#general synod

[sapphosremains]

the promised theological reflection on the general synod on prayers of love and faith - part 1

gonna be a big girl and use capitals sorry if its scary

as promised, this one will be less teary and personal, and more theological, but don't worry, you'll still get a big opinion of me and my personality! part 1 will address doctrine: why do we think it's changing, is it changing, should it be doctrine at all?

Firstly, let's get one thing straight. PLF is NOT allowing homosexual holy matrimony. If you want to understand what PLF is and isn't, you can read my previous post on this, or read the guidance (prepare to be wholly whish-washed by the whishy washy nature of it though), but essentially PLF is a set of prayers that can (come February 2025 if the General Synod does not block the motion then) be used by a minister to PRAY FOR people in a homosexual relationship (NOT a prayer for the relationship itself, nor is it a blessing). However, where doctrine is concerned, it is the idea that this is the definition of holy matrimony:

"marriage is in its nature a union permanent and lifelong, for better for worse, till death them do part, of one man with one woman, to the exclusion of all others on either side, for the procreation and nurture of children, for the hallowing and right direction of the natural instincts and affections, and for the mutual society, help and comfort which the one ought to have of the other, both in prosperity and adversity." - Church of England Canon B30

A) Why do we think it's changing?

So, if PLF is just prayers for people in a homosexual relationship, what are the issues? What doctrine do we think is changing? Surely we can pray for anyone?

Firstly, some think that the PLF motion would change doctrine because it will be agreed by B2, not B5. B2 is the process by which the General Synod can approve doctrinal liturgy.

Secondly, as in B30, the Church of England believes that marriage is between a man and a woman. Therefore, some argue that praying for people in a same-sex marriage is praying for people engaging in extramarital sex as they will not recognise ssm as valid marriage. However, then, there should be no issue then with praying for celibate couples.

This doctrine also defines marriage as being for procreation and nurture of children, which a same-sex couple cannot naturally achieve. However, the Church permits marriage between couples who may struggle to conceive, and those too old to conceive, as well as allowing contraceptive methods.

B) Is it changing?

We have two examples of similar changes in the church before:

remarriage after divorce (passed in certain circumstances since 2002)

ordination of women (passed in 1992)

Unfortunately, we do not have examples of these liturgically as significant changes were not made (as far as I can find) to liturgy and passed through the B2 system, so I cannot judge whether this is a doctrinal change here. I would argue that both of these were doctrinal changes, though I know there are others that would disagree. Some would argue that the reasons for divorce that are accepted are enfolded in the doctrine of marriage in the first place - couples who do not exclude all others for each other, do not help and comfort each other, etc could be considered 'invalid' marriages, therefore making divorce acceptable without doctrinal changes.

And again, PLF is not same sex holy matrimony! I think some think that this is a 'gateway drug' of slippery slopes to a crazy gay church (read: tolerant, loving, inclusive church that demonstrates Christ's unwavering and unconditional love). So, no, I don't think doctrine is changing. Even if praying for gay couples is praying for those engaging in extramarital sex, do we not pray for all 'sinners'?

Let's examine PLF more in its wording for the couple.

Prayer of dedication:

"enfold your servants N and N with your encouragement, hope, and love. Fill them with the grace to rejoice always in their love for one another,"

Prayer for companionship

"give grace to your servants N and N, that they may be companions in joy"

Prayer for grace to live well:

"give N and N wisdom and devotion in the ordering of their life together. May they dwell together in love and peace all the days of their life, seeking one another’s welfare, bearing one another’s burdens and sharing one another’s joys;"

Prayer for God's blessing:

"we give you thanks for N and N, for the love and friendship they share, and for their commitment to one another. As they come before you this day, trusting you as the giver of all good gifts, strengthen their love by your love, and gladden their hearts with your joy, that their journey through life may become a pilgrimage of grace. By your blessing, and with you as their companion and guide, may they rejoice in hope and be sustained in love all the days of their life and in the age to come, through Jesus Christ our Lord."

or

"Pour out, we pray, the abundance of your grace upon N and N in their life together. By your blessing, may they share in the joy of your kingdom where goodness and mercy abound; and bring them to feast with your saints for ever"

For lifelong peace:

"look with favour on N and N as they journey together through life. Deepen their love and strengthen their wills to honour the commitment they have made, that they may continue in lifelong faithfulness and friendship to each other;"

Everything else follows similarly, with no differences in what love is referred to etc. Main issues raised with the phrasing is that it is too similar to that of Holy Matrimony. I would argue that the main focus of all of the phrasing is the relationship between the individuals and God, with very little focused on their relationship. When the word 'love' is used, it is non-specific - Jesus had 'love' for his disciples. The prayers of covenanted friendship also use the word love, and also describe the pair's 'life together', so the issues with the phrasing come from the type of relationship, not the phrasing itself. When we acknowledge that this is the issue, that we are praying for and using these words in reference to a homosexual relationship, we return to the original issue of it being against doctrine, which we determined it is not.

C) Should it be doctrine at all?

I won't say much on this, because there are several articles I know of (and I'm sure many, many more of which I don't) that explain why doctrines against homosexuality are not Biblically supported, explaining the complex nuance of the time in which the Bible was written, extraneous influences such as Roman culture, and surrounding issues in the anti-gay 'clobber' passages, but essentially, the support for doctrinal anti-gay is weak. I would argue that we should be critically considering and praying on all aspects of doctrine to ensure that it is in line with His Word and pleasing to Him, as far as it can be. As Martyn Snow acknowledged at the Synod, 'this side of Heaven, the Church will never be perfect'. If, after the resurrection, sat at His table, we discover that homosexuality is indeed repugnant to His law, I concede. However, I think accepting doctrine as doctrine, and using this as a key argument is problematic. Recall all the past doctrines we would consider to be heretical today! Without critical thinking, prayer, and discernment, we cannot become more amenable to God. We should strive for perfection, and that includes critically analysing things we take as 'gospel'!

God bless you all, and may you all feel His extraordinary love. Let us hope and pray that this disagreement does not cause such schism in His Church, and that we can all consider each other and each other's viewpoints with love, understanding, and compassion. Let us pray for our LGBTQ+ siblings in this continued time of difficulty as our rights and God's love for us continue to be debated.

Useful resources:

Unfortunately, I can't find the best resource I read about the context of the 'clobber verses' and the idea that they were written in a culture of rejecting most Roman practices as heretical, but if I do find it I'll update this.

Prayers of Love and Faith:

Canons:

Watch the General Synod: (see Monday 8 Afternoon for the PLF debate)

https://collected.jcu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1019&context=mastersessays

[stairnaheireann]

#OTD in Irish History | 22 August:

565 – St Columba reports seeing a monster in Loch Ness, Scotland. 1755 – Birth of General Jean Joseph Amable Humbert. He was a French soldier, a participant in the French Revolution, who led a failed invasion of Ireland to assist Irish rebels in 1798. 1791 – Theobald Wolfe Tone publishes “An argument on behalf of the Catholics of Ireland”. 1798 – Birth of doctor, writer, abolitionist and…

[loremonster]

I'd say the children of people who shouldn't have had kids.

Still, fully agreed.

we are the daughters of parents who should not have had kids

[sheltiechicago]

Vatican City

Priests, bishops and cardinals preside at Holy Mass with the College of Cardinals for the opening of the XVI ordinary general assembly of the Synod of Bishops in Vatican City. Women were allowed to vote for the first time at the meeting of bishops as the Vatican sought to address some of the church’s thorniest issues as part of an agenda that has rattled many conservatives.

Photograph: Antonio Masiello/Getty Images

[irishgop]

The United Church of Christ elected Rev. Karen Georgia Thompson its first female & woman of African descent to lead the mainline denomination as general minister and president on Monday July 3 at its 34th General Synod in Indianapolis.

[sapphicmuppet]

unresolved things still in my brain post fhjy finale

okay hihi this is not me trying to nitpick I just have a lot of unresolved thoughts!! okay here we go

Buckys arc:

I don’t have a ton of stuff to say just generally his arc being unresolved, being counted as a follower of Cassandra but that never being formally gone over, him still living with Mac and Donna, him skipping class, the drama with his adventuring party etc.

Bobby Dawn:

another self explanatory one, Sandra Lynn never finding out he was teaching at school, him escaping scot free, the drama in the sol pantheon, him never finding buddy etc. Just a lot of unanswered questions

Mazey Graduating:

for having a finale that has a lot of emphasis on the Fabian/Mazey relationship I wish they went over that Mazey IS a senior and graduated at the end of the year and is presumably going to college in the fall, and just the logistics of her being a college student still dating someone in highschool, just interesting having them get together when they’re already going in separate paths. I wish they went over it!! because now in my brain I have to justify it as a summer thing because they’re actively going to be doing other stuff the next school year.

Kipperlilly (and Jace):

okay so. Kipperlily was never rage starred or she willing took on the ragestar whatever I NEED TO KNOW MORE. Ik the point is that the ratgrinders suck and are inexperienced heroes but the realization that she essentially took all of The Ratgrinders down with her and gave them up to Porter, wasn’t being controlled by him in the way the rest of them were, had an even more direct hand in Lucy’s death, but also was still being manipulated by Porter for years?? I need it to get gone over. Also Kipperlily staying dead? to be clear it shouldn’t be The Bad Kids’ jobs to have to deal with the moral question on if the ratgrinders deserve being revived but there’s so much unsaid about Kipperlily and so much she didn’t get to do ugh. And in her final moments her absolute hatred towards Riz just being justified? In her eyes. Idk. Lots of thoughts. AND JACE!! Porter ADMITS to killing Jace himself and shatterstarring him and says he will do it again, but also Jace is clearly under Porter’s control to a degree and wasn’t revived too. I wish we knew more about him because as of what we know right now it seems crazy to keep him dead without questioning him and with him being Porters partner in this whole thing he could fully reveal everything Porter and The Ratgrinders had been doing the past three years.

Bakur:

idk just minor stuff with Bakur. He never regained his elf status which was interesting? We never saw the resolution of his fight with Lydia etc

Kalina:

Okay the acknowledgment in the finale that Kalina seems to genuinely have her own free will and moral compass outside of Cassandra is making me crazy because I just assumed she was tied to Cassandra so when she was good Kalina was too by default but there’s so much not cleared up about her. She DID lure Cassandra to the synod where she was weak and fostered the rage in Cassandra about Kristen’s treatment of her. She killed herself and was trying to communicate to Riz about Porter. Ankarna has NEVER trusted her. She had the spies tongue with Porter. She’s escaping with Buddy at the end. WHATS HAPPENING WHAT IS SHE DOING AGGHHHHH

[mprgz]

(Kingdom of Minoa (Crete), Knossos Province)

Various Minoan men modeling their traditional (folk costume) paternity wear, corresponding the typical dress around the mid 19th century. The Minoans have occupied Crete since at least the middle bronze age, and are one of the few pre-Indo-European populations (in terms of language) to survive in Europe, along with the Basques. (The Uralic migrations in the north of the continent are now known to be later than the Indo-European migrations.) Although ruled by the Romans, and Byzantines before re-establishing independence in the late 7th century, the Minoans have been able to preserve their language, albeit it their native "hieroglyphic" script was replaced by the Latin alphabet around the second century AD. Knowledge of the hieroglyphic script was lost, but recovered in the 19th century by archeologists. Their preservation of male child-carrying has been used to support the Indo-European-Amorite female child-carrying hypothesis: which states that in early farmer societies, male child-carrying predominated, in order to maximize population growth, and pastoralist warrior societies switched to female child-carrying in order to maximize the number of warriors fit for combat. This innovation is theorized to have arisen in multiple unrelated cultures.

Among contemporary Minoans, female pregnancy is rare. Historical sources support the notion male pregnancy was the general rule, or at least common the Minoans, several Greek and Roman sources state that Minoan men were the ones who gave birth. Likewise, some early Byzantine synods attempted to suppress the practice. But, there is not enough evidence to know if male pregnancy was only common or it was always their near-universal practice.

[littlemisspractical]

So ... I started this in April. And worked on it a bit, and then next picked it up at Christmas. But it's done! My LARP group, Hearthfire Hall. Closeups and character details under the cut!

Isolde Hannasdottir, Tempest Shield, Night Bringer. She is the one who started the whole thing, seeing the refugees (of which she was one) sheltering however they could and realising they needed two things: a place to stay to survive the harsh Wintermark winter, and purpose. She found the land, got the resources however she could, and rallied anyone who could help to build a brand new hall, who would take in anyone who needed it. She's now their Thane and leader, although often doesn't feel she's a good one, as she's not bold or commanding as many others are. The rest of the hall, however, follows her very happily, as she's got the perfect leadership skillset for them. A skilled healer and one of the best crafter Runesmiths in Wintermark.

Ida the River. She was in the same group as Isolde when they were forced out of their home by war, and followed Isolde south to give what help she could to people as a healer. She has backed Isolde up every step of the way forming Hearthfire, and now serves as its Grimnir and runs its hospital with the help of a large bevy of apprentices. She and Isolde don't always agree, but they have a very reliable working relationship and the easy intimacy of people who have lived and worked together for years. They might have different oppinions but they're pushing in the same direction. She's an extremely skilled healer, sworn to the craft, and now a Priest of the Way, too, to offer spiritail aid and guidance to those who need it and a refuge has lots of them). (Ida is also my character!)

Unnr. He's joined the hall with Tulli a few years ago, wanting to help their mission of helping people. He's a skilled midwife and an even more skilled merchant and dedicant of Prosperity. He's the hall Alderman and in charge of resources, a job he's far better at than anyone else around. He and Ida frequently clash on the right way to grow healing herbs, the right way to organise the hsopital and the best way to go about doing things. Despite both being loud, forceful people with loud, forceful opinions, much to the chagrin of the rest of the hall, they do both respect each other. He's also trying to woo Tulli, although nobody is sure if either of them have noticed yet. He keeps birds. The only one her with no priest training.

Tulli. She joined at the same time as Unnr, having stopped in the hall over winter and liking what she found there. A sometimes mysterious and often aloof presence, she is a Stormcrow and Priest of Wisdom, and does her best to guide the hall on those precepts. Often tries to mediate Ida and Unnr's argument's, generally to the detriment of all involved. She has the ambition to attain a high rank in the Imperial Synod, thinking the current leader of the Wisdom Assembly isn't up to much. Has certainly yet to notice Unnr's interest in her. The only one here with no ability to heal.

Eldrid. The most martial of the group and who only joined this year, she is Champion of Ambition, a formidable warrior and battlefield healer. She seeks to inspire others to ambition by example, and can be found encouraging people to pursue ambitions both great and small. A woman of action, she admires Isolde's ambition with Hearthfire and wants to help and support that.

[lilafunger]

Overly Specific Headcanons about the Religious Sect Olivia and Reila grew up with!

I am Terminally autistic about both cults and generally just Intense and Not So Good For People sects of Christianity and I enjoy thinking about my blorbos' upbringings, so I thought I'd do some Research on real life religious stuff and come up with some headcanons based on all that. I might do the same thing with some of the other characters, because thinking about this is super fun to me, but tbh, doing it with the (ex) Alll-merian guys is probably going to be easiest, because I can lean moreso onto Christianity as an inspiration for practices. anyway yapping under cut V Discussion of some real life religious stuff and also of ableism down there.

FIRSTLY I had to figure out which subdenoms I wanted to take inspiration from, so naturally I started by looking up which ones were most Popular in Germany during the 1930s, around the equivalent of where Olivia and Reila were growing up. It was pretty split between Catholicism and Protestantism, in this particular timeframe of WWII and a short while during the buildup toward it, there seems to have been a sect called The German Evangelical Church, which was much too intertwined with the state and injected much too much Nazi propaganda into its preaching. I'm not gonna go into that too much! Mostly because that's a wildly upsetting topic for a LOT of people and not really necessary, as Funger's own Kaiser has his own slew of horrors he's been getting up to. The German Evangelical Church was sort of a mix of denominations, one of the key figures of which was Lutheranism!

SO. Basically, the Church I'm imagining the Haas family as having grown up with would be a fairly extreme sect of Lutheranist-inspired Alll-merianism with a REAL healthy dose of Kaiser Propaganda in there. I ended up researching a mixture of the German Evangelical Church, hyperconservative and apparently quite cultlike Lutheran sects like WELS.

I think I'll call it the Bremen Evangelical Alll-merian Synod or BEAS...

I don't think the sect is very uh... Pro Science at all. Reject Fallible Human Reason and Embrace Only the Most Literal Interpretation Of Our Alll-merian Texts! Don't look for information from outsiders, you have to be careful of getting caught up in False Doctrine! (In fact, just don't trust other people.) But yea, I think the rejection of human reason and of science fits well with the twins' parents utter reluctance to get her actual help for her condition. and ALSO imagining it having been that way makes the fact both of them grew up to be so academic very satisfying to me.

Very very literal about their Interpretations of The Texts. Very Very Very Literal.

At WELS schools at least, it sounds like there's quite a major culture of No Privacy!!! We just come into your room! Which reminded me of how Ever-watching Olivia and Reilas' parents are described as having been. So I think I can mentally expand on that and make a Thing of it.

I wonder what the Alll-merian equivalent of Luther's Poop Covered In Snow analogy for his ideas on Original Sin is... I'm not actually sure, I'd have to figure out more about the in-universe ideas about sin and stuff. But humans are nasty poop covered in the righteousness of the ascended one. Don't become too self loathing about that.

NOW. Keeping in mind Le'garde's goal of "Uniting" the world, I think one way his nonsense leaks into BEAS is through Mission work!! Good Deeds won't save people, proselytising will! Kinda like the Mormon approach to mission work perhaps? Veeeeeery heavy on the importance of getting people ALL OVER THE PLACE baptised in Alll-mer's name. Just Alll-mer's, definitely not the Yellow King's.

Man this is less about Religion headcanons and more about the twins' upbringing in general but I am Quickly beginning to imagine the parents favouring Reila faaaaaaaar too much. On top of how people can be about disabled people in general, which I could talk about so so much but I won't right now. But I think between her having spent so much of her youth bedbound (she wont be able to grow up and EVANGELISE :( ) and the lack of respect for her particular interests and talents, I think it would be very easy for her to be reduced to being sort of a burden in their eyes. Radiating and Shadowed,,,,

On that note, I did some looking into the real life beliefs about disabled people. What I found was that there's a lot of referring to it as A Way For The Works Of God To Be Displayed In Them and as A Manifestation Of Original Sin. I am... Less sure of how this would be translated to this universe through an Alll-merian lens. Also Martin Luther Himself I believe was a little too pro Murdering Disabled People, identifying at least one kid as a changeling, so the vibes around disabled people in a religious sect partially inspired by WELS can only be... Just. Great. I've heard at least that it's not great to be disabled in that group, but it's hard to find any specific info.

Because of the intensity about the scripture being the only infallible thing, I imagine the Bremen Evangelicals reject Enki's writings of Alll-mer as a creation of Vitruvia, much preferring the original Virgin Mother story.

Leaning into the WELS inspiration and what little I know of that, I think the community can be sort of a popularity contest so to speak...

Maybe Le'garde's goal of uniting the land to bring about a new era is twisted into something wholly unrelated for BEAS, like We All Have To Bring About The New Era for The Second Coming! or something along those lines.

Lutherans in general are in favour of secular healthcare, but Olivia and Reilas' parents notably and canonically are Not... Maybe it's because it's a much more intense group. Don't trust the fallible knowledge of random outsiders, no matter how many degrees they have! We Trust In Alll-mer!

SHAME SHAME SHAME SHAME SHAME

I think the Lutherans are fairly unique in that they do a Last Supper type sacrament that other denoms don't?? idk. But maybe BEAS has some fucked up rituals they do based on that... Considering the nature of Fear and Hunger's setting, maybe in the most most most closed off scary places (Probably not on the kinda scale where Olivia would have seen or been involved in it) some shit like Crucifying your local Sin Eater and then eating THEM! This not wine blood actually is a symbol of Alll-mer's divine blood and this not bread flesh actually is a symbol of Alll-mer's divine flesh! :) yummy

I might think More on this another time but I'm getting tired so this is what you get for now. Feel free to add onto this if you have any ideas :0

i might well be onto NOTHING here but it is fun to think about

[lgbtpopcult]

Best WLW News Stories of 2023

Meet South Korea’s first lesbian couple to have a child

[whencyclopedia]

Orosius

Paulus Orosius (usually given as Orosius, 5th century CE) was a Christian theologian and historian who was also a friend and protege of St. Augustine of Hippo (l. 354-430 CE). He is best known for his work Seven Books of History Against the Pagans in which he argued that the 410 CE sack of Rome by Alaric I, King of the Goths (r. 394-410 CE) had nothing to do with the Roman adoption of Christianity, a claim popularly supported among the pagans of the day. He was encouraged to undertake the work by Augustine whose book City of God was inspired by the same event. Tracing the history of the world from creation to his own time, from a Christian perspective, Orosius' work was immensely popular with followers of the new religion and became a standard history referenced by later writers. Following the publication of his book, he disappears from the historical record.

Life & Career

Little is known of Orosius' early life. He was probably born in Portugal to an upper-class family in c. 380 CE and entered the priesthood at some point in his early years, probably before the age of 20. In 414 CE he was forced to leave his home in Hispania quickly (for unknown reasons) and booked passage on a ship to Hippo in North Africa to meet Saint Augustine. He seems to have made a good impression on the older cleric because, the next year, Augustine sent him to Jerusalem to debate with the heretic Pelagius, author of the Pelagian Heresy, which claimed that man was capable of individual salvation without the church's intercession.

In Jerusalem, Orosius conferred with Saint Jerome and John, Bishop of Jerusalem and faced Pelagius at a synod called to discuss the heresy. The outcome was inconclusive but, in the official report sent to Rome, Orosius' own orthodoxy was questioned. This charge prompted him to write his defense in the book Liber Apologeticus contra Pelagianos (Defense against Pelagius) maintaining his orthodoxy while condemning Pelagius.

Orosius left Palestine at some point in early 416 CE, having been given the relics of the first Christian martyr Saint Stephen (from the biblical Book of Acts 6 & 7) to bring back to his home in Portugal. He stopped first in Hippo to deliver letters to Augustine from Jerome, and it is generally thought that Augustine approached him at this time regarding writing his history.

Most scholars agree that Orosius' history shows signs of being written in haste and perhaps Augustine wanted it finished quickly so that he could use it as a resource in completing City of God. Other theories suggest that Orosius assisted in writing City of God and his history is written quickly because he was working on two pieces at once. All of this is speculation, however, because all that is really known is that Orosius left Hippo and returned with St. Stephen's relics to Portugal. He then wrote his history and, shortly afterwards, disappeared.

Continue reading...

[sapphosremains]

a personal reflection on the cofe general synod's prayers of love and faith decision

to be followed by a theological one at some point

**this post is rife with grammatical erors! i wrote it at 1am! i'm trying to get through them as i notice them but i apologise in advance**

this blog is a theological blog. when it is personal, it is reposts, or occasionally personal theological reflections, but today, after weeks of thought on the decision made by the general synod back in early july on prayers of love and faith, i cannot yet be theological. right now, this is a personal thing, and i do not have the space to be theological. despite this inability to fulfil my usual aims with the blog, i will still be writing and posting this, because it deserves to be heard, and i deserve to be heard. the voices of lgbtq people deserve to be heard, especially when they have such love for their faith and such tolerance for others that they continue in a church which supports them so little, and abuses them so often.

i could not help but cry watching the proceedings of the general synod as they discussed whether ministers should be allowed to pray for people in homosexual relationships. it is important to understand that the prayers of love and faith (plf) 'suite of resources' does not allow prayers for the relationship, only the people in it. i have tried, and i have heard the arguments by members of the alliance group and others rejecting plf, but i cannot remotely understand how anyone could reject it. as fr stuart cradduck put so powerfully, ministers bless (that's right - bless, not just pray for) sewage plants, and statues of margaret thatcher. in fact, even we as the laity are allowed, and encouraged, to pray for sinners in compassion and love. so, even if one did view homosexual relationships as sinful, how do we reconcile praying for murderers and blessing sewage plants with the stark rejection of praying for the people in a God-centered, loving relationship? again, not the relationship. and, as we see in praying for sinners, prayer is not an endorsement. where can the logic in rejecting prayers for people be?

i am in the process of discernment. i feel called by God to be a priest, administering the sacraments and serving His people. i also feel called by God to marriage. in fact, i have believed since i met her (and this is a belief that has only grown more fervent as we have been together) that God calls me to her. i won't give you all the reasons, but our meeting was as a result of a number of extraordinary circumstances for me, our initial friendship pulled me out of a very difficult circumstance (one i asked God to alleviate), our relationship worked patiently and tirelessly through difficulties in dealing with my trauma, she has drawn me closer and closer to God and His holy, catholic (little c not Roman) Church, and He has answered my prayers in every aspect pertaining to our relationship. our relationship is God-centered, and the fruits of it are the fruits of the work of the Holy Spirit. we go to church together. what, in this, had it been a man, could possibly be so awful? yet, as it stands, i cannot have both of the things that i feel God is calling me towards. i feel i am meant to be an ambassador of the eternal love offered in His church signified by my same-sex marriage (ssm) in the priesthood. why should i have to choose? why should i be allowed to choose which of His callings is most important? that is not my decision. if i have both callings, like many priests have a calling to their heterosexual marriage, why am i put in a position where i should make a choice on His divine will?

it also felt like speakers who voted against seemed to focus on the idea of negotiable doctrine. the idea that plf means that doctrine is negotiable. firstly, there was ambiguity and vagueness that did not help this argument. it was unclear whether speakers were arguing against the potential 'support' of sex outside of marriage that plf could create, or just the 'support' of gay relationships. again, as addressed above, it does neither. however, it is still not changing doctrine. against speakers seemed to convey the feeling that plf brought vast doctrinal changes (such as allowing homosexual holy matrimony), or that this doctrine exists in the first place. firstly, plf does not bring doctrinal changes. it prays for people, as we pray for all people. secondly, this is not doctrine in the same way that belief in Jesus Christ as the Son of God and fully God is doctrine. this is not doctrine in the same way that believing in the existence of God is doctrine. this is a matter of a few passages that we know are rife with translation errors and cultural misunderstandings.

should it constitute a doctrinal change, the words of mtr brenda wallace, who discussed how we accepted doctrinal changes about divorce, despite scripture seeming to forbid it (more clearly than in passages about homosexuality, i would argue), were powerful. she, along with bishop sarah mullally, emphasised that at the heart of this problem are real people, who we put at risk the more we tie ourselves up in theology, law, and doctrine.

although i am grateful for the passing of the motion on plf, its existence as procrastination, again well put by cradduck, cannot be denied. furthermore, the statistics were disappointing. in a christian church which subscribes to the new testament assertion that love is the most important commandment, 12/39 bishops voted against plf, with five abstaining, 88/189 clergy voted against, with two abstaining, and 91/188 laity voted against, with two abstaining. to put this into more understandable numbers, 31% of bishops voted against, 47% of clergy voted against, and 48% of laity voted against. 46% of voters (supposedly representative of the church) oppose prayers for people in same sex relationships.

now, i am not someone without criticism of my own viewpoints, and i am aware of other reasons for voting against. some, like william harwood, argue, quite fairly, that they feel the motion was rushed, and lacks clarity on either side. i tend to agree. i would still argue that those in favour of inclusivity should vote favourably, but his point is understandable. i also understood the viewpoint of the bishop of bath and wells michael beasley, that through putting the plf prayers through b2, the process the synod uses for liturgy that expresses doctrine, plf implies doctrinal changes. this does seem an unwise, strong movement in an otherwise tentative course of action. of course, i would love to see the allowance of holy matrimony for homosexual couples, but i can understand the reluctance of those in support of plf for what they are - prayers - to put them through the doctrinal liturgy system. i also understand the frustration of many as expressed by fr aneal appadoo - there has evidently not been clarity and trust in this process. with all of these issues, it feels like the synod was so conflicted, and passed the motion so narrowly, because they were not voting on plf. they were voting on whether they believed this constituted doctrinal changes, they were voting on hopes and fears about future motions, and they were voting on the lack of trust they now held for the bishops.

as i have become more synodically and theologically-minded throughout this post, i do want to return to the human element. to return to the words of mtr brenda and bishop sarah about people. i love my girlfriend. i love God. and i love His Church. i cannot express how distressing it is that we need to argue so much about whether the love for all three is possible. i do not believe that God could ever condemn such love, and i cannot believe that a matter of gender supersedes any biblical and holy qualities of a love. above all, i feel naive. i feel silly, really, for having hope that i might be able to marry my wife someday in my church. i am grateful to other churches, such as the methodist and united reform churches (fun fact, i am actually christened united reform!) that allow ssm, but i just wish that i could offer my marriage up in the eyes of God in the church i know and love. i am sad, because i know that my vicar, and believe that the congregation, would be overjoyed to witness the marriage of me and my girlfriend, who they know very well and have watched our relationship flourish. i feel naive.

i pray for all involved, as it cannot have been an easy couple of hours. i would encourage others to watch this portion of the synod, if you're interested, but to prioritise your own wellbeing, as it could be difficult to listen to.

blessings and love and prayers to you all

may we continue to strive for love

[seriouslysam8]

What inspired your decision to have Dumbledore so closely connected to the Potters in Brumous (and also, seemingly your timetravel story)?

Do you tend to maintain your character backstories across the separate AUs—like with Demelza/Teegan?

I always found it weird that James gave Dumbledore is antique family invisibility cloak. James, having grown up with Fleamont and Henry, would know how it was from his Peverell line. While he may not know it was a deathly hallow, perhaps as generations wore on they thought it just a myth, James knew it was an important family relic. To just give that to Dumbledore seems odd unless there’s some close bond between them. Being only 21, being a former student and a member of the Order just doesn’t add up.

Not to mention, Dumbledore let a bunch of fresh out of Hogwarts kids join the Order? Especially with his strict stance that you MUST be an adult to join with parental permission - a la the Weasley twins.so, James, Sirius, Remus, Peter, and Lily all joining seems a tad bit odd… unless someone cough Fleamont cough not only vouched for them but Dumbledore also knew at least one of them very intimately, aka James.

Then, there’s Dumbledore relationship with Harry. It was Dumbledore who found him a home after Jily died, not the Ministry. It was Dumbledore who kept tabs on him. It was Dumbledore who tried to maintain Harry’s innocence and let him be a kid for as long as possible until the prophecy would come crashing down on him. It could be argued he did all of this because of the prophecy, but I’m not one for the manipulative Dumbledore trope. I like him as a character who is smart and knows he’s smart but he’s blinded sometimes by his own intelligence and doesn’t always make the right calls, i.e. keeping Harry in the dark in OOTP, forcing Sirius to stay at Grimmauld, not seeing the real spy in Peter and in turn accepting the seemingly obvious answer that it was Sirius.

Speaking of that, it also seems odd Dumbledore never questioned Sirius. He didn’t want to talk to him? I mean, the guy seemingly spied on him for over a year and Dumbledore didn’t have questions? Blah, blah, plot device, blah, blah. Or maybe, Dumbledore was so enraged by Sirius’ betrayal because he did everything to protect his godson’s son and it didn’t matter in the end anyway. He needed someone to blame and Sirius was easy to blame, the wicked godfather who didn’t protect his godson.

So, I don’t know. I like their being a bit of lore between the Dumbledore’s and Potters - both of whom had generations of their family living in Godric’s Hollow. Henry and Dumbledore could potentially be the same age and could have been besties while at school.

As for if my own personal backstories and headcanons are the same among all my stories… yes. Demelza will always be Ginny’s bestie. Tegan will always be Demelza’s mom. David Robins will always die at the ends of Augustus Rookwood during his arrest. Harry will always be a premie (though his birth story does differ between Petrichor and Synodic). Walburga will always be in love with Tom Riddle. Andromeda will always consider herself more of Sirius’ big sister than older cousin. Robards and Tegan will always be besties. Dumbledore and Henry will always be besties and Dumbledore will always be Fleamont’s godfather. I try to maintain these backstories so I don’t get them all confused between different series and fuck it all up. Plus, I put so much time and effort into these backstories that I fall in love with them and then forget what’s canon and what’s not.

[scotianostra]

On December 20th 1560 the first General Assembly of the Church of Scotland was held.

The General Assembly is a meeting of ministers and elders that happens once a year to make decisions about how the church should be run, based on what Jesus has said in the Bible. The first General Assembly of the Church of Scotland met in the Magdalene Chapel, on the Cowgate in December 1560. It had 6 ministers and 36 other members. By 1567 it had 252 ministers and 621 other members. Each year, a General Assembly appoints a Moderator who makes sure everything runs smoothly.

When the second General Assembly met in 1561, some thought it should only meet if the Queen allowed it. However John Knox argued that the Queen should have no power over the Assembly.

The General Assembly is the top tier of Church government and authority. Items of Assembly business are referred from synods, presbyteries, committees, and individuals. The Assembly sits for a week-long session annually in May at the debating-chamber on the Mound, Edinburgh.

The General Assembly can also meet elsewhere. A meeting of the Assembly was held in Glasgow to mark the city’s status as European City of Culture in 1990.

[apenitentialprayer]

Also, I can't believe I have to come to the defense of the fricking Church of England, but people are really whining over the fact that the Archbishop of York said that addressing God as "Father" might be hard for those who have been abused by fathers? People are making it sound like he suggested we edit the prayer or something, but the fullest quotation I can find from his General Synod address was:

I know the word 'father' can be problematic for those whose experience of earthly fathers has been destructive and abusive, and for all of us who have labored rather too much from an oppressively patriarchal grip on life

Like, oh no....... he has a measure of sympathy for those whose only tangible experience of fatherhood was bad? Am I missing something?

[thepastisalreadywritten]

By Courtney Mares

9 November 2024

For the first time in over a century, the historic Chair of St. Peter, a wooden throne symbolizing the pope’s magisterial authority, has been removed from its gilded bronze reliquary in St. Peter’s Basilica to be displayed for public veneration. 

Pilgrims and visitors can now behold this storied relic directly in front of the basilica’s main altar, just above the tomb of St. Peter, where it will remain on display until December 8, the Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception.

According to Pietro Zander, Head of the Necropolis and Artistic Heritage Section of the Vatican:

"The last major public viewing of the chair occurred in 1867, when Pope Pius IX exposed the Chair of Peter for the veneration of the faithful for 12 days on the 1,800th anniversary of the martyrdoms of St. Peter and St. Paul."

It was the first time that the centuries-old wooden throne had been exhibited to the public since 1666 when it was first encased within Gian Lorenzo Bernini’s monumental bronze sculpture under the stained-glass Dove of the Holy Spirit window at the basilica’s apse.

Formally known as the Cathedra Sancti Petri Apostoli, or more simply as Cathedra Petri, the chair has held a revered place in Catholic tradition over the centuries, representing papal authority from St. Peter to the present.

“The chair is meant to be understood as the teacher’s ‘cathedra,’” art historian Elizabeth Lev told CNA.

“It symbolizes the pope’s duty to hand down the teaching of Christ from generation to generation.”

She explained:

“It’s antiquity [ninth century] speaks to a papacy that has endured through the ages — from St. Peter who governed a church on the run trying to evangelize with the might of the Roman Empire trying to shut him down, to the establishment of the Catholic Church and its setting down of roots in the Eternal City, to our 266th successor of St. Peter, Pope Francis.”

A Storied History

The wooden chair itself is steeped in history.

According to the Vatican, the wooden seat was likely given by the Holy Roman Emperor Charles the Bald to Pope John VIII in A.D. 875 for the emperor’s Christmas coronation in the old St. Peter’s Basilica.

A depiction of the emperor appears on the crossbeam of the chair, and its ivory panels illustrate the labors of Hercules along with other scenes from Greek mythology.

The informational sign near the chair in St. Peter’s Basilica informs visitors that “shortly after the year 1000, the Cathedra Petri began to be venerated as a relic of the seat used by the apostle Peter when he preached the Gospel first in Antioch and then in Rome.”

The Fabric of St. Peter, the organization responsible for the basilica’s upkeep, maintains:

“It cannot be ruled out that this ninth-century imperial seat may have later incorporated the panel depicting the labors of Hercules, which perhaps originally belonged to an earlier and more ancient papal seat.”

Before returning the chair to its place within Bernini’s monumental reliquary, Vatican experts will conduct a series of diagnostic tests with the Vatican Museums’ Cabinet of Scientific Research.

The ancient seat was last removed and studied from 1969 to 1974 under Pope Paul VI but was not shown to the public.

The recent restoration of Bernini’s works in the basilica, funded by the Knights of Columbus in preparation for the Catholic Church’s 2025 Jubilee Year, made it possible for the chair to be moved from the bronze sculpture in August.

Pope Francis got a sneak peak of the relic in early October and a photo of the moment — showing him sitting in a wheelchair before the Chair of St. Peter — quickly went viral.

Afterward, the pope requested that the relic be displayed for public veneration.

Francis ultimately decided that the Chair of St. Peter — a symbol of the Church’s unity under the instruction of Christ — would be unveiled for the public at the closing Mass for the Synod on Synodality.

“Pope Francis has been exceptionally generous to the faithful about displaying relics,” Lev said.

“He brought out the bones of St. Peter shortly after his election, he had the Shroud of Turin on view in 2015, and now he has taken the Chair of Peter out for veneration in the basilica.” 

“In our virtual age, where much confusion reigns between what is real and what is not, Pope Francis has encouraged us to come face to face with these ancient witnesses of our faith and our traditions.”

Feast of the Chair of St. Peter

The Feast of the Chair of St. Peter, celebrated each year on February 22, dates back to the fourth century.

St. Jerome (A.D. 347–420) spoke of his respect for the “Chair of Peter,” writing in a letter:

“I follow no leader save Christ, so I enter into communion with … the Chair of Peter, for this I know is the rock upon which the Church is built.”

As Pope Benedict XVI explained in a 2006 catechesis:

“‘Cathedra’ literally means the established seat of the bishop, placed in the mother church of a diocese, which for this reason is known as a ‘cathedral.”

“It is the symbol of the bishop’s authority and in particular, of his ‘magisterium,’ that is, the evangelical teaching which, as a successor of the apostles, he is called to safeguard and to transmit to the Christian community,” he said.

When a bishop takes possession of the particular Church that has been entrusted to him, he sits on the cathedra, Benedict explained:

“From this seat, as teacher and pastor, he will guide the journey of the faithful in faith, hope, and charity.”

“The Church’s first ‘seat’ was the upper room, and it is likely that a special place was reserved for Simon Peter in that room where Mary, mother of Jesus, also prayed with the disciples,” he added.

Benedict XVI described Peter’s ministry as a journey from Jerusalem to Antioch, where he served as bishop, and ultimately to Rome.

He noted that the See of Rome, where Peter ultimately “ended his race at the service of the Gospel with martyrdom,” became recognized as the seat of his successors, with the cathedra representing the mission entrusted to Peter by Christ.

“So it is that the See of Rome, which had received the greatest of honors, also has the honor that Christ entrusted to Peter of being at the service of all the particular Churches for the edification and unity of the entire people of God,” he said.

Bernini’s Baroque Masterpiece

Bernini’s monumental reliquary for the chair, commissioned by Pope Alexander VII and completed in 1666, is one of the most iconic artworks in St. Peter’s Basilica.

Bernini encased the wooden relic within a bronze-gilded throne, dramatically raised and crowned by a stained-glass depiction of the Holy Spirit, symbolized as a dove, surrounded by sculpted angels.

The bronze throne is supported by massive statues of four doctors of the Church — two from the West, St. Augustine and St. Ambrose, and two from the East, St. John Chrysostom and St. Athanasius.

It is symbolizing the unity of the Church through the ages, bringing together the teachings of both the Latin and Greek Church Fathers.

And at the top of the throne, cherubs hold up a papal tiara and keys symbolizing papal authority.

On the chair itself, there are three gold bas-reliefs representing the Gospel episodes: "consignment of the keys" (Matthew 16:19), “feed my sheep” (John 21:17), and the "washing of the feet" (John 13:1-17).

The ongoing restoration of Bernini’s monument at the Altar of the Chair, along with the recently finished restoration of the baldacchino, is significant not only in light of the 2025 Jubilee Year but also the upcoming 400th anniversary of the Consecration of the Current St. Peter’s Basilica in 2026.

Benedict XVI said:

“Celebrating the ‘Chair’ of Peter means attributing a strong spiritual significance to it and recognizing it as a privileged sign of the love of God, the eternal Good Shepherd, who wanted to gather his whole Church and lead her on the path of salvation.”