From here:
The new archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, will hold talks with gay rights leader Peter Tatchell on Thursday (April 18), less than a month after the Australian-born activist called Welby “homophobic” for his opposition to same-sex marriage.
“I applaud the archbishop’s willingness to engage in dialogue, all the more because he comes from the conservative wing of the Church of England,” Tatchell said in an interview. “I hope our meeting is not mere window dressing and good PR for the church. I’m expecting more than tea and sympathy.”
Tatchell, 61, said that his aim would be to persuade the new archbishop — who is also head of the world’s 77 million-member Anglican Communion — to embrace “a new historic compromise with the gay community.”
“Discrimination is not a Christian value,” he said. “The archbishop should therefore oppose all discrimination against gay people, including the ban on same-sex civil marriage.”
There is so much wrong with this, it’s hard to know where to begin; still, here goes:
Tatchell, the non-Christian has taken it upon himself to instruct Welby, the Christian, on what Christian values are: “Discrimination is not a Christian value.” This is reported unquestioningly, as if it’s to be expected.
Tatchell, arbiter of contemporary virtues, magnanimously congratulates Welby on his willingness to engage in dialogue while giving an indelible impression that it is he, Tatchell, who is granting Welby an audience, not vice versa.
Rather than Welby, the Christian, evangelising Tatchell the homosexual activist, Tatchell is evangelising Welby: Tatchell, 61, said that his aim would be to persuade the new archbishop …. to embrace “a new historic compromise with the gay community.”
It’s transparently obvious that when it comes to claiming even a vestige of moral authority, the Church of England has thrown in the towel, preferring, instead, to seek approval and guidance from a homosexual activist who claims to be suffering from brain damage.
‘”Discrimination is not a Christian value,” he said. “The archbishop should therefore oppose all discrimination against gay people…”‘
Even as written this is drivel: replace ‘gay’ with something the establishment disapproves of:
‘”Discrimination is not a Christian value,” he said. “The archbishop should therefore oppose all discrimination against racist people…”‘
‘”Discrimination is not a Christian value,” he said. “The archbishop should therefore oppose all discrimination against paedophile people…”‘
‘”Discrimination is not a Christian value,” he said. “The archbishop should therefore oppose all discrimination against bad people…”‘
‘”Discrimination is not a Christian value,” he said. “The archbishop should therefore oppose all discrimination against thieving people…”‘
‘”Discrimination is not a Christian value,” he said. “The archbishop should therefore oppose all discrimination against dishonest people…”‘
And so on.
But of course this is just words intended to confuse and manipulate: this wretched person doesn’t care whether what he says is true; only whether it achieves his aims.
And I think we Christians will decide what “our” values are, thanks.
One of them is “bear not false witness”.
How do you know that it isn’t Welby’s intention to evangelize Tatchell? After all, what you have reported here is only Tatchell’s point of view.
Let us hope and pray that this new ABC holds fast to the True Faith and does not give in to this agent of evil.
And as to this Tatchell character thinking that he knows Christian values, perhaps he should Romans 1!
Just took a look at the linked article, and this is what Welby said:
Thursday’s meeting was offered by Welby in response to an open letter Tatchell wrote on March 20; Welby wrote back and said he’d like to explain his positions “without the mediation of the press.”
He wants to explain his positions. That in no way amounts to seeking approval and guidance, David.
I think this brisk back-peddling leading, I suspect, inexorably to eventual surrender tends to reinforce my view:
You’re right to have doubts, David. The Archbishop called the meeting in response to Tatchell’s baiting him with the ‘homophobe’ slur; so he’s already on the defensive. Tatchell’s not interested in honest and reasonable dialog, he’s interested in advancing his anti-Christian agenda.
David, again, you are only looking at articles that are written from Tatchell’s point of view (Gaystar news). I am sure that a prominent gay activist would put a spin on it that Welby might not appreciate.
I would much rather talk to someone who is honest about his non-Christian point of view than someone who disguises himself as a Christian but still holds to non-Christian beliefs.