebook and Twitter, Rev. Graham lamented efforts “by LGBTQ activists” to have his eight-city evangelistic tour across the UK cancelled. Opposition to the Gospel shouldn’t really surprise us. Jesus warned that it would come,” Graham wrote. “As you may know, my eight-city evangelistic tour across the UK has been met with resistance by LGBTQ activists who inaccurately claim that I am homophobic, Islamophobic, and say that I speak hate.” “Anyone who knows me or has heard me speak knows that this really isn’t true — but, I DO preach the TRUTH of the Gospel. Could it be, rather, that these folks are truthophobic or free-speech-ophobic?” Graham asks. Like many Christians, Rev. Graham has not hesitated to voice his disagreement with the 2015 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to impose same-sex marriage on the nation in Obergefell v. Hodges. Appealing to biblical morality, Graham has continued to assert that marriage is the union of one man and one woman, which was the predominant belief of humanity for all of history. In his dissent from Obergefell, Justice Samuel Alito presciently wrote that the decision would be used to hurt Americans who may not share a contemporary view of marriage as a malleable, fluid arrangement between an unspecified number of unspecified persons. “It will be used to vilify Americans who are unwilling to assent to the new orthodoxy,” he wrote. In his Facebook post Sunday, Rev. Graham cites Australian Martyn Iles who asks if society “has become so ‘tolerant’ that it is now intolerant of mainstream Christianity.” “This is really a fight for truth, and the Gospel is what is really being ‘banned’ from these venues,” Graham writes. “It really boils down to the fact that they disagree with the message.” Speaking the truth of Christianity to people, even when the message is unwelcome, is “love speech,” Graham asserts, the opposite of hate speech.”
Of course, we agree with these noble sentiments, being traditional Christians ourselves, but there are plenty of “woke” politically correct church leaders, who are pushing the Christianity = racism line, and some are right at the top of the tree:
“The Church of England’s most prominent cleric, Justin Welby, said he is “ashamed of our history” and of his supposed advantages as a straight white male. The Archbishop of Canterbury was speaking ahead of a vote by the Church’s General Synod to “lament, on behalf of Christ’s Church, and apologises for, the conscious and unconscious racism experienced by countless black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) Anglicans in 1948 and subsequent years”. 1948 was the year the Empire Windrush ship landed hundreds of Caribbean migrants in Britain, firing the starting gun on a wave of mass migration to the kingdom from its former empire which continues to the present day. “I am almost beyond words. Personally, I am sorry and ashamed. I’m ashamed of our history and I’m ashamed of our failure,” Welby said of his Church’s “conscious and unconscious racism”. “It’s shaming as well as shocking. It is shocking, but it’s profoundly shaming,” he continued, somewhat redundantly, in a speech which even he described as “incoherent”. “I have white advantage. Educational advantage. Straight advantage. Male advantage… I’m not ashamed of those advantages; I’m ashamed of not knowing I had them,” Welby said. “[T]here is no doubt when we look at our own Church that we are still deeply institutionally racist. Let’s just be clear about that. I said it to the College of Bishops a couple of years ago and it’s true,” he added, as part of a long harangue on what he sees as an excess of white people in England’s established church. “Most of us in here [at the Synod], almost all of us, the vast majority of us – well over 85 per cent; and remember 15 per cent is roughly the BAME in this country, so if we were representative it would be 15 per cent – but well over 85 per cent, over 90 per cent, are white,” he complained. He failed, however, to address the fact that a very significant portion of the 15 per cent ethnic minority share of Britain’s population belong to the Muslim, Hindu, and Sikh faiths, who you would not reasonably expect to see represented at an Anglican assembly.”
Many pointed out that white working-class men do not have this mystical “white privilege” such as miners dying of lung disease:
But ethno-masochism, is trendy among the white new class, who are free to beat their chests about supposed evils, feel morally superior (itself a form of “racism” by their own conceptions), but never say how they are going to do something, by giving up this evil privilege. The archbishop needs to resign, pay back all his salaries, but before doing so, the church needs to give-up all of its vast wealth to those who are the alleged victims of racism. Just to feel good. But, you can bet anything that they will not be doing this any time soon! Like many of the Pope’s speeches, it is just feel good moral gesturing, basically meaningless.