It is astonishing that the Church of England should cross a Provincial border to negotiate an ecumenical agreement just before the Primates meeting in January.
And quite gauche and offensive of both churches to put out a statement saying that "joint ecumenical" work with the Scottish Episcopal Church is important whilst getting the name of the Scottish Episcopal Church completely wrong.
Sounds good. But please will somebody explain to me how this fits with the Scottish Episcopal Church? Thank you.
If,as is possible, that the CoS allows congregations to call ministers in a same-sex marriage will these married clergy be allowed to serve in parishes in England-shire?
And where is the Scottish Episcopal Church in all of this - you know, the Anglican church in Scotland?
O sing a new Song to the Lord!
Make, all and every one,
A joyful noise, even for the king
And now thou hast restored our State,
Pity our kirk also;
For she by tribulations
Is now brought very low!
Consume that High-Place, Patronage,
From off thy holy hill;
And in thy fury burn the book
Even of that man, M'Gill.
Now hear our Prayer, accept our Song,
And fight thy Chosen's battle:
We seek but little, Lord, from thee,
Thou kens we get as little.
-Robert Burns ( abridged)
Thank you Kelvin. I hoped that I had missed something here, but it seems I haven't. I hope it is no more than utter thoughtlessness that the C of E has entered in to this agreement without joining together with the Scottish Episcopal Church. Having been a member of SEC when I lived in Scotland I am sad that over forty years later the C of E is still behaving like a Colonial power. And to get the name wrong. Words fail me! I am delighted that there is agreement between the C of E and the C of S to work together. I am convinced that our Christian voices will remain diminished until we work together, pray together, worship together and yet again people are able to say, "see how these Christians love each other". I hope that ++Justin will have the grace to apologise to the Primus and in future to include him in all future discussions in Scotland.
The Scottish Episcopal Church has issued this statement. Amazing to show such restraint in not mentioning that the statement got the name of the SEC wrong.
Response to Columba Declaration
A spokesperson for the Scottish Episcopal Church says “We have noted the announcement today about the Columba Declaration agreed between the Church of Scotland and the Church of England.
“We welcome the opportunity for the further ecumenical discussion referred to in today’s press statement and look forward to being able to consider the full text of the report when we receive this. We fully understand the desire of the Church of Scotland and the Church of England as national churches to discuss and explore matters of common concern. However certain aspects of the report which appear to go beyond the relationship of the two churches as national institutions cause us concern. The Scottish Episcopal Church, as a member of the worldwide Anglican Communion, represents Anglicanism in Scotland, and we will therefore look forward to exploring the suggestions within the report more fully in due course.”
It's hard to believe that reference to 'Episcopal Church of Scotland' would be stated in error.
Was the intention perhaps to have a 'Church of Scotland' and 'Episcopal Church of Scotland' seem parallel?
Or maybe there was an error, but it does seem odd.
ohmy...no mention of the SEC. That was sloppy. Wonder whose idea THAT was.
I don't know how my brethren and sistren in the UK think of this sort of thing, but here in the US we sometimes use the phrase, "ham-handed."
Wow! This has come out of the blue. I am not aware of any Ecumenical conversations leading up to this in the Churches Together network. Who has been behind this move, I wonder and how does it fit not only with CofE conversations with the URC but also with our covenant with the Methodists?
(iii) explore opportunities for congregational partnership, formal as well as informal, in those cases where there are churches in close geographical proximity;
Carlisle? Berwick on Tweed?
Sounds awfully like Provincial boundary crossing.
There is a phrase referring to the proximity of tanks and lawns.
At the risk of disappointing any of our conspiracy theorists, maybe it isn't Berwick or Carlisle where C of S and C of E have close by churches. Nor will it be border crossing. More likely it will be those 20 or so C of S churches in the Presbyteries of England and Europe, and their C of E neighbours.
And (at the risk of upsetting any members of the "If the C of E does it, it must be wrong" brigade) I can't see any of the seven clauses in the agreement that should raise any alarms. Not least, working together on social, political and ethical issues makes a great deal of sense for two historic churches both relating to the UK government.
Thanks be to God for this historic agreement!
And a Merry Christmas to one and all.
As a cradle Anglican baptised in the (United) Church of South India, I welcome this agreement. As a Christian (even of a very liberal inclusive sort), I welcome what this agreement hopes for. But then there are comments of another sort. Surely, in this fragile Season of Hope, when we remember how and perhaps why our Saviour gets born in a dirty stinking animal shed, with no room in the inn, and recalling a certain tetrarch tried to eradicate a rival, we can see where our indignation and loyalty should really lie. "It shall not be so with you" says the Lord. Rather, with the angelic host and the shepherds, "Glory to God ...!"
Here's what Mark, the Bishop of Moray, Ross and Caithness had to say on Facebook:
"I had planned to spend today preparing a joyful Christmas message, instead I have spent Christmas Eve trying to discover who in the Church of England decided to issue a statement on closer links with the Church of Scotland. This statement was made without bothering to inform the Scottish Episcopal Church, their sister church in Scotland.
As an ecumenical member of Inverness Presbytery I am clearly not upset about closer links between churches, but this matter has been handled so badly and dare I say with great rudeness to those you are supposed to be "in communion" with.
I have just returned home from a service this evening and discovered people are feeling hurt and confused. All I was able to tell them is "so am I"."
A Happy Christmas to Simon and all others who work on the Thinking Anglicans website.
I appreciate the effort you put into it, and the level of discourse on this site, compared to other sites I visit, is amazing!
Is there any role for the United Reformed Church in this? It is, after all, the primary inheritor of the Presbyterian tradition in England. Over 40 years after the formation of the present-day URC, many English towns still have formerly-Presbyterian URC congregations, where a significant proportion of the membership were born in Scotland and grew up in the Kirk.
Heartily seconded, Peterpi!
David Walker said ...maybe it isn't Berwick or Carlisle where C of S and C of E have close by churches. Nor will it be border crossing. More likely it will be those 20 or so C of S churches in the Presbyteries of England and Europe, and their C of E neighbours.
Here's the list of CofS congregations in england
Presbytery of England
Crown Court Church, London WC2
St Columba's Church, London SW1
St Andrew's, Liverpool - see also Church of Saint Andrew, Liverpool
Corby, St Andrew's NN17
Corby, St Ninian's NN18
Jersey, St Columba's
Guernsey, St Andrew's in the Grange
Newcastle, St Andrew's
And furth of the UK:
English Reformed Church, Amsterdam
Christ's Church, Warwick, Bermuda
English-speaking Christian Congregation, Bochum, Germany
St Andrew's Church, Brussels
St Columba's, Budapest, Hungary
St Andrew's Scots Kirk, Colombo, Sri Lanka
Church of Scotland, Fuengirola, Spain
Church of Scotland, Geneva, Switzerland
St Andrew's Church, Gibraltar
The Scots Kirk, Lausanne, Switzerland
St Andrew's Church, Lisbon, Portugal
St. Andrew's Scots Church, Valletta, Malta
The Scots Kirk, Paris
English Language Congregation, Regensburg, Germany
St Andrew's Church, Rome
The Scots International Church, Rotterdam
Church of Scotland, Turin, Italy
St Andrew's Church, Jerusalem
St Andrew's Church, Tiberias, Galilee
And of course since Queen Victoria, British monarchs have been communicant members of the Church of Scotland.
The Liverpool Church of Scotland congregation meets in the Anglican Cathedral, and has done for many years.
robert ian williams; And of course since Queen Victoria, British monarchs have been communicant members of the Church of Scotland.
But are they? I always understood that the monarch does not actually receive communion in the Church of Scotland, only attends the services. Can anyone confirm or deny this?
'[T]his matter has been handled so badly and dare I say with great rudeness to those you are supposed to be "in communion" with.'
Fairly typical behavior from the Church of England.
So the Anglican Communion matters when it suits the CofE, as a figleaf for its bigotry and homophobia.
I don't like to take issue with an outstanding bishop, much and fondly missed in our part of the world; but, re David Walker:
'At the risk of disappointing any of our conspiracy theorists...'
I'm no conspiracy theorist but, if there are any in the C of E or indeed on Thinking Anglicans that may be because the C of E and its leadership appear to be profoundly nervous of transparency. Just in the past year we have had major strategic decisions appearing unexpectedly in the press before coming to Synod as a done-deal ( for example the Green Report - and why are the names of those in the Talent Pool - we appear to have reverted, as noted elsewhere, to this ghastly expression - top secret?) Elsewhere we have the total secrecy demanded of those on Vacancy in See committees, together with the...erm...less than gracious response of our leaders when questions arise from them in public places such as Synod, not to mention the legal advice given on how the Church might, within the confines of law, discriminate against some who have publicly expressed certain views. Conspiracy theories abound in institutions which behave in secretive and/or authoritarian ways which defy transparency.
'..at the risk of upsetting any members of the "If the C of E does it, it must be wrong" brigade...'
For some of us exploring closer communion with a Church defined by the absence of a historic episcopate might raise some alarms. Not least for those in the same country whose Church's historic raison d'etre was a belief in episcopacy. And, as has already been said, for SEC not to have been informed of this Statement - better still, consulted - is just downright rude.
That said, happy Christmas to Manchester from the Midlands!
Queen Victoria was a unique case and caused concern among the hierarchy of the C of E...there is an essay on Queen Victoria's religion by Owen Chadwick which mentions that some of the correspondence relating to the incident ( it was a one off, I think) remains embargoed.I don't think subsequent monarchs received communion in the Kirk until the present Queen who I think communicated when she was present in person at the General Assembly. Worth noting that Michael Ramsey also received on one occasion ( again at the General Assembly) but asked if he could receive kneeling.
Peter Kettle: Interesting point you raise; and I'd like just to share a little anecdotal with you: Fr Philip G once told me - it was in 1971 - that HM the Queen preferred the Church of Scotland; or, at least, no more vestments then surplice and stole. The things one remembers 44 years later!
And out of interest the Presbyterian Reformed Church of France has had a church in the crypt of Canterbury cathedral since 1565.
Also Hanoverian monarchs were co-communicants with the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Hannover.
Can't say I know a whole lot about this issue and the implications; but I have a couple of questions. Is this agreement possibly an alliance between two established national churches that fear themselves endangered species? Is the arrangement a kind of subterfuge in with politics hidden in ecumenism? Just asking.
The Queen is a Lord High Commissioner of the Kirk, and has a reserved seat in general assembly..it is inconceivable that she would not be a communicant.
The Royal family are not very deep thinking on religion... Prince Phillip gave up his Greek Orthodox faith to marry into the British royal family.
As the Primus says, "The Church of England is not a Scottish Church nor does it have any jurisdiction in Scotland."
This is a point that several provinces are having to make to the Church of England--so far with little success.
Strange it is to try to apologize for 19th-century imperialism by renewing the imperialisms of earlier centuries.
Not a CofS congregation as such, but St. Columba's URC in Cambridge functions as the CofS Chaplaincy for the University and uses CH4 in its worship.
Robert Ian Williams - The Queen has acted as Lord High Commissioner twice, I think. She is not a member of the General Assembly, nor is the Lord High Commissioner.
Prince Philip remains Orthodox, I understand, and has had an Orthodox chapel constructed. He probably, though, as you suggest is 'not very deep thinking on religion', but I do not think the same can be said of his wife or eldest son, or, for that matter, his late mother in law or sister in law
Prince Philip was received into the Church of England in 1947.
I find it all the more surprising that the Scottish Episcopal Church was wrongly named "The Episcopal Church of Scotland" in the Report of the Study Group whose Co-Chair was the Rt Rev Dr Peter Forster, Bishop of Chester. He trained for the ministry at the Scottish Episcopal Theological College in Edinburgh (then known as Coates Hall)and obtained his BD and PhD degrees at the University of Edinburgh.
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.