Police criticize, investigate Church of England bishop for comments about reparative therapy
Peter Forster, the Church of England's Bishop of Chester, is one of the men behind the church's report, "Some Issues In Human Sexuality: A Guide to the Debate," which received some media attention last week. (The report essentially called for "full debate" of sexuality issues in the church and said that gay, bisexual, and transgender parishioners should be treated with "understanding, support, and unconditional love," but offered no policy recommendations.)
It seemed natural, then, that the local newspaper would ask Forster, who opposes the ordination of gay bishops, about the report and about homosexuality and the church. Among his comments to the Chester Chronicle was the following: "Some people who are primarily homosexual can reorientate themselves. I would encourage them to consider that as an option, but I would not set myself up as a medical specialist on the subject—that's in the area of psychiatric health. We want to help them, but I don't offer it as a panacea. I am about giving honor to marriage."
The comment made national news, and now the local police are investigating the comment as a breach of public order. (Manchester Online reports that the complaint suggested that Forster's comments were a hate crime.) Police chief Peter Fahy already seems to have made up his mind, and tells the BBC that Bishop Forster crossed the line. "I think in a civilized society that is totally unacceptable," he said. "Cheshire Police, day in, day out, deals with offences against members of minority communities which are generated by hate and prejudice. I think all public leaders need to make sure that comments they make are balanced by that need for all of us to be giving clear leadership on this issue and to make sure that vulnerable groups are protected and that people have an awareness of the needs and the backgrounds of all these various groups."
The bishop's office has refused to comment on the situation. Smart move: Forster would probably face another investigation no matter what he said.
New Hampshire Supreme Court: Lesbian sex can't count as adultery
In another shocking development regarding homosexuality and the law, the New Hampshire Supreme Court ruled 3-2 that a married woman having sex with another woman cannot count as adultery, since Webster's Dictionary and an 1878 case both define "intercourse" as a necessary part of adultery.
The two dissenting judges disagreed, saying that lesbian sex is still adulterous since "because it occurs outside of marriage and involves intimate sexual activity, not because it involves only one particular sex act."
Did you miss our second helping?
Regular Weblog readers, please note: We posted twice on Friday, with one Weblog in the morning and another in the afternoon. The latter included links to more than 200 stories, so you won't want to miss it.
Copyright © 2003 Christianity Today. Click for reprint information.
Suggest links and stories by sending e-mail to email@example.com
Check out Books & Culture's weblog, Content & Context.
See our past Weblog updates:
November 7b | 7a | 6 | 5 | 3
October 31 | 30 | 29 | 28 | 27
October 24 | 23 | 22 | 21
October 17 b | 17a | 16 | 15 | 13
October 10 | 9 | 8 | 6
October 3 | 2 | 1 | September 30 | 29
September 25 | 24 | 23 | 22
and more, back to November 1999
Subscribe to Christianity Today and get access to this article plus 65+ years of archives.
- Home delivery of CT magazine
- Complete access to articles on ChristianityToday.com
- Over 120 years of magazine archives plus full access to all of CT’s online archives
- Learn more
Read These Next
- TrendingAfter Nashville, Moral Numbness Is Our EnemyShootings have become normal to the American public. But as Christians, we know better.
- From the MagazineJohn 3:16: So Loved, So FamiliarWe need fresh eyes for our faith’s basic teachings, no matter how long we’ve studied the Bible.简体中文繁體中文
- Editor's PickThis Palm Sunday, Ponder Donkeys, Not BranchesFor his entry into Jerusalem, Jesus picked a symbol of lowliness rather than military might.