A Wedding and a Gay Churchgoer.

As many of my readers may be aware, the front page of today's edition of The Daily Mail national newspaper carries a photo of the bride and groom leaving the church in Windsor, and exchanging a kiss whilst their arms are entwined. Yet if I were to see them walking along the street or busy at a shopping mall, I would not even give them a second glance, as they would appear as total strangers. But not to the rest of the nation, it seems like, who would have recognised the bride as Princess Eugenie, the daughter of Prince Andrew, the second son of the Queen (after Prince Charles and Princess Anne), and therefore Her Majesty's granddaughter.

She had just tied the knot with, as it looks to me, some unknown fellow, Jack Brooksbank by name. An aristocrat of some sort, as I tried to scour both the newspaper and the Internet on what he does for a living. All I got was that he is an ambassador for several brands of wine. Whatever that's supposed to mean, one thing for sure, he never got his hands dirty fixing a broken pipe or stood in a muddy trench in search for some frayed cables.

Jack Brooksbank with Princess Eugenie.

Yet the Daily Mail devotes its first seventeen pages to the wedding, plus a further twelve centre pages as a souvenir pullout, making a grand total of 29 pages altogether, which is a typical reflection of our nation's obsession with celebrity. Heavens! Why didn't they make it into a tidy number of thirty pages? But when it comes to crowd attendance, there is quite a significant difference between this Royal wedding and that of Prince Harry and Meghan at the same venue a few months earlier. Harry's wedding had attracted a crowd of 100,000 spectators, whilst this one pulled in only 3,000 onlookers, according to the newspaper. The small fact that Eugenie's nuptials took place on a Friday, and therefore there were many employers unwilling to give their workers a day off, this might well have had a hand in the vast difference of crowd numbers, as Harry was wise enough to marry Meghan on a Saturday.

Am I one of a majority who really couldn't give a damn? A minor Royal had just got hitched, and I was far more interested in the gym workout, followed by a relaxing sauna afterwards. And while I was preparing to row for a full hour on the Concept 2 flywheel machine, three thousand devoted followers lined the street, with just one overnight camper. Personally, I wish them good luck and God's blessing. Although I do wish them well, that's not the point here. Rather, if there is such a country which practically deifies Royalty, it has to be Great Britain. And the English in particular.

It's nothing new of course. Far from it. The Pyramids of ancient Egypt, for example, remains a lasting testimony of the Pharaoh's deification by his loyal subjects. Sometime later the Romans were at it. I believe it was Emperor Augustus who initiated the Pax Romana, which allowed its citizens to live in peace whilst the Empire expanded. Since the Pax Romana is an abstract quality rather than an entity, the idea of worshipping the Emperor as divine suited them well. It was not long before Emperor-worship became compulsory on the penalty of death, which brought problems to the early Christian who insisted that the risen Jesus of Nazareth was God, not the ruling Emperor.

These Roman emperors certainly did not live saintly lives. They tended to murder their own family members in order to ward off any threat of rivalry and to secure their own power. The majority of these ancient rulers also had handsome boys in their bedrooms, what we at present would label as pederasty and paedophilia, such scandals in Her Majesty's Government would shake the very foundations of Parliament. It does look to me that generation after generation of governance under a Christian Constitution has made the churches effective in its role as Salt of the Earth.

Poor John the Baptist! He wasn't so lucky in stemming evil. During the days of his ministry, King Herod successfully wooed his brother's wife while her husband was still alive. And so he rebuked the couple in public, calling their marriage adulterous and a sham. Indeed, after John's arrest and imprisonment, Herod had taken a liking to his captive and even called him up to his palace to hear more on what he had to say, according to Mark 6:20. But John's rebuke failed to bring repentance. He never sent his wife Herodias back to his brother. Instead, he allowed her hatred of the prophet to fester and eventually used her beautiful daughter to lull the king to have John executed.

However, Herod's sin looks to be incredibly mild in comparison to those of the reigning emperors in Rome. Really, Herod's sin wasn't unlike our own perception of marriage, divorce and re-marriage taking place all around us at present. Here in the UK, even under a Christian Constitution, this sort of thing takes place all the time, despite what both Jesus himself and apostle Paul had taught, that he who marries a divorcee commits adultery (Luke 16:18, Romans 7:1-3).

1-hour workout = 6.4 miles, 520 calories and no wedding bore!

Which makes Prince Harry's wedding to Meghan a very awkward issue indeed, since Meghan was a divorcee herself. Therefore, according to John, Jesus and Paul, the marriage between Harry and Meghan stand as an adulterous relationship, yet as many as 100,000 stood to watch the nuptials and giving their blessing, as with the TV and newspaper media.

Then came the news from Northern Ireland that a Christian baker has won a legal victory against two gay men who wanted a cake decorated with a motto advocating same-sex marriage. The two men ordered the cake and were ready to pay for it, but the baker refused to make it, based on his own Christian convictions. So the two men took the baker to Court, but lost the case, mainly due to the fact that same-sex marriage is still illegal in Northern Ireland, unlike the rest of the UK.

Organisations such as Christian Concern has endorsed the baker's legal victory with praise. As with John the Baptist's rebuke to Herod, their loss of the Court case did not bring these two gay men to repentance, but most likely had left them shimmering in bitterness and resentment. And Christian Concern will be celebrating their tenth birthday at the Emmanuel Centre next weekend - the same venue in London where Creation Ministries International held their Conference a month ago.

We were invited by my PhD friend Andrew to go with him to the celebration. At first, I declined the invitation. But when Andrew revealed to me that a connection was possible between declining morals and the rise of Darwinism, a chord was struck within and I had to re-think. I admit that I wasn't keen to push my wife's wheelchair into London all over again after such a short time, with all the transportation problems such a contraption would bring. But I eventually agreed to attend if Andrew was happy for me to go on my own with him. So off we shall go.

But what has brought me to say Not this time initially? Much to do with moral reformation but without the re-birth of the spirit, as the case of Herod and the two gay men shows. Here I try to use empathy here, to try and put myself in their shoes:-

During the Court case, it is repeated over and over again that the issue of the cake is against Christian principles. The Judge sides with the baker and I lose the case. What would I then be thinking? How would I feel? Certainly not warm towards the churches! And as for the faith itself, any credibility it might have had is taken away by the punitive attitude it has. And it's so grossly unfair. It's all very well for a straight preacher, happily married with two children, to stand in front of the pulpit and declare how wicked and evil same-sex relationships are. But he wasn't born that way. And to say that homosexuality is a mere mental condition borne out of choice...well, that's an insult in itself. Why is it then that a vast majority of gays would have preferred to be heterosexual, marry and have children? And why choose to bear the rejection and hostility from mainstream society? Furthermore, why is there a frightening level of suicides among us gays, way above those committed by straights? And that despite that gays consist only 4% of the population?

And my view of God? A punitive monster in the sky who is obsessed with hellfire, and the certainty that all gays will go there. The churches are no better. Nothing more than a house of constant condemnation. And here is the crunch. I can't help being the way I am. For example, I could walk along a street or at a shopping mall. I could be in the office or even a factory shop floor. Or, heaven forbid, I could even be in church. I catch sight of a decent, handsome man. I quickly look away but it's already too late. My heart beats rapidly, nerves cause my muscles to tighten, libido sets in. The trouble is, there is also a higher level of embarrassment if ever he would find out how I felt, or anyone else in the room. Choice? Rather, I'm bound for eternal condemnation, in chains from which I cannot break free. After all, with such a divine monster in the sky - if he exists - how could I possibly turn to him for mercy?

And so that's how the churches and society as a whole would perceive a gay person. I think there is an element of truth in reports written by psychiatrists and psychologists that homosexuals have the least happiness ratio in any society. Not so much because the sexual experience can be so unpleasant, but more likely the feeling of fear of rejection which can include verbal and physical harm.

Although there are churches and para-church organisations such as Christian Concern which can be quite heavy when they come to LGTB issues, it does look to me that they are far from true moral reformation. I can be wrong of course. They testify of God working through them. However, real repentance without regret is a grace which can only come through conversion and regeneration by faith in Jesus, the crucified, buried and Resurrected Christ. Conversion to Jesus Christ as Saviour is the only answer.

And this especially when considering these other issues: Have you ever looked at another person and harboured a secret lust? Then you are an adulterer. Do you have a superior attitude towards another person of inferior status? Are you snobbish? Or hold racist views? Then you are a murderer. Have you ever manipulated your tax return with dishonest intent? Then you are a thief. Have you ever rebelled against your parents? Or shown hostility towards them? Then you have dishonoured them. And in frustration, you shout, Oh for Christ's sake!? Or Jesus Christ Almighty!? Then you are a blasphemer. And even told a white lie? Then you are deceitful. The fact is, where sexuality is concerned, we are all deviants. as the Scriptures says:

There is no one who is righteous, no, not even one.

Psalm 14:1-3, 53:1-3, also Romans 3:10-12.

The trouble with me is, I am no better than any other sinner. I'm just as bad. Therefore to attend a Christian organisation dealing with moral reform but with the lacking emphasis of a faith in Christ, then there are elements of hypocrisy. If ever there was one in deep need of moral reformation, then it is me, especially in my thoughts and motives. Without Christ, I'm lost and without hope. Yet by God's grace, I shall be going. Not to shout from the rooftops that homosexuality and same-sex marriage is wrong, but to learn further where all these worsening moral standards have a connection with Charles Darwin's evolutionary theory.