Comments: General Synod Questions on Sexuality Reviews

Circling the wagons.

Posted by Lapinbizarre at Tuesday, 7 February 2012 at 2:42pm GMT

The Archbishop of York thinks that the only distinguished and independent outsiders are men? The insiders are men too, of course.
So the women are - what, exactly?

Posted by badman at Tuesday, 7 February 2012 at 3:59pm GMT

The insistence on the 1 July statement as the terms of reference shows that this is a foregone conclusion.

A reminder of the 1 July 2011 Statement from the House of Bishops on the current review:

"It will be undertaken in the context of the Church of England's teaching on same sex relations as set out in the General Synod motion of November 1987 and Issues in Human Sexuality (a teaching statement from the House of Bishops in 1991). It will also be consistent with the approach taken by the Anglican Communion in Resolution 1.10 of the Lambeth Conference 1998 and subsequently."

So, there is to be no advance on 1987 and 1991.

Posted by badman at Tuesday, 7 February 2012 at 4:27pm GMT

@Bishop of Gloucester

I will be fascinated to know how he intends to "to assemble and reflect on the very considerable range of material and experience that has emerged from the listening process around dioceses since 1998" as, as far as I know, there has been no one in Church House or anywhere else whose job it has been to co-ordinate responses/initiatives/activities emerging from any kind of 'listening'.

I am engaged with two initiatives in dioceses in this regard - in one there has been nothing at all done since 1998 until now - in the other, there was an attenpt at listening which, by the admission of senior figures in the diocese, was unsucessful and unproductive: they want to revisit the whole question again.

How, in the name of all that is holy, are these dioceses supposed to be contributing? My efforts at research also suggest that they are far from unusual, and that activity around the country has been sporadic and uncoordinated. But, of course, in both dioceses there are LGBT church members and clergy aplenty.

It is hard to have confidence in a review by a group of leaders who have been responsible for initiating and guiding a process that, in 14 years, has got pretty much nowhere.

Posted by JeremyP at Tuesday, 7 February 2012 at 4:36pm GMT

I despair! The crass arrogance of these people beggers belief! They just don't get it do they?

Posted by Robert Ellis at Tuesday, 7 February 2012 at 5:07pm GMT

I say the bishop of Sodor and Man should be as welcome on this committee as Sweeney Todd at a pie-makers convention.

Posted by Martin Reynolds at Tuesday, 7 February 2012 at 6:19pm GMT

No woman! Even I am genuinely shocked. Would you have the BNP represented on a Commission about racism?

Posted by Robert ian Williams at Tuesday, 7 February 2012 at 8:46pm GMT

Judith Maltby's question was a seminal one - basic to the whole area of gender and sexuality: Where are the women in this process of evaluation?

The ABY's answer to her question reveals that both he and the ABC, who appointed the reviewers, were seemingly intent on appointing only males. Even the non-bishop on the panel is male, and the Archbishops have no intention of extending the panel to include a female representative.

Is this not a further indication of misogyny on the part of the Church - especially the ABs - at a time when the inclusion of women as bishops in the Church of England is under serious discussion?

Posted by Father Ron Smith at Tuesday, 7 February 2012 at 10:10pm GMT

How can there NOT be a female presence in a group leading explorations into sexuality?

The group is immediately unbalanced and lacking.

It's like only having English people in a task force on the future of Britain.

Or only having white Britons in a task force on race relations.

It doesn't seem respectful.

I think they should review the membership of this group.

Posted by Susannah at Wednesday, 8 February 2012 at 1:14am GMT

Once again the Archbishops are oblivious to their own ridiculousness.

Posted by Jeremy at Wednesday, 8 February 2012 at 2:13am GMT

There is a lot of sniffy homophobia in Anglican clerical circles, as I have noticed over the last 35 years. Yet what I mostly feel when looking at such debates is astonishment at the vast gulf between Anglican attitudes and the total benightedness of bishops in my own church -- an obligatory benightedness, since the least glimmer of light (as from Abp Vincent Nicholls) draws shrieks from the right-wing vigilantes and in some cases quick suppression from Rome.

Posted by Spirit of Vatican II at Wednesday, 8 February 2012 at 4:00am GMT

In 1986 , Robert Paterson , then vicar of a thriving Evangelical parish in Cardiff informed me, there will never be gay marriage in the Anglican Church. Robert was very aware of the homosexual sub-culture in the Diocese of lLandaff, but he preferred not to rock the boat at the time. However he is a very decent man, and he supported female ordination.

Posted by Robert ian Williams at Wednesday, 8 February 2012 at 7:15am GMT

Thank you, Spirit, for acknowledging the problems of blindness in the R.C. Church, on matters of gender and sexuality. One wishes other R.C.s on this blog could also acknowledge the problems.

We Anglicans, at last, are emerging from our mediaeval closet of patriarchalism - and it is causing pain and strife - for bishops, clergy and laity alike - but mostly at the top.

God willing, our emergence from the chrysalis of hypocrisy will soon be complete, and we shall be a more broad and inclusive Church as a result. Maybe leaner, but more robust, please God.

Blessings, Dear Brother, to you in your struggles

Posted by Father Ron Smith at Wednesday, 8 February 2012 at 10:24am GMT

"In 1986 , Robert Paterson , then vicar of a thriving Evangelical parish in Cardiff informed me, there will never be gay marriage in the Anglican Church"

Ah well, that settles that, then!

Posted by Erika Baker at Wednesday, 8 February 2012 at 10:45am GMT

"No woman! Even I am genuinely shocked. Would you have the BNP represented on a Commission about racism?"

Perhaps a more accurate metaphor might be a commission on bilingual education made up entirely of Anglophones.

Posted by Counterlight at Wednesday, 8 February 2012 at 12:24pm GMT

Erica, Robert Paterson is now the bishop of Sodor and Man.

Posted by Martin Reynolds at Wednesday, 8 February 2012 at 8:57pm GMT

Hear "gay marriage" and think "homosexual subculture" -- a suspect conflation.

Posted by Spirit of Vatican II at Thursday, 9 February 2012 at 7:42am GMT

Thank you Martin, I didn't make that link.
Still... "never" is a strong word. And whatever those in charge may say or do now, all they'll be able to do is postpone the inevitable.

Posted by Erika Baker at Thursday, 9 February 2012 at 8:13am GMT
Post a comment









Remember personal info?






Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.