Talk:Arthur Winnington-Ingram

Latest comment: 8 months ago by Cloptonson in topic Personal life

POST WW.I

Did the Bishop come to regret his support for the war or support appeasement in the 1930's to avoid another war? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.22.209.148 (talk) 11:21, 20 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Personal life

edit

It's been claimed that Bishop Winnington-Ingram was gay. Is there any information on this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.113.44.32 (talk) 15:15, 18 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

I'm reading Arthur Marshall at the moment, (I'll Let You Know - page 179-180 has information about this man) - and read this : "Other pleasantly recurring treats, also of a mainly moral kind, were the regular week-end visits to the school of the then Bishop of London, dear old, kindly old, indubitably wonky old Winnington Ingram, much loved by all. He preached of course, in our chapel on Sunday and, after pronouncing the Blessing at the altar, swung round, and dexterously extracted from his billowing canonicals a large gold watch and had a dekko at the enemy. And indeed he was operating on a tight time schedule for as soon as the service was over he repaired to our Natural History Museum which stood close by and there, unsuitably seated amongst pressed grasses and cases of spread-eagled moths and the skeleton of a singularly unattractive horse, he received any boy who cared to call on him solo, and very many did, for a little moral uplift and spiritual encouragement at two minutes flat a head, though the more personable boys could usually count on a few seconds longer. " Marshall says he was an endless protester about 'morally unworthy' goings on, 'hot on the track of filth' -- took against Somerset Maugham's The Sacred Flame for example - "the whole 38 years of his London incumbency, he never once missed a meeting of the Public Morality Council's subcommittee on brothels, the air thick with tch tchs. He kept the Home Secretary on his toes ('I took him in 21 filthy books' ) "In 1934 he announced in the Lords , muddle-headed to the last, that he would like to make a fire of all contraceptives 'and dance round it' "
I recall a few years ago on Ian Hyslop's TV programme, "Canterbury Tales" (on Church of England in the 20th century) that Ian put the words more precisely as "all the condoms in the land" as what he wanted to burn. (Specifying male contraceptives here.)Cloptonson (talk) 22:42, 21 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

It's particularly Marshalls use of the words 'indubitably wonky' that makes me see this as Marshall saying the Bishop was homosexual - the word 'wonky' I believe in Marshalls use, has this meaning. 92.13.57.222 (talk) 12:37, 21 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

In The Orton Diaries, Orton quotes a Mr. George Greeves (1900-1984) who when telling him an anecdote, mentions that in 1936: "'I gave a party,' he [Greeves] said, 'all the fucking queers for miles flocked in. I believe we even invited the Bishop of fucking London but he had the piles and couldn't come.'" The Bishop of London in 1936 was Winnington-Ingram.--Britannicus (talk) 23:12, 15 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
The article Confirmation of bishops says that there was some disorder at his confirmation; was that because of his sexual orientation? I think the disorder should be mentioned and explained. J S Ayer (talk) 03:09, 16 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
The present article on Confirmation of bishops does not mention Winnington-Ingram, I find, when I tried to see what the nature of the 'disorder' was. This word I often think of as meaning disruptive protest behaviour in a church ceremony, such as the anti-Ritualist protests by John Kensit who was active in the decade Winnington-Ingram became Bishop of London.Cloptonson (talk) 19:23, 21 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
Rereading these comments I would stand by my suggestion of disorder being protests. It's extremely unlikely, given homosexual behaviour between men was then criminalised and imprisonable, as highlighted by the then-recent Oscar Wilde case, that anyone would make a public protest alleging a bishop was homosexual, and they would be risking a slander suit were they wrong.Cloptonson (talk) 18:41, 21 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Arthur Winnington-Ingram. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:56, 9 July 2017 (UTC)Reply