Tuesday 14 March 2023

 

Bishop of Grantham reveals he is gay a year after his appointment was announced in the town





The Rt Rev Dr Nicholas Chamberlain pictured on the day he was unveiled as the new Bishop of Grantham.
The Rt Rev Dr Nicholas Chamberlain pictured on the day he was unveiled as the new Bishop of Grantham.

The Bishop of Grantham has revealed he is gay after a Sunday newspaper was reported to have threatened to publish a story about his sexuality.

The Rt Rev Dr Nicholas Chamberlain says he is gay and in a long-term relationship. It is thought this is the first time that a serving bishop in the Church of England has revealed he is gay.

The bishop told the Guardian: “People know I’m gay, but it’s not the first thing I’d say to anyone. Sexuality is part of who I am, but it’s my ministry that I want to focus on.”

The Rt Rev Dr Chamberlain said the church was aware of his “sexual identity” when he was appointed bishop in November.


'Revealed a year after his appointment'   ... hmm!

ALSO I NOTE THAT HE HASN'T SAID ANYTHING ABOUT HIS LONG TERM RELATIONSHIP BEING CELIBATE.

GENE

35 comments:

  1. You nasty, lying sod, Gene. This is a seven year old news story, which you have selected from and slanted gratuitously to smear Nick Chamberlain, as the following corrections [from The Guardian of September 2nd 2016] make clear.

    [EXTRACT 1] "Chamberlain was consecrated last November, and all those involved in his appointment – including Justin Welby, the archbishop of Canterbury – were aware of his personal situation. During the process of being appointed as suffragan bishop of Grantham, he said, “I was myself. Those making the appointment knew about my sexual identity.” His appointment was made by the diocesan (senior) bishop of Lincoln, Christopher Lowson, and endorsed by Welby.

    Chamberlain said he adhered to church guidelines, under which gay clergy must be celibate and are not permitted to marry. In the appointments process, “We explored what it would mean for me as a bishop to be living within those guidelines,” he said.

    In a statement, Welby said: “I am and have been fully aware of Bishop Nick’s long-term, committed relationship. His appointment as bishop of Grantham was made on the basis of his skills and calling to serve the church in the diocese of Lincoln."

    It is clear from this that Revd Chamberlain's sexuality was a matter of public knowledge long before he was appointed - the process of appointing a bishop takes at least six months.

    It is also a fact that Revd Chamberlain made this statement only because a Sunday newspaper threatened to publish the kind of smear story you have concocted, Gene.

    But your biggest and most calamitous clanger is this accusation that Revd Chamberlain is lying about the nature of his relationship:

    "ALSO I NOTE THAT HE HASN'T SAID ANYTHING ABOUT HIS LONG TERM RELATIONSHIP BEING CELIBATE. GENE"

    Extract [2] "Nicholas Chamberlain said there had been no secret about his long-term – ALBEIT CELIBATE – relationship with his partner."

    Extract [3] " Chamberlain said HE ADHERED TO CHURCH GUIDELINES, UNDER WHICH GAY CLERGY MUST BE CELIBATE AND ARE NOT PERMITTED TO MARRY. In the appointments process. 'We explored what it would mean for me as a bishop to be living within those guidelines,' he said."

    Extract [4] "In a letter to parishes in his diocese, Christopher Lowson, Bishop of Lincoln said: “I am satisfied now, as I was at the time of his appointment, that Bishop Nicholas FULLY UNDERSTANDS, AND LIVES BY, THE HOUSE OF BISHOPS' GUIDANCE ON ISSUES IN HUMAN SEXUALITY."

    This is a dirty minded and deliberate attack on the integrity of a good man, and it will not go unpunished, Gene. In particular, your implication that Nicholas Chamberlain has lied about his celibacy is, I am fairly sure, actionable.

    Either way, I have screen-shot this page in its entirety including my refutation of your lying smear, and I will print out those screenshots as soon as I have published this.

    I intend to send copies of it to Christopher Lowson, Justin Welby and Bishop Nicholas by first class post tomorrow, and will consider whether or not to send further copies to Fr Schofield and Ms Atkins as well, with a note by which they will be able locate and speak with you.

    This is beyond the pale, Gene: and don't think you can get out of it by taking this post down. I have a permanent record of it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have implied nothing untoward about Rev Chamberlain. He seems to have been a very fine man indeed.

    My concern was as to whether the C of E was properly administering it rules as to celibacy in civil partnerships of C of E clergy.

    Why did matters only become public after a year following his appointment.

    You are back to your evil ways of threatening me with exposure so that my good name will be ruined. Fine Christian you are!

    GENE

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. [1] You have implied that he has lied about the quality of his relationship, doing so by omitting selected sections of the story.

      [2] You have not the least interest in the C of E rules about clergy in civil partnerships, so pull the other one.

      [3] Everyone who needed to know, including the people of Grantham, knew of Revd Chamberlain's sexuality from well before his appointment as bishop. He published his statement only when a Sunday newspaper, probably staffed by dirty-minded bigots like you, threatened to expose him.

      [4] Not threatening, Gene, just telling you what will happen first thing tomorrow. If your claims about what you have published hold good, then you have nothing to fear, and your good name will not be ruined, will it?

      It was only a matter of time before you did something that was over the line, and for whatever happens next, you have no-one to thank but yourself.

      End of story.

      Delete
    2. There you go again. Threats and blackmail. You can never fight your own battles. Always wishing to bring in third parties to fight for you. A bottlejob through and through.

      In all the years of our long correspondence have I ever threatened you even once? Of course not. THAT'S BECAUSE I'M A DECENT MAN.

      And if anyone contacts me as a result of you vile and cowardly threats I will refer them to this blog and your nauseating comments.

      GENE

      Delete
    3. And by the way I selected nothing from the Guardian. I reproduced the post above from the Grantham Journal.

      GENE

      Delete
  3. And how you propose to set about proving who it was who made any of the comments?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And don’t come the “I am a decent man” crap.
      A decent man doesn’t lie, invent filth about other men’s wives and families, taunt, scoff, jeer at homosexuals and above all doesn’t squeal like a stuck pig when someone sets about holding him to account for the filth he writes whilst cowering behind a pseudonym.

      What next? The bleat about “free speech”? The “free speech” you have abused for so long?

      No, Gene, enough is enough. A “decent man” wouldn’t be worried about his blog being circulated to people who can hit back.

      I am looking forward to whatever happens next…what larks, eh Gene?

      Delete
  4. You do your worst Detterling and I will do my best.

    Any decent person reading this thread will see I have done nothing wrong. It is perfectly legitimate to ask why it took a full year after his appointment for the C of E to go public on the background of Revd Chamberlain's sexuality.

    GENE

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well if that is the case, then you have nothing to fear by being identified as the author of this blog, have you?

    ReplyDelete
  6. And if you really wanted to know that, why didn’t you ask him? Instead of the snide insinuations of concealment and lies, and implied accusations of his lying about his celibacy?

    As it is, I will put those questions to Revd His Honour Mark Bishop, Chancellor of the Grantham Diocese. He is the chief legal officer for that diocese. He will probably brief Lupton Fawcett, who are specialist solicitors in both ecclesiastical and civil law. I gather they are notably ferocious towards anonymous libels.
    What larks, eh. Gene?

    ReplyDelete
  7. "Instead of the snide insinuations of concealment and lies, and implied accusations of his lying about his celibacy?"

    I MADE NO SUCH INSINUATIONS.

    You seem to forget Detterling that I taught 'A' Level Law. I am perfectly capable of defending myself against any Sue, Grabbit and Runne that the C of E may brief.

    GENE

    And by the way I have now read up about Bishop Nicholas Chamberlain.

    A thoroughly good chap and indeed admirable and courageous.

    GENE

    ReplyDelete
  8. Let’s leave that to the lawyers to decide, shall we? I showed thd screenshots to my solicitor and she said that a case for libel and defamation would definitely get on its feet.

    And you taught A level law so you can defend yourself? JESUS CHRIST, GENE, YOU ARE MAD!!

    ReplyDelete
  9. And your back pedalling over Bishop Nicholas is valuable as an admission of guilt. Surprised that as a teacher of A level law that you didn’t realise that.

    Bang to rights, Gene. You are as f*cked as the Church of England.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Can we now draw a line under this Bishop Nicholas Chamberlain contretemps?

    Anyone reading this thread will see that no harm was meant to him.

    I admit that I did make a mistake in reproducing that Grantham Journal headline item from 2016. I should have sought out the Guardian article.

    Nevertheless, the C of E should have been up front at the time of Bishop Nichols's appointment and not left things until a year later. Also. for what it's worth, I deplore that threats of the scumbag press to 'out' the bishop.

    On Ms Tutu, I maintain that it was a disgrace to have the funeral service in a marquee. Why didn't she stand aside and let another priest officiate so that the funeral service could take place in the church?

    Detterling at times you are so blinkered in your being an apologist for the C of E you refuse that believe that it can do anything wrong.

    GENE

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So are we agreed Detterling? We now draw a line under the Bishop Nicholas Chamberlain contretemps?

      GENE

      Delete
  11. Can we now draw a line under this Bishop Nicholas Chamberlain contretemps?

    NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT.

    Anyone reading this thread will see that no harm was meant to him.

    BOLLOCKS. You chosen to omit elements of the newspaper article and slant others to suggest that [a] Revd Chamberlain had concealed his sexuality and that [b] the Church hierarchy had connived at this. You also, in making this sneering comment - ALSO I NOTE THAT HE HASN'T SAID ANYTHING ABOUT HIS LONG TERM RELATIONSHIP BEING CELIBATE - lied about Revd Chamberlain's honesty in owning that his same sex relationship is, in accordance with the church's guidelines, celibate. THIS WAS A DELIBERATE, DIRTY MINDED AND NASTY SMEAR ON YOUR PART.

    I admit that I did make a mistake in reproducing that Grantham Journal headline item from 2016. I should have sought out the Guardian article.

    BOLLOCKS. Both the Grantham Journal and the Guardian stories were written from the same press release. You would have slanted and smeared the Guardian article in just the same viciously nasty way, because you are an unprincipled and dirty minded bigot.

    Nevertheless, the C of E should have been up front at the time of Bishop Nichols's appointment and not left things until a year later.

    BOLLOCKS. Who the hell is Bishop Nichols? Revd Chamberlain's sexuality is a matter purely for him and the church in which he ministers, and was known to everyone who needed to know when his appointment was ratified. Only prurient, nasty minded bigots like you think that it has anything to do with them.

    Also. for what it's worth, I deplore that threats of the scumbag press to 'out' the bishop.

    BOLLOCKS. You have the mind, the morals, the unprincipled hypocrisy of a tabloid hack. Although all of them are far better writers than you.

    On Ms Tutu, I maintain that it was a disgrace to have the funeral service in a marquee.

    BOLLOCKS. If the Pope can celebrate mass in a football stadium, the church of England can celebrate a life in a tent.

    Why didn't she stand aside and let another priest officiate so that the funeral service could take place in the church?

    Because Malcolm Kenyon was her father's closest friend and her godfather, and a church with any sense of decency would have let her get on with it.

    Detterling at times you are so blinkered in your being an apologist for the C of E you refuse that believe that it can do anything wrong.

    GENE, YOU MONUMENTAL FUCKING IDIOT.

    The church of England's attitude to homosexuals is beyond deplorable, and I regard the latest decisions by the Synod, and the stomach turning hypocrisy of Welby and Cottrell over them as deeply unChristian. The calculated insult they have offered to homosexual Christians and homosexual clergy puts me in mind your deplorable and unprincipled bigotry. If you have read my posts on this blog and concluded that I am apologist for the Church of England then you are even more stupid than I had thought. That does not mean that I will not call out bigotry like yours when I see it.

    Any decent person would have defended Nicholas Chamberlain against your sleasy attack as I have done: but I shall go on campaigning [as I have done in several church based publications] for full equality in access to the sacraments for homosexual Christians, both lay and ordained. The C of E fudge is both an insult to your fellow Christians and to the intelligence, and I will go on saying so until I drop.

    Now fuck off.

    ReplyDelete
  12. "BOLLOCKS. You chosen to omit elements of the newspaper article and slant others"

    No I did not edit or slant anything. I simply posted the headline piece from the Grantham Journal. And, I have admitted that I should have used the Guardian article instead. Remember, I had never heard of Bishop Nicholas Chamberlain until you mentioned him.

    I'm sure that Bishop Nicholas would be much more understanding to me than you have been.

    GENE

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "No I did not edit or slant anything. I simply posted the headline piece from the Grantham Journal."

      YOU LYING BASTARD, GENE.

      You omitted the following paragraphs from the Grantham Journal headline story which make it clear that Revd Chamberlain's same sex relationship is celibate.

      " Most Reverend Justin Welby, the Archbishop of Canterbury, said Dr Chamberlain was appointed Bishop of Grantham on “the basis of his skills and calling to serve the church in the diocese of Lincoln. HE LIVES WITHIN THE BISHOPS’ GUIDELINES AND HIS SEXUALITY IS COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT TO HIS OFFICE”, HE ADDED

      A Church of England spokesman said: “The Church has said for some time that it would be unjust to exclude from consideration for the episcopate ANYONE SEEKING TO LIVE FULLY IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CHURCH’S TEACHING ON SEXUAL ETHICS OR OTHER AREAS OF PERSONAL LIFE AND DISCIPLINE. “Whilst Bishop Nick’s appointment is notable in the gifts and talents that he brings to the episcopate, IT IS WHOLLY CONSISTENT AND UNEXCEPTIONAL IN OTHER REGARDS given the testing of that call by those responsible for the selection process in each case.”

      This DISPROVES your LYING SMEAR that you did not edit the story to suggest that Revd Chamberlain was being dishonest about the state of his relationship.

      For this reason, your libellous smear MUST be referred to the Chancellor of the Diocese for a decision to be taken on legal action. And you will need a great deal more than four years of stumbling through A level law ten pages ahead of your hapless students when that wind starts to blow....

      I can hardly wait....

      Delete
    2. Look up the website of the Grantham Journal and you will see that I reproduced the headline, the photo and the first paragraph - the first paragraph gave the story. I edited and omitted nothing.

      GENE

      Delete
    3. I did just that too - the paragraphs I include above were there. DON’T LIE TO ME, YOU UNPRINCIPLED BASTARD.

      Delete
    4. I don't dispute that the other paragraphs are there. (I have just looked it up.) I simply copied the headline, the photo and the first paragraph - enough to tell the story.

      GENE

      Delete
    5. And you omitted the paragraphs which would enable you to level your nasty accusatory sneer. Don’t insult my intelligence, you unprincipled sod.

      Delete
  13. "Can we now draw a line under this Bishop Nicholas Chamberlain contretemps?", pleads Gene as he shits his pants with fright....

    No, absolutely not, and here's why.

    THE STOMACH CHURNING HYPOCRISY OF GENE VINCENT.

    Gene Vincent's blog, March 12th:

    "You know perfectly well that anyone professing Christianity must as a matter of principle be opposed to the totally spurious claim of a so-called LGBT community (no such community exists) and to the bullying and intolerant Gay Lobby."

    Gene Vincent's Blog, 14th March:

    "I have implied nothing untoward about Rev Chamberlain. He seems to have been a very fine man indeed. And by the way I have now read up about Bishop Nicholas Chamberlain. A thoroughly good chap and indeed admirable and courageous."

    What a gutless piece of work Gene is. He has not even the courage of his appalling convictions.

    "Can we now draw a line under this Bishop Nicholas Chamberlain contretemps?", pleads Gene as he shits his pants with fright....

    No, absolutely not. And if you don't stop badgering I will send "outing" information to Revd Chamberlain, Revd Lowson and Revd Welby to supplement the blog extracts.

    ReplyDelete
  14. From what I have read about Bishop Nicholas Chamberlain he is an intelligent enough man to understand that no LGBT etc. community exists and that the relentless and ruthless bullying of the Gay Lobby is downright evil.

    GENE

    ReplyDelete
  15. Oh shut up Gene - there is NO WAY you can weasel your way out of this mess, which is entirely of your own making. You lied about and libelled Revd Chamberlain, after informing us all that all Christians were duty bound to reject homosexuals, and now you are telling us what a great bloke this “shirt lifting Nancy boy” - to use one of your many nasty descriptions of homosexuals - is.
    COME OFF IT, YOU WEASELLING HYPOCRITE.

    ReplyDelete
  16. "... after informing us all that all Christians were duty bound to reject homosexuals"

    REJECT HOMOSEXUALS? NEVER!!!

    What I wrote is that we Christians are duty bound to abhor homosexual activity - something which is sinful and intrinsically morally evil. And this of course is the teaching of both the Catholic and Anglican churches. No Christian would ever reject the homosexual person. It's the sin we reject.

    Also, in my opinion we should act on an informed conscience and reject the false claim that there is an LGBT etc community. There is no such thing. There are individual in all societies who practice a variety of homosexual practices all of which are sinful. That doesn't make for a community.

    There is most certainly, however, a Gay Lobby. A strident, abusive and evil pressure group.

    And I am sure that Revd Nicholas Chamberlain, an undoubtedly valiant and Christian gentleman, agrees with on these matters. After all he has chosen to live a celibate life.

    GENE

    ReplyDelete
  17. Once again, Gene, shut up and stop flailing and flannelling around to try and talk yourself out of the corner your vast mouth and tiny brain have landed you. And please stop sucking up to Nicholas Chamberlain in that greasy sycophantic tone - I have just eaten my dinner and I would rather it stayed down.

    You lied about and libelled Revd Chamberlain, after informing us all that all Christians were duty bound to reject homosexuals, and now you are telling us what a great bloke this “shirt lifting Nancy boy” - to use one of your many nasty descriptions of homosexuals - is. Jesus Christ, you could cut the reek of hypocrisy with a knife. Anyway, must stop so I can catch the last post from the sorting office. Here comes shit creek, Gene, and whoops! there goes your paddle....

    And DO stop talking piss.

    ReplyDelete
  18. "after informing us all that all Christians were duty bound to reject homosexuals"

    There you go again repeating this falsehood. What's the point in my trying to get through to you. Sometimes you are as thick as the fog on the Tyne.

    GENE

    ReplyDelete
  19. JESUS CHRIST! Where do you get off rebuking people for "repeating falsehoods"?

    Where do we start? The Duke of York? Dizzy spells? the TES Opinion "Clique"? the "persecution" of "Annie Baker"? the "suicide" of "Myrtle Thornberry"?

    That is IT, Gene.

    The gloves are OFF.

    This whole thread will be on Nicholas Schofield's desk by this time next week.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You will not be hearing from me again.

      But the shit will hit the fan nevertheless.

      Delete
  20. "You will not be hearing from me again."

    Yes, Detterling once again when the going gets tough you get going - get going out of sight. Once a bottlejob always a bottlejob.

    You are throwing in the towel because you have been soundly defeated. In a nutshell the Church of England's doctrinal position is that homosexual acts are incompatible with Scripture and always sinful. No bluff and bluster from you can alter that.

    It's a pity you are not as Christian and honorable as your friend Bishop Nicholas Chamberlain.

    And on Fr Nicholas Schofield, you should check out his parish website and perhaps you might learn something about the Christian life from the excellent material that he and the parish secretary/pastoral assistant, Angela Atkins, provide.

    GENE

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What a load of waffle and bullshit. We have not been arguing about C of E doctrine at all, you are are simply shifting your ground to try to distract attention from your appalling attempt to smear Revd Chamberlain. You can’t weasel your way out of that Gene, no matter how hard you try.

      Delete
  21. And furthermore Detterling it is so wrong of you to walk away like this leaving me with, at least the possibility, of legal action against me. You cause all this and, like Pontius Pilate, you wash you hands and say it's nothing further to do with you.

    GENE

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. WHAT THE FUCK? You say that I have caused all this? You must be insane or pissed, Gene, even at this hour.
      You published a seven year old news story edited and slanted so as to smear the name of Revd Chamberlain and imply that he was and is lying about the celibacy of his relationship. When you are called out on it you lie, bluster and whinge at the thought that you might have to answer in court for this cowardly and nasty attack on a good man, like the snivelling, hypocritical poltroon you are, with the morals of sewer rat.
      Just remember one thing. Gene: I have the screen shots of your nasty attack on Revd Chamberlain and if you ever again do anything so foul, unprincipled and nasty, I will do everything I can to disgrace you using that material. Your panicky attempts to justify yourself, your arse-licking attempts to suck up to Revd Chamberlain and your attempts to make this argument about something else show just how much you fear such an exposure.
      Don’t do it again and you won’t hear from me again. But try it on once more. Or start up your attacks on my family, and you will be shown no mercy.
      And forget the bleating horseshit about blackmail and threats. Just behave as if you really were the decent man you claim to be and you will have nothing to fear. And above all there will be no more attempts by you to justify your behaviour in posting this thread. That will irritate me enormously, and that would not be a good idea. I am an old man with little left to lose, and I would die a happier man for having seen you in the disgrace you deserve, SO WATCH IT.
      And now I - not you, not we - have drawn a line under this affair. But I will be watching. And waiting my opportunity.
      Detterling

      Delete