News

Banned priest defends alleged abuser & insults women clergy

Banned priest defends alleged abuser & insults women clergy

A row has broken out over the presence this week of disgraced Anglican priest Jules Gomes, above, at a Church House meeting in London.

Formerly a priest at St Mary’s on the Harbour on the Isle of Man, Gomes addressed a February 1 meeting staged by supporters of the former Bishop of Chichester, George Bell, who was accused of historical sex abuse.

According to this report, the Bishop of Gloucester, Rachel Treweek, above, blasted his presence at the event, called “Rebuilding bridges”.

He has been invited to speak under that wonderful title whereas all his writings about me and other bishops who are women are being destructive and destroying bridges not building them.

I think it is outrageous that he has been allowed to speak at Church House under that title when his writings demonstrate that he is not up for living in reconciliation or relationship.

Gomes was banned from ministry for 10 years after a disciplinary tribunal found against him following complaints about his behaviour.

Deeply opposed to female clergy, he refers to female bishops as “bishopesses”.

He described Sarah Mullally, above, the new Bishop of London, as “safe space Sarah, the box-ticking Bishopette of Londonistan” who “doesn’t have the foggiest idea about the biblical gospel”.

Elsewhere in a “satirical” blog he described:

A gaggle of anorexic and bulimic teenage girls’ accompanying Rachel Treweek, Bishopess of Gloucester.

Treweek said:

I have known him in the past so it is deeply disappointing that he feels able to write things about me and others without ever trying to communicate in a relational way.

If rebuilding bridges is about relationship then it is a very funny and strange way to demonstrate that if you feel able to simply write abusive things on blogs.

Gomes, according to this report, told the George Bell Group:

Over the last two years, the Bishop Bell group has been fighting this battle between chaos and logos. Finally, logos has triumphed.

Hundreds of thousands of words written and spoken by dozens of historians, lawyers, clergy, columnists, churchgoers and choristers have prevailed. The Lord Carlile Review, a leading manifestation of ‘order’, even though restricted in its brief, has found a subtle way to pronounce Bishop Bell ‘not guilty’.

But the bridge over troubled waters is yet to be built. Justin Welby doubts the logos and rejects the light and clarity of order. He returns to the darkness and disorder of chaos in his insistence that a ‘significant cloud’ still hangs over Bishop Bell’s character.

9 responses to “Banned priest defends alleged abuser & insults women clergy”

  1. Cali Ron says:

    His misogyny may be repugnant, but it is also biblical. The bible is a sexist tome written by sexist men. If the lady bishops have a problem with that why are they even in the clergy, let alone members of one of the oldest, most backwards sexist organizations in existence? Deeply deluded darlings of Christianity.

  2. Philby says:

    They are all either deluded fools or liars. Every one of them.
    Fools if they actually believe fantasic stories that have been clearly shown to be confections and inventions.
    Liars to parade in ostentacious humility as CoE clerics if they do not actually believe.

    Either way I have no respect for them whatsoever.

  3. Stuart H. says:

    The biggest joke is that Gomes was brought to the Isle of Man by the last bishop as a missioner priest. The idea was that as he supposedly came from a university theology background he’d raise the level of debate and attract brighter converts.
    To local atheist delight, he did the opposite. In action he was such a knuckle-dragger that people left what had been a thriving small town parish church in droves. Even the (quite conservative) local authority refused to attend civic church services after he preached a vicious sermon at one laying into “broken families”.
    He’s like a younger version of Peter Mullen (if anyone remembers him) but without Mullen’s ability to produce the odd funny (if tasteless) turn of phrase about guitar-playing vicars and the like.

  4. AgentCormac says:

    These idiots, with their daft hats, ridiculous, ostentatious costumes and Gandalf-esque staffs look so bizarre, how does anyone take them seriously?

    If someone wearing a laughable pantomime outfit told you they had the answer to life, the universe and everything, would you really believe them?

  5. Bubblecar says:

    Seem a male clown is really cheesed off because he doesn’t get to dress up as a Chief Clown like these uppity female clowns.

  6. 1859 says:

    What I find most obnoxious is their smile – they dress up like some wood fairy and grin like they’re having their bum tickled. I can just hear them saying at parties – ‘I deal in spells, potions and odd moments of necromancy.’

    But the sillier they dress the more people will turn away and embrace common sense.

  7. Broga says:

    1859: I think the smile, which does not extend beyond the lips, is obligatory for the role. The smile is an attempt to suggest that these are unfailingly happy people as a result of their faith. The other essential needed to distinguish them is the frock.

    Without the smile and the frock they would fade into invisibility. What have the skills of the job to offer that people need?

  8. andym says:

    They probably think it makes them look like happy, well-adjusted, ordinary people, when in fact they look like game show hosts contemplating mass murder.

  9. barriejohn says:

    We all know that he’s right, and that she’s not “biblical”. If she were, she would remain silent in church and ask her husband to explain everything when they got home. That’s what the Bible says.

    When I was younger, I was seduced by the idea that if only we had more women in positions of authority, things might be much better (the men having made such a sow’s ear of things). Sadly, I soon became disabused of this notion when people like Golda Meir and Mrs Bandanaraike came along!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *