HOMOSEXUALITY DIVIDES THE ANGLICAN CHURCH
On Monday June 30th The Australian newspaper declared what had happened in Jerusalem that weekend (Saturday evening according to London’s Sunday Times ) was perhaps the most historic event for the Anglican Church since the Reformation.
The statement may yet prove a bit extreme but the now actual or virtual declared split of the church into opposed liberal and conservative factions, the former under the Archbishop of Canterbury and the latter guided by Australia’s Archbishop of Sydney, Dr. Jensen and Nigeria’s Archbishop Akinola(Christianity’s version of Robert Mugabe for high handedness) is undeniably unprecedented and serious. But it shouldn’t have been a surprise and amid all the uncertainties afflicting the Anglican Churches worldwide one thing was reasonably certain and that is that the split that has created FOCA, (The Fellowship of Conservative Anglicans) was pretty inevitable - “fated” one might say.
Since I regularly claim to have a unique knowledge regarding the astrology of Christianity which is working clearly for this crisis I shall emphasize this hidden aspect of affairs but there are others and I mention these especially later on.
ANGLICANISM AND THE DANGEROUS MONTH OF JUNE
At the beginning of June just prior to the month’s lunation (new moon) as this would be falling so closely conjunct the Saturn of Christianity’s birth I wondered what restriction or loss of rights somewhere on the globe it might portend given so much report of persecution recently. I was puzzled because, as indicated in my June 11th article about Ruckins McKinley’s declaration over Australia and the coming spiritual big wave, by contrast the full moon (which so often brings the promises of a lunation to fruition) was right on the Galactic Centre (events in religion) at 27 Sagittarius. So, to the extent I considered the matter I preferred to be positive and imagine contested but important affirmations, not historic church splits. And I didn’t give the subject much thought since, thanks to Telstra, I still wasn’t netted for purposes of research and was anyway much otherwise preoccupied.
However the Galactic Centre contact might be expected to produce rather more than the powerful, but still somewhat secret, events surrounding McKinley on which I have yet to comment. And I should have given more thought to how anything to Saturn in Gemini, the divisions sign, could be involved with undermining disputes, disputes that could especially affect the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams. The Archbishop happens to be born under the Twins and has been regularly accused of two faced behavior and (in effect) sitting on the Geminian see-saw where his beliefs and policies are concerned. But Christianity itself was born under Gemini. It suffers this tendency to split, something that has bedeviled (Saturn equals Satan in religious contexts) the entire history of the faith in contradiction of Christ’s wish that “you may all be one”. Then, by tradition, though I’m not sure of its basis in dates historically, pragmatic Virgo is Anglicanism’s sign. (The Anglican Communion is a rather moralistic, pragmatic, rather than mystical sort of church much influenced by policies of the Virgoan Elizabeth 1st). If tradition is right then Saturn currently in Virgo should make things tricky for Anglicans and perhaps too for churches beyond it since currently Saturn in Virgo is setting up afflictions to factors in the birth of Christianity such as Sun (its identity) and Jupiter (its beliefs).
When in November ‘03 a gay bishop was consecrated in America Jupiter (religion/beliefs) was going direct in Virgo (sign of Anglicanism) and making positive aspect to Christianity’s Mercury in its leadership sector. Now that the same ordination is being declared an abomination, Jupiter, currently in conservative Capricorn, is moving in retrograde so in line with this is the call to “get back” to basic, traditional beliefs. But significantly Saturday’s declaration occurred almost exactly as Uranus (any issues to do with homosexuality) after many months also turned apparent retrograde, so that the desire is to reverse, go back upon, the whole development of openness regarding gay issues.
ASTEROID CANTERBURY MARKS THE ANGLICAN LEADERS, URANUS IS ANY GAY CONTROVERSY
While Anglicanism as a religion is associated with Virgo its leadership is indicated by the asteroid, Canterbury in another ritualistic earth sign, Taurus. Asteroid Canterbury though still unnamed at the time was at almost 28 Taurus at Christianity’s birth. Two thousand years later, in November 03, when gay Bishop Robinson was consecrated as first(out) gay bishop - there have been plenty of the closeted variety across history! - the always gay relevant Uranus was making direct difficulty square to asteroid Canterbury from 28 of Aquarius, the sign of Uranus’ rulership while Venus (ceremonies and good feelings) was opposing Canterbury from 28 Scorpio. And there would of course be plenty of difficulty and on any purely PR rather than theological basis arguably Robinson was not the best candidate for any first gay bishop and only a certain American emotionalism pushed him in. But that’s another issue.
On June 16th in London what some saw as a virtual gay marriage, an Anglican first, was celebrated in St Bartholomew’s Church for a New Zealand priest and his chaplain. This was the final straw for the conservatives. On Saturday 29th June ‘08 the aggressive action planet Mars was at 28 of Leo, opposing the position of Uranus at Robinson’s consecration and making difficulty square to Christianity’s Canterbury. Anglican leadership was in trouble, indeed its Archbishop was copping a lot of flack. Gayness, in religion at least, was in trouble too because if we take asteroid, Gaily as the gay asteroid (which empirically there is every good reason to believe we should), Mars at 28 Leo last Saturday was declaring war though a conjunction with Christianity’s Gaily at 29 Leo.
Uranus of course can never be overlooked whenever there’s any controversy around gays or almost any controversy about anything the problem for gays being that they are all too often allowed to be the symbol of any dispute and function as the proverbial scapegoat. Typically and disgracefully in recent controversies over a gay parade in Jerusalem, a leading rabbi was trying to organize opposition on the basis Jewish gays were all “evil criminals”.
HOMOSEXUALITY WORSE THAN ATHEISM? AND WHAT ABOUT ARCHBISHOP JENSEN’S INTEGRITY?
Even if you believe homosexuals and homosexuality are immoral what mental trick arrives at this criminality idea? And we may well ask that regarding the abrasive, fanatical Archbishop Akinola. He has been actively encouraging the Nigerian government to jail gays for 5 years at a time. At the last Lambeth conference of Anglicans in ‘98 which nearly came to blows over homosexuality with Akinola doing a lot to turn up the heat (one bishop present told me the atmosphere was so aggressive he would prefer never to attend another Lambeth) gay and revolutionary Uranus was directly afflicted by conservative Saturn in the horoscope of Christianity. And now again for this July’s Lambeth conference Uranus is again in aspect to Saturn though less drastically.
There is a huge irony in what is going on. Strictly speaking, the Anglican Communion should have been soul searching, (and if it wanted to heresy hunt then heresy hunting) over priests who denied the church’s creed or even the existence of God through the Christian atheism of the Sea of Faith movement. Yet just this got passed over in favour of making mere blessings on gay unions (marriages aren’t even in question as in the Scandinavian churches!)and the ordination of gay clergy (which the church has always tacitly been doing) its trigger point for schism. But then, although as mentioned the St Bartholemew’s ceremony of gay blessing whose ritual was seen as virtually a marriage was a trigger for the wrath of conservatives , it’s pretty clear the split is interested beyond simply the gay issue that is its pretext.
There is an urge outside of England and America (in the “Global South”) to establish what is thought of as a post-colonial, non western independence from foundational Anglicanism plus, over in Nigeria where the church has been periodically harassed by Muslims, Archbishop Akinola seeks to appease Muslim criticisms that Christianity is decadent and the pervert church. So, respectability and power issues come into play here. But also some rank fanaticism. As said, Akinola supports jailing gays. We don’t hear all his evangelical supporters condemning him for this. Many may even tacitly support it thus encouraging the suspicion of liberals and secularists that all contemporary talk from conservative Christians about loving the sinner but not the sin and that of course gays must have their rights (an idea none would have had and never voiced prior to Gay Liberation) is convenient lies or at least serious self deception best ignored. And what about Archbishop Jensen? Precisely who and what is this Sydney cleric who makes himself party to support of the Akinola who doesn't wish to sit at table or be in the same room as a homosexual?
It is interesting that Archbishop Jensen of Sydney is a Cancerian (11.7.1943). Cancer is a prime difficulty sign as regards homosexuality. On the one hand Gay Liberation itself was founded under Cancer (on the 28th, rather than the 29th of June, 1969 and at that in America, the nation founded under Cancer, the mother sign. The Great Mother can seem at once permissive and threatening. She tolerates and includes much that others wouldn’t so easily but certainly she troubles heterosexuality, or at least that of heterosexual males. Cancerian males frequently distrust their own and other men’s feminine side and can quite sensationally overcompensate a la Ernest Hemingway who was all for boxing and bull fights and abusing gays in the street. It is in America that homosexuality is most promoted and contested. So, within Anglicanism it is not surprising that once again Cancer will produce the schism trump card – and although homosexuality wasn’t the basis of the schism but rather a divorce let’s note that Anglicanism’s great schism began through the work of the Cancerian Henry V111.
The fire-cracker natal astrology of the rather impossible Archbishop Akinola, an Aquarian (27.1.1944) is something I had better not comment upon. As rebel and maverick Akinola is all of a textbook Aquarian but the sign is also traditionally the sign of all things alternative while a conjunction of Mars and Uranus such as Akinola sports is quite a feature of gay charts (Akinola himself has six kids). So Akinola is finding his own ways to be subversive and different and above all divisive since his Mars/Uranus is of course, in Christianity and Archbishop William’s Gemini.
THE LEGACY OF AFRICAN CHRISTIAN INTOLERANCE
Since this July the Lambeth Conference brings Anglicans from all quarters together it is interesting that the July full moon hits within minutes Christianity’s Part of Homosexuality - interesting because obviously despite, (or even because of), the split the issue will continue to be discussed and I gather that some people, like those of the Other Sheep organization, are pressing for consideration of matters the bullying approach of Archbishop Akinola and other African clergy and their Australian supporters are overlooking.
African clergy may protest that English and American Anglicans (i.e. Episcopalians) have gone too far for the church to be recognizable but they also conveniently ignore the incredible and themselves unchristian oppressions they have been overseeing in the African churches. They constantly promote the lie any anthropologist can refute that homosexuality is not native to Africa but an English import; they have silenced and dismissed theologians from colleges if they express any kind of sexually liberal view and are so damning of gays there is a legacy of depression and suicides among gay African Christians as a result.
I fancy that with Canterbury in easy trine in one direction to Christianity’s Part of Homosexuality mainstream Anglicanism would always be something of a gay friendly church no matter the consequences – and as said, all that has really happened is that what was previously closeted has become open - but it will be interesting to see just what the consequences now are. However, I’m inclined to suppose that events in church and world over the coming year may somewhat distract from this question, pressing though it is and may be expected to remain. I suspect the solar and lunar eclipses of August will keep things lively in and out of the church in more ways than one.
J’ACCUSE: AUSTRALIAN CENSORSHIP DIDN’T CHALLENGE ARCHBISHOP JENSEN
My final word is the sour grapes one from someone writing in Australia which is not quite the West of the controversy (though it would like to think so) nor the Global South of many dissidents but simply a place where too much censorship and secrecy favouring every cabal and intrigue prevails. It is plain now that it would have been better for church and world if there had been more close examination and intelligent debate of the divisive Archbishop Jensen’s ideas. Like so many who presume to deal with the issue of gays in the church he gives no indication beyond conservative cliches of really knowing anything about the subject whether at the social or theological level. Developments in thought and scholarship regarding it pass him and others of his kind by and the whole crudely dismissive Australian system allows it.
My A Special Illumination, published in London at the end of '04 was based on a world first, trans-cultural, trans-historical doctoral study on the varieties of gay spirituality from a religious studies department. It included what a friend of the Archbishop of Canterbury judged as probably the best survey of gay theology available. But I obtained no support whatsoever in Australia for promoting it. Likewise a friend from the same dept, Michael Carden, who has published on what is probably the definitive study of the history of Judaeo-Christian understanding of the Sodom story has not been inquired of here. What is the point of study and research in Australia?.....
I was rudely told by a member of the ABC religion department that I hadn’t even written about religion. The editor of a leading paper pompously assured me Australia had experts enough to talk about these religious affairs – in this area that’s hardly true, but at least he didn’t deny I was talking about religion. I could go on but the roll call of questionable conduct in this area just goes on and on. I have never even had apology from another paper for the terrible trouble caused by the disinformation I had done a doctorate not on gay issues but Jesus’ sexuality! Australia’s black and white crude approach to the gays and religion subject makes for simply dismissing Archbishop Jensen as a conservative. That’s not good enough, it reduces everything to media bites and it’s ineffective to assist real change. Information and intellectual pre-censorship keeps Australia behind Europe in mumbers of ways and it has helped to support the questionable policies and actions of the Archbishop of Sydney at what The Australian would define as a historic moment.