THINKING ANGLICANS

further press coverage on Southwark

The Guardian has an editorial, In praise of … Dr Jeffrey John

In the recent history of the Church of England, there can have been few more miserably resonant meetings than the one that took place on 5 July 2003 at Lambeth Palace between Archbishop Rowan Williams and his friend the then Canon of Southwark, Jeffrey John. It occurred because the nomination of Dr John, who is gay, as Bishop of Reading had set off a storm at home and overseas. Parishes had threatened to take their money and loyalty elsewhere, and senior clergy in Africa and the Caribbean had called for the nomination to be revoked. The meeting at Lambeth lasted six agonising hours. It ended with Dr John agreeing to sign a letter withdrawing his acceptance of the bishopric “in view of the damage my consecration might cause to the unity of the Church”. A few months later, Dr John moved to St Albans, where he has worked as dean with distinction ever since. Now, seven years almost to the day after the humiliation over Reading, he is a step away from becoming the next Bishop of Southwark. Dr John was shabbily treated over Reading. No damage that his consecration may have done compares to the damage done to the church and Dr Williams by its abandonment. Dr John has behaved with great dignity throughout. He has no presumptive right to the Southwark see. Yet surely neither he nor Dr Williams would have allowed things to get this far if they were not determined to see a different outcome this time. Right should be done. Dr John’s name should go forward.

The Associated Press has A gay bishop for the Church of England?

20
Leave a Reply

avatar
3000
20 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
15 Comment authors
PantycelynRobert ian williamsdrdanfeeChris SmithMartin Reynolds Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Pantycelyn
Guest
Pantycelyn

Surely the AP headline should read

ANOTHER gay bishop !

We have more than one working in the C of E at the moment as Suffragan / Diocesans

Why can’t they speak out backed by good, true and brave heterosexual bishops ?

(Surely, there must be Some ?)

Dennis
Guest
Dennis

Pantycelyn: I think the problem lies in trying to use the words “brave” and “bishop” in the same sentence.

Prior Aelred
Guest

Some years back, someone at the ACO told me that the ABC had consecrated (or ordained) nine (closeted) gay bishops — it has been implied that during the 17th century all of the ABCs were gay (at least none of them participated in the [semi-]) sacrament of marriage)

David da Silva Cornell
Guest
David da Silva Cornell

Re the AP story’s quotation from Andrew Brown: “If he wins, he will have shot the rapids and the Church of England will finally emerge from the turbulence of the last 30 years with a fairly clear and fairly coherent doctrine about sex.” Clear and coherent? Well, only if that doctrine is that gay/lesbian people can be in Holy Orders only if celibate — which is not at all the doctrine I would hope to see. Or does Mr. Brown mean something else? His words make sense to me only if he means that “celibacy makes all the difference” —… Read more »

jnwall
Guest
jnwall

OK, so, the meeting to designate a candidate or two (according to some reports) for Bishop of Southwark was yesterday or the day before.

When will they announce the results?

badman
Guest
badman

The UK Supreme Court is the latest body to throw itself behind modern understanding of human sexuality and to reject a distinction between homosexual orientation and practice. In HJ v Home Secretary, Lord Hope says: “…unlike a person’s religion or political opinion, it [i.e. “sexual orientation or sexuality”] is incapable of being changed. To pretend that it does not exist, or that the behaviour by which it manifests itself can be suppressed, is to deny the members of this group their fundamental right to be what they are.” He also condemns “the rampant homophobic teaching that right-wing evangelical Christian churches… Read more »

Cynthia Gilliatt
Guest
Cynthia Gilliatt

“When will they announce the results?” Someone on Episcopal Cafe said mid-August or so, since they have to do the background checks. Wouldn’t it make more sense to do the background checks earlier in the process? I think the way the Diocese of Virginia did it was to do thorough background checks on the finalists before releasing their names and starting the walkabout process leading up to voting. Some years ago, when background checks were less thorough, we had to drop one of the two people we’d chosen for suffragan because past scandal caught up with one of the men… Read more »

Colander Boy
Guest
Colander Boy

Someone commented the other day that “what goes on in committee stays in committee”. Well, the committee’s leaking like a sieve and reliable sources inform me that the ABC ‘lost it’ in the meeting, has vetoed Jeffrey John’s nomination and Nick Holtam is not on the list either.

Laurence
Guest
Laurence

“ANOTHER gay bishop !

We have more than one working in the C of E at the moment as Suffragan / Diocesans

Why can’t they speak out backed by good, true and brave heterosexual bishops ?”

Fear and/or lack of personal integrity I would guess. Isn’t it time Mr. Tatchell outed the lot of them?

evensongjunkie
Guest
evensongjunkie

There’s a Face Book entry by Ruth Gledhill saying something that Jeffrey Johns was NOT selected.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1755472019&ref=name#!/ruth.gledhill

jnwall
Guest
jnwall

Well, no, says Jonathan Wynne-Jones, John will not be Bp of Southwark.

The bullies win again.

The ABC reveals yet again he is a politician, a creature about which the American poet e. e. cummings once said was an ass upon which everyone has sat except a man.

Father Ron Smith
Guest
Father Ron Smith

There has been a comment from the Diocese of Southwark to the effect that it might not be until October that the result is confirmed. Does that mean that the Church at large has to wait until that time and does it include time that will be taken by the Dioceses to agree to the election – as would be the case in N.Z.? The process needs to be clarified.

Martin Reynolds
Guest
Martin Reynolds

Very significant judgment in the Supreme Court. Thank you badman.

I am sure that the project aimed at stopping insurance companies offering professional indemnity to those peddling “cures” for homosexuality will be much helped by this.

Father Ron Smith
Guest
Father Ron Smith

So now we know. Jeffrey John has been by-passed yet again! This is proof conclusive that Rowan values unity ahead of integrity. Victory for the Fundys, & a further defeat for the Gospel of Truth & Justice.
Kyrie Eleison, Christe Eleison.

Martin Reynolds
Guest
Martin Reynolds

I am not surprised at any of this.
The English Church is in disarray.

While my money has always been on Holtham (and I had thought JJ’s nomination a flight of journalistic fancy) – If the Prime Minister HAS said he wants two names and he now gets a name or names he was not expecting he can say

“No to (all) the above.”
To make his point publicly.

It has happened before.

Chris Smith
Guest
Chris Smith

It will be interesting to see to what degree the clergy and laity in York confront the Archbishop of Canterbury for his spineless behavior regarding the undignified treatment of Jeffrey Johns. Coupled with the amendments Rowan and the Archbishop of York have proposed for women bishops, this could be quite a defining moment for The Church of England. I hope the clergy and laity at least make Rowan squirm.

Pantycelyn
Guest
Pantycelyn

Fear and/or lack of personal integrity I would guess. Isn’t it time Mr. Tatchell outed the lot of them?
Posted by: Laurence on Wednesday, 7 July 2010 at 9:33pm BST

Believe me, I am sorely tempted to give the names of the ones I know.

But they do need the support of non-gay bishops to do it. Not come out one by one, and be picked off.

drdanfee
Guest
drdanfee

Being a Guardian sort, from across the pond, I find this whole business distasteful and silly, past any common sense point. If scapegoating and assaulting queer folks’ leadership and gifts and callings is always going to be the grouch that wins every day, why bother? At the passing moment, this reads/decodes as yet another indication that RW and the CoE powers that be are dead set – and I use the word, dead, advisedly – dead set on NOT having a global big tent when it comes to reforming Anglicanism. Clearly, RW prizes the old-fashioned Anglican closet too dearly. RW… Read more »

Robert ian williams
Guest
Robert ian williams

What amazes me is that any “thinking” Anglican could have thought that Dean John had a chance. Even a heterosexual like Dean Slee has no chance either. On Episcopal appointments, Anglican Mainstream have won the day!

Pantycelyn
Guest
Pantycelyn

Yes, Robart the thought of gay bishops or other ministers in the C of E is as unthinkable as way -well –

the end of Apartheid, the fall of the Berlin Wall, the end of capital punishment, peace in Ireland —

or at the level of popular culture

as unthinkable as transexual and gay characters on Coronation Street, Emmerdale or East Enders…

No – you’re right t’will never happen !

(and never has ?)