‘Rebel Priest’ Rev Jules Gomes: Bishop worships at the altar of the State

Fools rush in where angels fear to tread. So do bishops in the Church of England. Alan Wilson, Bishop of Buckingham, has now crowned himself the supreme personification of the honorific office of Useful Episcopal Idiot.

This preacher of the false gospel of tolerance is now urging the government to strip the Church of England of its exemptions under the Equality Act to help it stamp out a culture of abuse, homophobia and sexism.

Wilson’s suicidal policy is akin to three blind mice squabbling over a piece of cheese. When they cannot find a solution to the equal distribution of a miserable chunk of cheddar, they optimistically approach the cat, urging him to clamp down on their squeaking and grant them justice and equality.

The Equality Act of 2010 grants exemptions to any ‘organised religion’ in the case of same-sex marriages. ‘A minister does not contravene Section 29, so far as relating to sex discrimination’ if the minister does so ‘for the purpose of avoiding conflict with the strongly held religious convictions of a significant number of the religion’s followers’.

The commentary provided by the government on the Equality Act explains that ‘the protected characteristic of religion or religious or philosophical belief’ is ‘in line with the freedom of thought, conscience and religion guaranteed by Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights’.

In a sense, the Equality Act wonderfully upholds the inalienable rights of freedom of thought, conscience and religion. The Declaration of Independence reminds us that human beings are ‘endowed by their Creator’ with these inalienable rights. God, not government, has granted us these rights and government has no right to take these rights away. The Equality Act emphatically affirms this; the ‘tolerant’ bishop categorically denies this.

Bishop Wilson would like the government to go one step further and invade the sphere of thought, conscience and religion. Does the bishop believe more in government than in God? Does the bishop believe in the power of government to coerce and compel people into surrendering their inalienable rights of freedom of religion and conscience? Does the bishop believe that the strongly held political convictions of a minority within the church and other religions on homosexuality should trump the ‘strongly held religious convictions of a significant number of the religion’s followers’ even though the latter is protected by democratic legislation?

The Bishop of Buckingham has succumbed to the virus of homofascism. ‘Everything in the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state’ was one of Mussolini’s favourite phrases. Like Mussolini, Wilson would worship at the altar of Giovanni Gentile, the founder of fascism. ‘Morality and religion . . . must be subordinated to the laws of the State,’ writes Gentile. Bishop Wilson would cheer and applaud.

Even elected governments do not have unlimited power. Bishop Wilson quotes the apostle Paul’s letter to the Romans, chapter 13, to defend the power of the government to legislate his homofascist version of equality and morality.

This is a strangely schizophrenic approach for the bishop to adopt. The apostle Paul is unequivocal in his condemnation of homosexuality in the very first chapter of his letter to the Romans! What principle of interpretation does Bishop Wilson adopt in accepting one part of the Bible and rejecting the other?

Yes, Paul asks us to be subject to the governing authorities. But aren’t religious people already doing this when they are obeying the Equality Act of 2010? Bishop Wilson is asking the governing authorities to change the law in a manner that is subject to his totalitarian view of morality and sexuality.

The bishop forgets that the institution of marriage precedes the institution of government – in nature and Scripture. The government has no business legislating on marriage. Bishop Wilson also forgets that according to Romans 13, government gets its authority from God and Christians believe that God has already spoken authoritatively on sexuality and marriage in the Holy Scriptures.

With his utopian spectacles on, Bishop Wilson also believes that a new law will end homophobia in the church. The bishop does not explain how this will happen. A phobia is an irrational fear of something. A law is expected to have a rational basis if it hopes to achieve a legitimate and constitutional objective. So how can a rational law end an irrational fear of homosexuals? Unless, of course, the bishop is prepared to concede that the orthodox belief held for thousands of years by people of all faiths and none that marriage is between a man and a woman amounts to an irrational fear of homosexuals? The confused bishop conflates morality with legislation, and sin with crime.



The bishop also cherry-picks a biblical text oblivious to its context. Paul is asking Christians to be subject to the Roman Empire. Would the bishop recommend that people subject themselves to modern dictatorships? Perhaps, given his homofascist position, he might. Ironically, the apostle Paul himself commits acts tantamount to civil disobedience that land him in prison and in serious trouble with the Roman authorities.

Of course, Bishop Wilson says priests should be free to object to conducting same-sex weddings on religious grounds. Ha! Ha! Ha! We’ve been fooled before, Bishop Wilson, haven’t we? When conservative evangelicals and Anglo-Catholics objected to the ordination of women, General Synod assured them that their interests would be protected when women were ordained priests and later bishops. The C of E gave this arrangement the grand title of ‘mutual flourishing’.

But when Bishop Philip North, a conservative Anglo-Catholic who objects to the ordination of women, was appointed to the See of Sheffield, Leftists from Bishop Wilson’s tribe launched a hate campaign against North, forcing him to give up his seat even before he could sit on it.

The State is desperate to control the family and the church. It desires unlimited power and we repeatedly remind ourselves that we must render unto Caesar only what belongs to Caesar, and what Caesar can legitimately claim is very little. Bishop Wilson wants to take what belongs to God and hand it over to Caesar on a silver platter. In Roman times, he would have assured the Roman emperors that the lions had a regular supply of Christians for their Sunday lunch.

Fools rush in where angels fear to tread. The great conservative Edmund Burke repeats this aphorism first composed by Alexander Pope and sets it in the context of his discussion about government and clergy. ‘Instead of balancing the power of the active chicaners (deceivers) in the other assembly (i.e. House of Commons), these curates must necessarily become the active coadjutors, or at best the passive instruments, of those by whom they had been habitually guided in their petty village concerns,’ writes Burke. ‘They too could hardly be the most conscientious of their kind, who presuming upon their incompetent understanding, could intrigue for a trust which led them from their natural relation to their flocks, and their natural spheres of action, to undertake the regeneration of kingdoms.’

Beware of clerical chicanery, Bishop Wilson! And if you are hell-bent on putting your head in the lion’s mouth, don’t complain if he happens to bite it off one day.

Rev Jules Gomes

  • Bonce

    Entryism is a real problem in the established Church of England, and other establishments like the Baptist Union of Great Britain
    Entryism by the communists, marxists and the bourgeoisie state loving class. Its the reason why you will find the true bible based Christianity mainly in Churches that are not subjected to the rules and regulations of established organisations.

    Its a complete perversion of Christianity to preach modern “liberal values”, which directly contradict what is written in the bible and comes from God, Jesus and the apostles. If more Christians knew their bible properely and voted with their feet, this would not be such a problem.

  • Little Black Censored

    Philip North was forced to withdraw from his appointment to Sheffield by the feminazis. He had already suffered the same thing before, when he was due to become Bishop of Whitby; an oh-so-pastoral campaign by “concerned” people forced him to withdraw from that appointment as well.

  • disqus_N9Jawtu8Uw

    You wrote:
    “In Roman times, he (‘Bishop’ Alan Wilson) would have assured the Roman emperors that the lions had a regular supply of Christians for their Sunday lunch.”

    Mr Wilson is unlikely to only feed Christians to the lions on Sundays.

  • disqus_N9Jawtu8Uw

    Bishop Wilson already testified in support of Jeremy Pemberton and against the Church. The Judge was very polite but was completely clear how biased and incomplete Bishop Wilson’s testimony was. He should have been subject to review over that but wasn’t.

    Bishops are required to, and swear to, uphold the Church and it’s teaching. Yet in this latest outburst from him he wants to bypass Synod illegally and have Parliament to act without Synod. It really is now time for him to be tried. Why is he a Bishop at all?

  • Tricia

    What can one say about the Bishop of Buckingham. He is continually wheeled out by the Biased Broadcasting Corporation. This must be because he has so much time on his hands as there is a growing group of clergy in his Diocese who will not have him in their churches. When is a Bishop not a Bishop – Answer: when he is not a Father in God and does not feed the sheep. He is like a one track record – homosexuality. I have never heard him speak on anything else. To suggest that the Government should decide Church doctrine must be rock bottom. Who will rid us of this pesky priest? Obviously not the Archbishop of Canterbury as he can’t give a straight (no pun intended) answer to anything.

  • Mark Downham

    The man us clearly an Apostate and
    should be stripped of his ecclesiastical office and excommunicated in line with Titus 3:10-11 with immediate effect.

  • The Duke of Umberland, England

    Dr Gomes

    Brilliant!

    ‘Bishop Wilson would like the government to go one step further and invade the sphere of thought, conscience and religion. Does the bishop believe more in government than in God?’

    Aye, he does!

    At the beginning of the 21st century, Bishop Wilson has the sole distinction of calling God as a mere prisoner to the bar.

    Mene, mene tekel upharsin.

  • Today my post spoke of two Archbishops of Canterbury, Thomas Becket and Stephan Langton. How badly the CofE needs men of that caliber now.

  • John Thomas

    “A phobia is an irrational hatred of something” No, no, no! A phobia is a FEAR of something, and it may be rational/reasonable (thus, I and others, think that Islamophobia, fear of Islam, is reasonable, and rational, given the things that it produces). I thought it was only our PC politicians (ie. our politicians) who were totally ignorant on this (or intentionally distorted the true meaning of words through ideological motives, a feature of modern life which is truly Orwellian).

    • Oxford says, “An extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something.” Not a sensible aversion to something.

      • JabbaPapa

        The full OED (2nd edition 2009) is astonishingly non-committal in its basic definition of “-phobia” :

        a. L. -phobia, a. Gr. -ϕοβία, forming abst. ns. from the adjs. in -ϕόβος (see -phobe) with sense ‘dread, horror’; as in ὑδροϕοβία, hydrophobia ‘horror of water’. Also in modern words formed in Eng. by analogy, as Anglophobia, Gallophobia, Germanophobia, Russophobia, some of them imitating Fr. forms in -phobie.

        • That’s an amazing difference to the online version that I used.

          • JabbaPapa

            The online OED is worthless — of their shorter dictionaries, OUP’s “Student English Dictionary” (intended for foreign EFL and E2L students) and the old “Concise English Dictionary” (still easily obtained second-hand) remain greatly more reliable than the grotesque free online version.

          • So I see. Thanks.

      • Bruce Atkinson

        This is also what all the psychological/psychiatric diagnostic manuals indicate. Fear is not a “phobia” unless irrational/extreme.

  • Flaketime

    It would of course be impossible for the government to do what he asks (which I suspect he knows) because under equal treatment laws every religion would have to be treated the same way, and there’s no way they’re going to force Muslims to accept homosexual marriage.

    If I were the PM I would call the bishops bluff and tell him he can have what he wants providing he is prepared to go to the Finsbury park Mosque and persuade 1000 Muslim worshipers to a change it in the law (I wonder if he would make it out alive?)

    Of course if he still persists in his posturing there is a work around which would suit everyone. Declassify the C of E as a religous organisation (which it isn’t anyway) and then it can be treated just like every other organisation, and be liable for business rates on all its properties too !

    As I said at the begining though, I expect the Bishop is more than aware of all of this and knows it cannot be done. It’s little more than virtue signalling on his part.

  • Charitas Lydia

    This Bishop is absolutely exasperating. I am aghast at his claims. Leftists like him should not claim to be Christians because they do not know what Christianity they are talking about.

    Well done Dr. Gomes! Such false prophets along with their arch-leader(ABC Wobbly Welby) ought to be exposed and shunned, lest they contaminate our faith by their false teaching and lead us astray. Time and again the Lord condemns such false prophets all through the Bible. May God show mercy on such blind and deaf shepherds that they may know what wrath of God is awaiting them and turn away from their error.

  • JabbaPapa

    This preacher of the false gospel of tolerance is now urging the government to strip the Church of England of its exemptions under the Equality Act to help it stamp out a culture of abuse, homophobia and sexism

    Implicitly, he’s going far beyond that — he’s implicitly demanding that these exemptions should be abolished in toto, so that every single religion should be subjected to Lefty gender-fluid “feminist” cultural Marxist ideology and the whim of Parliament.

    He’s basically campaigning for the abolishing of religion as such.

    What a lunatic !!

    If the CoE were a Church in anything but name only, this man would be silenced for his grotesque Modernist heresies …

  • Bruce Atkinson

    XX. Of the Authority of the Church.
    The Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies, and authority in
    Controversies of Faith: and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any
    thing that is contrary to God’s Word written, neither may it so expound one
    place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another.

    What does this bishop not understand about this?