The Archbishop of Canterbury has written in the Spectator Face it: Marx was partly right about capitalism.
The Archbishop of York gave a speech to the Institute of Worshipful Company of International Bankers Archbishop Labels HBOS short sellers as “Bank Robbers”.
Stephen Bates in The Guardian Archbishop offers praise for St Bernadette – and Marx
Sadie Gray and agencies in The Guardian Archbishops attack profiteers and ‘bank robbers’ in City
Martin Beckford in the Telegraph Archbishops of Canterbury and York blame capitalism excesses for financial crisis
Ruth Gledhill in the Times The Archbishop of Canterbury speaks in support of Karl Marx
and Time to curb the ‘asset strippers and robbers’ who ruin the financial markets, say archbishops
Steve Doughty in the Mail Archbishops attack the ‘bank robbers’ who have brought economy to brink of disaster
BBC Archbishops attack City practices
The Archbishop of Canterbury has been participating in anniversary celebrations at the Shrine of Our Lady of Lourdes, at the invitation of the Bishop of Tarbes and Lourdes, Monsignor Jacques Perrier. He preached this sermon at the International Mass there yesterday.
Stephen Bates in The Guardian Archbishop offers praise for St Bernadette – and Marx
Martin Beckford in the Telegraph Dr Rowan Williams becomes first Archbishop of Canterbury to visit Lourdes
Updated Tuesday evening to add Guardian and Telegraph articles.
Following his remarks about creationism and science lessons the Revd Professor Michael Reiss has resigned his position as the director of education at the Royal Society.
The Royal Society issued this statement today.
Royal Society statement regarding Professor Michael Reiss
16 Sep 2008
Some of Professor Michael Reiss’s recent comments, on the issue of creationism in schools, while speaking as the Royal Society’s Director of Education, were open to misinterpretation. While it was not his intention, this has led to damage to the Society’s reputation. As a result, Professor Reiss and the Royal Society have agreed that, in the best interests of the Society, he will step down immediately as Director of Education a part time post he held on secondment. He is to return, full time, to his position as Professor of Science Education at the Institute of Education.
The Royal Society’s position is that creationism has no scientific basis and should not be part of the science curriculum. However, if a young person raises creationism in a science class, teachers should be in a position to explain why evolution is a sound scientific theory and why creationism is not, in any way, scientific.
The Royal Society greatly appreciates Professor Reiss’s efforts in furthering the Society’s work in the important field of science education over the past two years. The Society wishes him well for the future.
BBC ‘Creationism’ biologist quits job
New Scientist Royal Society prof resigns over comments
Lewis Smith and Mark Henderson in The Times Royal Society’s Michael Reiss resigns over creationism row
Ian Sample, science correspondent, in The Guardian Michael Reiss resigns over call for creationism in science lessons
Martin Beckford, Religious Affairs Correspondent, in the Telegraph Royal Society scientist loses post in row over creationism in schools
Update – early Sunday evening
The new website (more accurately a new section of the CofE website) is now online: On the origin of Darwin.
There is an accompanying press release Church of England marks Darwin’s contribution to science as bicentenary approaches.
———
There are reports in today’s papers that the Church of England will apologise to Charles Darwin for rejecting evolution in a new website to be launched tomorrow.
Jonathan Wynne-Jones in The Telegraph Charles Darwin to receive apology from the Church of England for rejecting evolution
Alexandra Frean and Lewis Smith in The Times Anglicans back Darwin over ‘noisy’ creationists
Jonathan Petre in the Mail Church makes ‘ludicrous’ apology to Charles Darwin – 126 years after his death
The British Association for the Advancement of Science (BA) held its annual Festival of Science in Liverpool last week. At the meeting the Revd Professor Michael Reiss, director of education at the Royal Society and a priest in the Church of England, is reported to have said that creationism and intelligent design should be taught in school science lessons.
James Randerson, science correspondent, in The Guardian Teachers should tackle creationism, says science education expert
Aislinn Simpson and Richard Gray in the Telegraph Creationism should be taught in science classes, says expert
Lewis Smith, Science Reporter, and Alexandra Frean, Education Editor, in The Times Leading scientist urges teaching of creationism in schools
Steve Connor, Science Editor, in The Independent One in 10 pupils believes in creationism
BBC Call for creationism in science
Wendy Barnaby at the BA Creationism has a place in school science lessons
Robin McKie in The Observer Creationism call divides Royal Society
Reiss himself writes in The Guardian Science lessons should tackle creationism and intelligent design
The Guardian published a profile of Prof Reiss in November 2006 Michael Reiss: How to convert a generation
Some comment articles
Melanie McDonagh in The Times Creationism in class is nothing to fear
Ruth Gledhill in The Times You need to understand your opponents’ arguments
Archie Bland in The Independent The Big Question: Why is creationism on the rise, and does it have a place in education?
Adam Rutherford in The Guardian Teenagers are not stupid, even if creationism is
Damian Thompson in the Telegraph Creationism and the advance of counterknowledge
Rod Liddle in The Times Don’t get creative with facts when it comes to evolution
Robin McKie in The Observer Our scientists must nail the creationists
The Royal Society published this statement No change in Society position on creationism on 12 September.
65 CommentsThe Royal Society is opposed to creationism being taught as science. Some media reports have misrepresented the views of Professor Michael Reiss, Director of Education at the Society expressed in a speech yesterday.
Professor Reiss has issued the following clarification. “Some of my comments about the teaching of creationism have been misinterpreted as suggesting that creationism should be taught in science classes. Creationism has no scientific basis. However, when young people ask questions about creationism in science classes, teachers need to be able to explain to them why evolution and the Big Bang are scientific theories but they should also take the time to explain how science works and why creationism has no scientific basis. I have referred to science teachers discussing creationism as a worldview’; this is not the same as lending it any scientific credibility.”
The society remains committed to the teaching of evolution as the best explanation for the history of life on earth. This position was highlighted in the Interacademy Panel statement on the teaching of evolution issued in June 2006.
Andrew Brown in The Guardian Dr Williams’ contortions
Mary Ann Sieghart in the Times Rowan Williams was selected as a liberal and now he should govern as one
Roderick Strange writes about Edith Stein in the Times The life and death of a German Jewish Christian nun.
Dr Bernard Ratigan in The Guardian writes that The needs of young people brought up in homonegative faiths are being neglected.
Justin Thacker in The Guardian God and evolution can coexist
Tom Frame in the Church Times Jesus’s checklist for good leadership
3 CommentsThe Archbishop of Canterbury has issued the following statement in response to the release of the Pitt letters.
Friday 08 August 2008
In response to the recent coverage of the correspondence dated back to 2000, The Archbishop Canterbury has made the following statement:
In the light of recent reports based on private correspondence from eight years ago, I wish to make it plain that, as I have consistently said, I accept Resolution I.10 of the 1998 Lambeth Conference as stating the position of the worldwide Anglican Communion on issues of sexual ethics and thus as providing the authoritative basis on which I as Archbishop speak on such questions.
That Resolution also recognises the need for continuing study and discussion on the matter. In the past, as a professional theologian, I have made some contributions to such study. But obviously, no individual’s speculations about this have any authority of themselves. Our Anglican Church has never exercised close control over what individual theologians may say. However, like any church, it has the right to declare what may be said in its name as official doctrine and to define the limits of legitimate practice. As Archbishop I understand my responsibility to be to the declared teaching of the church I serve, and thus to discourage any developments that might imply that the position and convictions of the worldwide Communion have changed.
The Bishop of Durham and 18 other bishops have written a letter to The Times which begins:
35 CommentsSir, As bishops in the Church of England, we wish to protest in the strongest possible terms at what we regard as a gross misrepresentation of the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Here are more Lambeth Conference news items from last week’s Church Times that were only available to subscribers until today.
Williams urges generous love
Lawyers see 1662 as still able to unite
Bishops tackle extremism and ‘daily business of dialogue’
Spouses aim to build good faith
Step up moral pressure over climate, Conference is told
Millennium Goals must be met, say Lambeth walkers
Ecumenical participants grapple
Murphy-O’Connor warns of ‘ecumenical shadow’
The detailed reports in the Church Times of the recent Church of England General Synod are now available to non-subscribers.
The reports on the women bishops debates
Women bishops: debate: ‘I know people say that bishops can’t be trusted, but I think I can’ – reports of the Bishop of Manchester’s preentation on the Friday evening and the take note debate on the Saturday.
Women bishops: the vote – the main debate on Monday 7 July
Below the fold are details of clergy votes in the debate on women bishops on Monday 7 July similar to my earlier details for bishops. So far only three of the votes (the Packer amendment, the vote on the adjournment and the final vote) are included.
I have matched my list of members and the voting lists by synod number. My list is based on the June 2008 list of members, which may not be totally up-to-date.
13 CommentsVoting lists for the electronic votes at the recent sessions of the Church of England’s General Synod are now online. I have summarised the bishops’ votes in the debate on women bishops held on Monday 7 July, both in a table below the fold and online as a pdf file.
The table records whether each bishop voted for or against each motion or amendment, or recorded an abstention. Some of the 45 bishops present missed some of the votes altogether and this is indicated by a dash.
Bishops are listed alphabetically by surname, and their synod number is given in the first column.
I have already given the text of each amendment and of the substantive motion, and the overall voting figures here. The table includes my very brief summary of the purpose of each amendment.
Note: Not included in the table are the bishops of Sheffield and Truro (sees vacant) and the bishops of Coventry, Chester, Ely, Leicester, Salisbury and Sodor & Man, none of whom took part in any of the votes. The bishop of Coventry was only consecrated on 3 July, the bishop of Leicester was on duty at the House of Lords and the bishop of Salisbury was ill. I don’t know why the others were absent.
25 CommentsThe official report of business conducted today is found at General Synod – Summary of Business Conducted on Tuesday 8th July 2008.
0 CommentsUpdated to add link to article by Miranda Threlfall-Holmes
Reports
Riazat Butt in The Guardian Church vote opens door to female bishops
Martin Beckford in the Telegraph Church of England set to split over women bishops
Jennifer Gold in Christian Today Church of England votes to ordain women bishops
Jerome Taylor in The Independent Church risks split as Synod votes to ordain women bishops
Steve Doughty in the Mail Church of England faces clergy revolt after paving way for first woman bishop by 2014
The Press Association Church turmoil over women bishops
Ekklesia Church of England makes historic decision for women bishops
John F Burns in the International Herald Tribune As schism lurks, the Church of England endorses women as bishops
The Age [Melbourne] Anglicans vote in favour of women bishops
Stephanie Kennedy in ABC News [Australia] Anglican Synod votes to allow female bishops
Comments
Miranda Threlfall-Holmes in The Guardian There will be women bishops
Andrew Brown in The Guardian Super-bishops fly in
Damian Thompson in the Telegraph The Church of England is Protestant again
53 CommentsFor the final form of the motion before Synod and the voting figures see the end of this article
Synod began its main debate on women bishops at 2.30 pm today.
The Order Paper is here
I have copied this below, but have amended it to include the votes in synod as they took place.
Note: Where a vote is taken by houses, the motion must be carried in all three houses to be carried.
The Bishop of Gloucester moved:
20. ‘That this Synod:
(a) reaffirm its wish for women to be admitted to the episcopate;
(b) affirm its view that special arrangements be available, within the existing structures of the Church of England, for those who as a matter of theological conviction will not be able to receive the ministry of women as bishops or priests;
(c) affirm that these should be contained in a national code of practice to which all concerned would be required to have regard; and
(d) instruct the legislative drafting group, in consultation with the House of Bishops, to complete its work accordingly, including preparing the first draft of a code of practice, so that the Business Committee can include first consideration of the draft legislation in the agenda for the February 2009 group of sessions.’
The Bishop of Winchester moved as an amendment:
66. After “That this Synod” leave out paragraph (a) and insert:
“(a) anticipating the ordination of women to the episcopate in the Church of England, and noting the Manchester Group’s assertion in paragraph 22 of GS 1685 that “far and away the most important question that the Church of England now has to face is the extent to which it wishes to continue to accommodate the breadth of theological views on this issue that it currently encompasses”,
(i) affirm the assurances included in paragraphs 67-69 of GS 1685;
(ii) reaffirm (GS 1685 paragraph 74) Resolution III.2 of the 1998 Lambeth Conference “that those who dissent from, as well as those who assent to the ordination of women to the priesthood and the episcopate are both loyal Anglicans”;
In paragraph (b) leave out “within the existing structures of the Church of England”; and
In paragraph (c) after “in” insert “legislation and in”.
Amendment 66 was lost after a vote by houses.
Voting figures
|
for
|
against
|
abstentions
|
|
| bishops |
14
|
31
|
0
|
| clergy |
62
|
120
|
0
|
| laity |
78
|
114
|
0
|
The Revd Prebendary David Houlding (London) moved as an amendment:
67. Leave out paragraph (a) and insert:
“(a) affirm that the wish of its majority is for women to be admitted to the episcopate”.
Amendment 67 was carried after a vote by houses.
Voting figures
|
for
|
against
|
abstentions
|
|
| bishops |
28
|
17
|
0
|
| clergy |
90
|
89
|
4
|
| laity |
97
|
85
|
7
|
The Revd Stephen Trott (Peterborough) moved as an amendment:
68. Leave out paragraphs (b) and (c) and in paragraph (d) leave out “, including preparing the first draft of a code of practice,”.
Amendment 68 was lost after a vote by houses.
Voting figures
|
for
|
against
|
abstentions
|
|
| bishops |
3
|
40
|
2
|
| clergy |
28
|
149
|
4
|
| laity |
36
|
147
|
5
|
The Revd Miranda Threlfall-Holmes (Universities, York) moved as an amendment:
69. In paragraph (b) leave out all the words after “affirm its view that” and insert “this should be done with the simplest possible statutory approach, with local diocesan arrangements for pastoral provision and sacramental care;”;
Leave out paragraph (c); and
In paragraph (d) leave out “, including preparing the first draft of a code of practice,”.
Amendment 69 was lost after a vote by houses.
Voting figures
|
for
|
against
|
abstentions
|
|
| bishops |
7
|
37
|
1
|
| clergy |
66
|
107
|
9
|
| laity |
68
|
118
|
4
|
The Revd Canon Simon Killwick (Manchester) moved as an amendment:
70. In paragraph (b) leave out “the existing structures of”;
In paragraph (c) leave out “national code of practice to which all concerned would be required to have regard” and insert “Measure”; and
In paragraph (d) leave out “accordingly, including preparing the first draft of a code of practice,” and insert “by preparing a draft Measure and associated code of practice providing new dioceses for those who cannot in conscience receive the ministry of women as bishops or priests,” and after the words “so that” insert the words “, if possible,”.
Amendment 70 was lost after a vote by houses.
Voting figures
|
for
|
against
|
abstentions
|
|
| bishops |
10
|
32
|
3
|
| clergy |
53
|
124
|
4
|
| laity |
71
|
116
|
2
|
The Bishop of Exeter moved as an amendment:
71. In paragraph (b) leave out “the existing structures of”;
In paragraph (c) leave out “national code of practice to which all concerned would be required to have regard” and insert “Measure”; and
In paragraph (d) leave out all the words after “accordingly” and insert “by preparing drafts of possible legislation in accordance with paragraph (c), to include further draft Measures, together with associated codes of practice, based on diocesan structures for those who cannot in conscience receive the ministry of women as bishops or priests, so that, if possible, the Business Committee can include consideration of these options in the agenda for the February 2009 group of sessions.”.
Amendment 71 was lost after a vote by houses.
Voting figures
|
for
|
against
|
abstentions
|
|
| bishops |
14
|
29
|
2
|
| clergy |
65
|
116
|
1
|
| laity |
77
|
112
|
0
|
The Bishop of Ripon and Leeds moved as an amendment:
72. In paragraph (c) after the words “affirm that these should be” insert “either by way of statutory transfer of specified responsibilities or”; and
In paragraph (d) leave out “complete” and insert “develop” and leave out the words “first consideration of the draft legislation” and insert “further consideration of both alternatives envisaged in paragraph (c) ”.
Amendment 72 was lost after a vote by houses (since it was defeated in one house).
Voting figures
|
for
|
against
|
abstentions
|
|
| bishops |
21
|
21
|
1
|
| clergy |
84
|
92
|
2
|
| laity |
98
|
87
|
0
|
At this point (6.30 pm) Synod broke for its dinner break. The session will resume at 8.00 pm
[Miss Emma Forward (Exeter) did not move her amendment so it was not considered:
73. In paragraph (b) leave out “special”.]
The Revd Gillian Henwood (York) moved an amendment:
74. Insert after paragraph (b):
“(..) affirm its view that special arrangements should be available, within the existing structures of the Church of England, for those who as a matter of theological conviction wish to exercise or receive the ministry of women as bishops or priests in episcopal areas where the bishop has stated that he is not able to ordain women;”.
Amendment 74 was lost after a vote by houses.
Voting figures
|
for
|
against
|
abstentions
|
|
| bishops |
5
|
31
|
3
|
| clergy |
68
|
85
|
20
|
| laity |
82
|
90
|
7
|
Canon Dr Christina Baxter (Southwell and Nottingham) moved as an amendment:
75. After paragraph (c) insert as a new paragraph:
“(..) require that the Measure enabling women to be admitted to the episcopate should require:
(i) that the Measure should only come into force once the code has been agreed;
(ii) that in order for the code of practice to come into effect, it must receive the approval of the General Synod with a two-thirds majority in each House; and
(iii) that any future changes to the code can only be made by the General Synod with a two-thirds majority in each House;”.
Amendment 75 was lost after a vote by houses.
Voting figures
|
for
|
against
|
abstentions
|
|
| bishops |
15
|
19
|
5
|
| clergy |
86
|
78
|
8
|
| laity |
81
|
88
|
10
|
Ms Jacqueline Humphreys (Bristol) moved as an amendment:
76. In paragraph (c) insert “statutory” before the words “national code of practice”.
Amendment 76 was carried on a show of hands.
the Revd Canon Robert Cotton (Guildford) moved as an amendment:
77. Insert as a new paragraph after paragraph (c):
“(..) agree that the code of practice should relate only to the exercise of episcopal functions and describe a commitment to mutual support and cooperation between members of the House of Bishops to help with pastoral provision and sacramental care when situations arise affecting those with conscientious difficulties relating to ordination to the priesthood and the episcopate; and”.
Amendment 77 was lost after a vote by houses.
Voting figures
|
for
|
against
|
abstentions
|
|
| bishops |
1
|
35
|
4
|
| clergy |
38
|
129
|
5
|
| laity |
44
|
129
|
7
|
His Honour Thomas Coningsby QC (ex officio) moved as an amendment:
78. In paragraph (c) leave out all the words after “national code of practice” and insert “which all concerned would be required to follow”.
Amendment 78 was lost on a show of hands.
The Bishop of Durham moved that the debate be adjourned. This motion was lost with 180 votes in favour, 203 against and 9 abstentions.
Final form of the substantive motion
As a result of the two successful amendments (67 and 76) the final form of the substantive motion became:
That this Synod:
(a) affirm that the wish of its majority is for women to be admitted to the episcopate;
(b) affirm its view that special arrangements be available, within the existing structures of the Church of England, for those who as a matter of theological conviction will not be able to receive the ministry of women as bishops or priests;
(c) affirm that these should be contained in a statutory national code of practice to which all concerned would be required to have regard; and
(d) instruct the legislative drafting group, in consultation with the House of Bishops, to complete its work accordingly, including preparing the first draft of a code of practice, so that the Business Committee can include first consideration of the draft legislation in the agenda for the February 2009 group of sessions.
After a vote by houses the substantive motion was carried.
Voting figures
|
for
|
against
|
abstentions
|
|
| bishops |
28
|
12
|
1
|
| clergy |
124
|
44
|
4
|
| laity |
111
|
68
|
2
|
Here is the official report of Sunday’s business at General Synod.
General Synod – Summary of Business Conducted on Monday 7th July 2008
It is being updated during the day and will include links to audio of each session.
0 CommentsThree recent items from Fulcrum
Further Thoughts on GAFCON and related matters by the Bishop of Durham, Dr Tom Wright
The GAFCON Movement and The Anglican Communion by Andrew Goddard
A briefing paper for PCCs. It is “against the resolution suggested on the Anglican Mainstream site: ‘We stand in solidarity with the Jerusalem Declaration and Statement on the Global Anglican Future’”
An interview on ABC Sydney with Archbishop Phillip Aspinall, the primate of Australia
This is reported in The Sydney Morning Herald as Aspinall warns Jensen.
General Synod will be debating Women Bishops later today. The debate was orginally scheduled for this afternoon, but because of the large number of proposed amendments it will now continue into the evening.
The order paper for this debate is online here and copied below the fold.
0 CommentsThe Archbishop of Canterbury preached at the 10 am Eucharist at York Minster yesterday. The service was attended by most members of General Synod as well as by the regular minster congregation. The text of the Archbishop’s sermon is now online here.
3 CommentsThe Archbishop of Armagh, the Most Revd Alan Harper, spoke to the USPG conference last week on Holy Scripture and the Law of God in Contemporary Anglicanism in the Light of Richard Hooker’s “Lawes”. His address is online here and here.
Ruth Gledhill in the Times Archbishop of Armagh invokes scripture in defence of homosexuality
BBC We may allow gay unions: COI head
David Young and Alf McCreary in the Belfast Telegraph Church of Ireland may accept gay marriages
Belfast News Letter C of I may accept gay marriage – Harper
6 Commentsupdated at lunchtime
A mixture of articles looking forward to the debate on women bishops later today and back to the Archbishop of Canterbury’s sermon yesterday.
Riazat Butt in The Guardian Church of England to consider introducing ‘super-bishops’ to avert crisis over women
Martin Beckford in the Telegraph Anglican Church may create ‘super bishops’ to avoid splitting and
Church of England to debate women bishops
Ruth Gledhill in the Times Day of reckoning for Anglicans amid split over women bishops
Steve Doughty at the Mail Church of England plans male ‘superbishops’ for rebel clergy who refuse to be led by women
Alastair Beach in The Independent Anglican rebels ‘in Vatican meeting’
BBC Jesus ‘would feel Anglican pain’
BBC Synod set for women bishops vote
Jonathan Wynne-Jones in the Telegraph Dr Rowan Williams stands tall in the Church
0 Comments