Conquer Club

The head of the Roman Catholic church in England and Wales issued his strongest attack yet on the government's plans to introduce same-sex marriage, lambasting them as "shambolic" and accusing the prime minister of "shallow thinking".

In the most divisive of a host of Christmas Day comments from religious leaders, the archbishop of Westminster, Vincent Nichols, questioned the democratic credentials of the plans, which could see the first gay weddings take place in 2014.

"Frankly, the process is shambolic," he told the BBC in an interview. "There was no announcement in any party manifesto; there's been no green paper; there's been no statement in the Queen's speech. And yet here we are on the verge of primary legislation. From a democratic point of view, it's a shambles."

Army of GOD wrote:There's no way shambolic is a word

Symmetry wrote:I kind of liked that an un-elected head of a church says that it's undemocratic for the elected parliament to pass gay marriage because the un-elected Queen, also hereditary un-elected Supreme Governor of the Church of England, didn't mention it in her Christmas speech.

Phatscotty wrote:

Symmetry wrote:I kind of liked that an un-elected head of a church says that it's undemocratic for the elected parliament to pass gay marriage because the un-elected Queen, also hereditary un-elected Supreme Governor of the Church of England, didn't mention it in her Christmas speech.

Who's island is it, really?

Symmetry wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

Symmetry wrote:I kind of liked that an un-elected head of a church says that it's undemocratic for the elected parliament to pass gay marriage because the un-elected Queen, also hereditary un-elected Supreme Governor of the Church of England, didn't mention it in her Christmas speech.

Who's island is it, really?

The gays, obviously, and undemocratically.

Phatscotty wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

Symmetry wrote:I kind of liked that an un-elected head of a church says that it's undemocratic for the elected parliament to pass gay marriage because the un-elected Queen, also hereditary un-elected Supreme Governor of the Church of England, didn't mention it in her Christmas speech.

Who's island is it, really?

The gays, obviously, and undemocratically.

wtf? I mean, what is the real deal. Does the government run the shit, or does the Queen run the shit, or do they share it, or is it something else altoghether?

This Archbishop answers to the Queen right?

crispybits wrote:Technically the Queen is still sovereign ruler, but all the power is with parliament and she's no more than a figurehead. The queens speech (well, the policy element) gets written for her by the government and she just adds in the personal and family elements (or her speechwriter does)

I think that's much the same in the church of england. Technically she's the top bod, but I don't think she ever exercises that power to actually do anything.

The royal family are in such a precarious political and economic position, and so reliant on public good will to stay on their gravy train, that they really don't have the power to make even the smallest of waves unless theyre supporting an extremely populist view (and supporting an extremely populist view isn't going to make too many waves anwyays)

But as Symmetry just pointed out she has no authority over the catholic religion

Symmetry wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

Symmetry wrote:I kind of liked that an un-elected head of a church says that it's undemocratic for the elected parliament to pass gay marriage because the un-elected Queen, also hereditary un-elected Supreme Governor of the Church of England, didn't mention it in her Christmas speech.

Who's island is it, really?

The gays, obviously, and undemocratically.

wtf? I mean, what is the real deal. Does the government run the shit, or does the Queen run the shit, or do they share it, or is it something else altoghether?

This Archbishop answers to the Queen right?

Constitutional monarchy, or, if you like, look it up on wiki before trolling Her Britannic Majesty.

The Archbishop of the Catholic Church answers to the Pope.

Phatscotty wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

Symmetry wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

Symmetry wrote:I kind of liked that an un-elected head of a church says that it's undemocratic for the elected parliament to pass gay marriage because the un-elected Queen, also hereditary un-elected Supreme Governor of the Church of England, didn't mention it in her Christmas speech.

Who's island is it, really?

The gays, obviously, and undemocratically.

wtf? I mean, what is the real deal. Does the government run the shit, or does the Queen run the shit, or do they share it, or is it something else altoghether?

This Archbishop answers to the Queen right?

Constitutional monarchy, or, if you like, look it up on wiki before trolling Her Britannic Majesty.

The Archbishop of the Catholic Church answers to the Pope.

Excuse me if I would prefer to ask a real person rather than read it on wiki, and I seem to remember asking about the Church of England....not the Catholic Church

wait, did I hit your soft spot???

Phatscotty wrote:Just trying to be talkative, friend

spurgistan wrote:This thread has now had the words "shambolic" and "multifarious."

chang50 wrote:

spurgistan wrote:This thread has now had the words "shambolic" and "multifarious."

Shambolic is a portmanteau word,combining shambles and symbolic,like smog or brunch among others..an indication of our evolving language.

Phatscotty wrote:Is the Queen the head of the Church of England?

chang50 wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:Is the Queen the head of the Church of England?

But paradoxically she could not be a bishop..how bizarre is that?

Funkyterrance wrote:Do you realize the utter bias the title of this thread exudes?

Phatscotty wrote:

Funkyterrance wrote:Do you realize the utter bias the title of this thread exudes?