Comments: more rumours about Pilling

I do wish this silly speculation would stop. Some people are playing games for their own purposes. Clearly no ones knows anything yet.

BTW 'issues' was only ever a discussion document which has got elevated into church teaching. Disowned by its principal author it has been given an authority it never should have had. It is high time it was buried.

Posted by Richard Ashby at Monday, 11 November 2013 at 9:46pm GMT

Very dubious reporting following very dubious gossip.
Sad that Pilling has not already been repudiated by those gay individuals and groups who were persuaded to take part.
It is a moral and tactical error.

I am also sad to report that the Church in Wales bench of bishops rejected an appeal to include openly gay people in the group they have appointed to consider gay things.

In an implicit attack on the way the Pilling group had been made up the Archbishop, Dr Barry Morgan said that had the Welsh Doctrinal Commission been formed solely to discuss gay matters then the principle that openly gay people should be included "would have force".
I reproduce his thinking below
"We had a long discussion at the Bench. The feeling was that we appoint a Doctrinal Commission every three years to deal with a range of issues eg it is looking at Anglican/Orthodox relations, The Gathering with Cytun, issues to do with confirmation and baptism as well as same sex relationships. If we were setting up a group just to deal with the latter, then your point would have force but given the wide ranging nature of the Doctrinal Commission's brief, it has to consult others with more knowledge and expertise on each matter as it arises, which is what they are doing over same sex relationships, rather than co-opting people for a particular discussion and then having to unco-opt them when they move on to another topic."

Posted by Martin Reynolds at Tuesday, 12 November 2013 at 6:34pm GMT

Richard Ashby, this does sound like the media stirring the pot to keep it boiling. Something that would "never" cross their minds, I'm sure.
While it's great that some bishops may be arguing that gay clergy in civil-sanctioned relationships should be treated no differently than other clergy, whole religious movements have been created on the disparate treatment of gays -- and women -- and others. If not for such a desire to treat gays and women differently, I daresay GAFCON would cease to exist, or would have to focus on real Global South issues.

Posted by peterpi - Peter Gross at Tuesday, 12 November 2013 at 8:39pm GMT

" rather than co-opting people for a particular discussion and then having to unco-opt them when they move on to another topic."

One could, of course, assume that the church has gay members who are also qualified to speak on baptism and confirmation.
Being straight doesn't seen to disqualify the others from sitting on the Doctrinal Commission.

Posted by Erika Baker at Wednesday, 13 November 2013 at 11:24am GMT

"Being straight doesn't seem to disqualify the others from sitting on the Doctrinal Commission."
- Erika -

Doesn't that depend on the opinion of whoever gets to choose the membership of the Commission? If being an honest Gay prevents a person from being a bishop in the Church, what makes you think, Erika, that an openly-Gay person would ever get to be on the doctrinal commission?

Posted by Father Ron Smith at Friday, 15 November 2013 at 7:31pm 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.