Fewer or none?
Updated Friday 30 March
In last week’s Church Times Paul Bickley of Theos wrote an article about the bishops and the House of Lords, under the title Fewer Lords Spiritual, or none at all. In it he argues convincingly that:
The game is almost up for the bishops in the Lords. The only option for them is to put forward a counter-proposal of their own, with a radically reduced number of bishops to be part of a potential appointed element of a reformed chamber. They have not done so in the Lords’ debates on the subject this week. But five, six — even two — bishops, appointed on the basis of ability and capacity, and released from some diocesan responsibilities, could ensure that the national Church could maintain its excellent work in a reformed second chamber.
This article follows on from the Theos report Coming off the bench: The past, present and future of religious representation in the House of Lords which was published in February and can be downloaded from here. At the time, Bill Bowder reported on it: Report finds bishops too political.
This week’s Church Times has letters in response to the article, including from Frank Field and Colin Buchanan.
Update These letters are now available, see If the bishops want a future in the Lords, they need to work on it.
Frank Field writes:
…The impression given by the bishops is like that of their predecessors sitting around, sharpening their quills, and waiting for Prime Minister Peel to come and begin ecclesiastical-committee meetings. This time round they are simply awaiting reform.
The House of Bishops needs to become proactive and introduce its own Bill reforming the place of the Lords Spiritual in the Upper House. But to do this the bishops need to have thought through what is their place in a “modernised” Second Chamber.
Despite the increase in attendance of bishops now, compared with the Thatcher era, most bishops who have places in the Lords do little to justify their existence…
And Colin Buchanan says:
14 Comments…I wonder whether a few one-line shafts of the obvious would help?
First, if there were 16 bishops taking their seats on the present pecking-order basis, all but the top five would get about nine months’ membership of the House before retirement.
Second, if there were the Bickley solution of “six, five — even two — bishops appointed on the basis of ability . . . and released from some diocesan responsibilities”, then (a) who would appoint them? (b) what would count as “ability”? and © what diocese would want them in absentia?
Third, surely the issue of “100 per cent elected” should be addressed in its own right, not simply on the grounds that it unseats bishops?
Fourth, when will anyone start to couple a changed future for bishops in the Lords with an end of Downing Street’s final say in their appointment as bishops, indefensibly staked, as it is, upon the current expectation of their proceeding to the Lords?
columnar thoughts
The Times Many roads lead to the One in southern India by Guy Liardet
Guardian Stephen Tomkins writes about the abolition of slavery campaign.
Telegraph Christopher Howse The lost language of worship
Church Times Giles Fraser Capitalism can have a warm heart
Tablet Dangers, toils and snares by Michael Fitzgerald
Church of England Newspaper via Fulcrum The Church of England: More than Evangelical but not Less by Graham Kings
18 CommentsSORs: follow-up and analysis
Ekklesia has Victory goes to equality in House of Lords vote.
The BBC has Blair proud of gay rights record.
The Daily Mail has How agencies could beat gay adoption laws and also Gay adoption laws forced through by the Lords.
…Equalities Minister Meg Munn admitted the nine Catholic adoption societies in England would be released from the demands of the Sexual Orientation Regulations if they forego cash from state-run social services and instead rely entirely on collections from supporters.
The announcement caused speculation that the Catholic Church could launch an appeal to England’s one million Catholic churchgoers to make up the £10million agencies get from local councils.
Miss Munn revealed the breakaway option in a Parliamentary written answer.
She explained how regulation 14 of the gay rights laws allows religious organisations exemption from the discrimination rules, as long as they are not run on commercial lines.
They can discriminate if it is necessary to comply with doctrine or the beliefs of members…
The Parliamentary written answer to which reference is made above can be found here.
The Evangelical Alliance issued this press release: Christians should continue to deliver public services until the law stops them.
Craig Nelson has an excellent detailed and critical analysis of the bishops’ contributions to the House of Lords debate at More on the House of Lords debate – the bishops’ speeches. It’s worth reading in full, but predictably he selects this quote from the Bishop of Winchester as winning the prize:
“I greatly regret the fact that the Government chose not to do so, but, rather, chose to legislate to coerce the churches and others to accept as the norm for this society—the regulations ask us to accept this and to collude in the Government’s promotion—alternative patterns of living and of family life that many people conscientiously believe are less than the best, less than the most healthy, and less than God’s will for humankind.”
Keith Porteous of the National Secular Society has much harsher things to say about the bishops:
13 Comments“As it turned out, only three of the bishops turned up. They probably realised that a show of brute power would seriously jeopardise the survival of the Bishops Bench in House of Lords reform. But they clearly tried to field their top brass. This included the Archbishop of York, who even apologised for the absence of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and two senior bishops. All voted against the Regulations…
…“Their remarks were torn to shreds by several speakers in a way that would have been unthinkable just a year ago. The most effective attacks came from three non-aligned Christians, two peers who happen to be gay and a baroness who was chief executive of Childline. To murmurs of approval they lectured the prelates on love and discrimination. It was unforgettable.
“Lord (Chris) Smith spoke of the humiliation of a gay couple being turned away from a bed and breakfast, and the reality of gay and lesbian people being removed from GP lists because of their sexuality. In one of the most powerful speeches of the evening, Lord Waheed Alli spoke of his father, a Muslim. The Koran openly says that Jews should be killed, he told peers. As a Muslim, if he truly believed that, then there should not be a law against it, according to the arguments of the bishops. ‘The sight of children holding up homophobic placards outside the Lords seems a good argument for these regulations,’ he told peers. Baroness Howarth of Breckland concluded ‘Gay people deserve that as much as any of us, just as Wilberforce said that every black person deserved equal treatment.’
American bishops: Telegraph editorialises
Updated Friday evening
Today, the Daily Telegraph catches up with the news, as Jonathan Petre reports Liberal bishops reject parallel Church, but compensates for the delay by printing this leader column: Communion no more. Part of it reads:
…The text of the American bishops’ statement is damaging. This is a national Church speaking with an (almost) united voice. The casus belli has shifted from the ordination of Gene Robinson, a bishop who is in a relationship with another man, to allegations of bullying by a group of primates led by the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Dr Williams now finds himself out of favour with liberals and moderate conservatives in his own Communion. And, harsh though it may sound, he has only himself to blame.
In the past couple of years, he has allowed conservative Anglicanism to be hijacked by extremists. Archbishop Peter Akinola, Anglican Primate of Nigeria, is the leader of the Global South provinces opposed to the ordination of actively homosexual clergy.
That is fair enough, but he has also defended new Nigerian legislation that makes “cancerous” (his word) same-sex activity punishable by up to five years’ imprisonment. The deeply divisive figure of Archbishop Akinola was central to Dr Williams’s Tanzanian compromise; is it any wonder that it has been rejected?…
It takes a while for the RSS feed to arrive, but the Damian Thompson blog entry related to this is now on Holy Smoke: It’s all over for the Archbishop. He starts out this way:
35 CommentsRowan Williams is finished as Archbishop of Canterbury. His authority has been utterly destroyed by the decision of the American bishops to reject his scheme to hold together the Anglican Communion.
If there is a Lambeth Conference next year – and it is hard to see how there can be, if its American bankrollers are kicked out – then I shall be very surprised if he presides over it.
Any Archbishop of Canterbury would have faced almost insurmountable obstacles to preserving the unity of the Anglican Communion, many of whose members do not recognise each other as Christians, let alone as Anglicans. But Dr Williams has not come even close to surmounting them.
Just as John Major never recovered from Black Wednesday, Rowan Williams has never recovered from Black Sunday: 6 July, 2003, when he forced his friend Canon Jeffrey John to withdraw his acceptance of the post of Bishop of Reading…
American bishops: more stuff
Updated Monday morning
One of the things the American bishops did was to invite Rowan Williams and the Primates Standing Committee to come to the USA, and talk directly to them.
Somebody has decided to help this idea along: see on Ebay Travel for the Archbishop of Canterbury to the USA:
See American bishops in their native habitat!
The bishops of the American Episcopal Church have asked Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, to make an unprecedented and long-delayed visit to them in North America to discuss the Current Unpleasantness pre-occupying the Anglican Communion. The Americans assure ++Cantuar that their Christian hospitality will match that of the various fissiparous bishops he has broken bread with on multiple continents. So that the plate and pledge of parishes is not unnecessarily depleted, elements within TEC inclined toward reconciliation or at least a good face-to-face row are offering a business class ticket to any USA destination of the archbishop’s choosing, along with lodging in a Courtyard by Marriott ™ or better accommodation within strolling distance of the agreed-upon meeting place. A team of Th.D translators will be on hand to couch ++Cantuar’s musings in terms accessible to the colonials. Tea and biscuits to be provided by the ECW.
All are invited to bid on this communion-saving encounter.
Update see eBay Shall Not Splinter the Communion!
2 CommentsNigeria: legislation imminent
Updated Saturday
Changing Attitude has this: Changing Attitude Nigeria urges international action against Same Sex Marriage Act. It concludes thus:
…Archbishop Peter Akinola is said to be doing last minute lobbying of Anglicans in the House of Representatives and the Government to ensure the bill is voted on soon and passed into law.
Davis Mac-Iyalla, Director of Changing Attitude Nigeria (CAN), said:
“Changing Attitude Nigeria stands as a reminder to the world-wide Anglican Communion that the Church of Nigeria is promoting and supporting a bill which will erode the most basic human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people.”
“Archbishop Peter Akinola has committed himself to the Windsor Report which commits him to the process of listening to LGBT people. If he is honest and serious about listening to LGBT members in his Province he must speak out now in condemnation of this bill and ensure that it is defeated.”
“I am very worried because very few Nigerian LGBT activists are free to speak out in a country which already has repressive anti-gay legislation on the statute book. The bill is moving very fast and although some people think the bill will fall, the Church sponsors are not giving up and neither are we.“
“Conservative Christians want to use Nigeria as an example to other African countries to demonstrate that anti-gay legislation can be passed which criminalizes all affection and activity between LGBT people.”
To put this in context, another article from the Daily Trust (Abuja) is instructive, Nigeria: The Audacity of Deviants.
Update Saturday
Jim Naughton reports in A hopeful delay in Nigeria? that
28 Comments…the Nigerian legislature did not consider the hateful anti-gay legislation being supported by Archbishop Peter Akinola and the Church of Nigeria before adjourning yesterday. The legislature as currently composed does not reconvene until May, after the general election, and then only for one week…
SORs: from the Church Times
Last week, I wrote an article for the Comment pages of the Church Times, which is now available on the public part of the website: How far churches may discriminate. Most of this article is an attempt to explain how generous the religious exemption is to churches. I also wrote:
…the initial Church of England response was only lukewarm: “The Government has gone some way to recognising the particular needs of churches and other religious organisations to act in accordance with their own convictions.” In contrast, the Christian charity Faithworks welcomed them: “The proposed SORs are an opportunity for Christians to demonstrate the love and grace of Christ.”
Sandhya Drew, a barrister who specialises in discrimination cases, commented: “People of faith who respect the principles of universal human dignity have nothing to fear from these regulations.”
This week, Bill Bowder reports fully on the latest events in Christians fight on gay Regulations.
25 CommentsAmerican bishops: news conference
Episcopal News Service has a detailed report of the news conference held at the end of the American House of Bishops meeting: Bishops comment on invitation to Archbishop of Canterbury, other actions.
The Living Church has a report headed Resolutions Arose From Bishops’ Concern Over Pastoral Council Nominations.
18 CommentsStephen Bates weighs in on the American bishops
The Comment is free website is carrying an article by the Guardian’s Religious Affairs Correspondent, Stephen Bates. The title is Bishops to primate: drop dead.
The original on which this headline is based can be found here.
44 CommentsAmerican bishops: some further responses
The American Anglican Council has this AAC Statement on the Episcopal House of Bishops’ March 2007 Meeting.
Integrity has INTEGRITY APPLAUDS BISHOPS’ STRONG STAND AGAINST PRIMATES.
The Bishop of Central Florida has written a very surprising letter which can be found here.
The Bishop of Western Louisiana also wrote about it. See here.
The Bishop of New Hampshire wrote this Pastoral Letter.
Susan Russell had this Report on Post Camp Allen News Conference which includes some interesting tidbits.
Bishop Christopher Epting has written What The Bishops Didn’t Do.
6 CommentsSORs: what the bishops did etc.
There were three bishops present and voting last night, and one retired English bishop.
Lord Harries voted against the amendment.
The Archbishop of York, the Bishop of Winchester, and the Bishop of Southwell & Nottingham each spoke for, and voted for the amendment.
Lord Eames also voted for the amendment.
You can read their speeches here (in chronological order, scroll down as necessary):
Ekklesia has commented on this aspect of the debate: Bishops reject calls to vote on Sexual Orientation Regulations and also Bishop’s vote over Sexual Orientation Regulations.
The Press Association issued Kelly welcomes gay equality law
Zefrog has Sexual Orientation Regulations – Lords Vote and What the Christian Right Doesn’t Want You to See Anymore.
The Public Whip analyses the Lords voting in detail here.
10 CommentsAmerican bishops: further press coverage
For earlier reports, including UK papers this morning go here.
BBC US bishops refuse Anglican demand
Reuters Global Anglican dispute remains after US meeting
Associated Press Episcopal bishops reject ultimatum from Anglican leaders, risking split from Anglican family
New York Times Episcopal Church Rejects Demand for a 2nd Leadership
Washington Post Episcopal Bishops in U.S. Defy Anglican Communion
Los Angeles Times Episcopal-Anglican rift deepens
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Episcopal bishops reject Anglican demands
Houston Chronicle Episcopal bishops spurn demands from Anglicans
USA Today Episcopal bishops reject Anglican ultimatum on gays
50 Commentstwo more documents from the Americans
The American bishops issued A Message to God’s People…from the Bishops of the Episcopal Church.
And here is the Presiding Bishop’s homily at House of Bishops’ closing Eucharist.
13 CommentsSORs: Lords vote
Updated Thursday morning
The amendment seeking to prevent the Regulations coming into effect was defeated by 168 to 122.
Text of amendment here.
The original government motion to approve them was then passed on a voice vote: I heard no dissent while watching the last part of the debate over the internet. I saw only three bishops present: York, Winchester and Southwell & Nottingham. (The 42 objectors must be disappointed.)
Craig Nelson was also watching and made some notes here.
You can watch the debate by going here and going forward about 4 hours 30 minutes. The Hansard report on this debate starts here. Direct links to the bishops speeches in a later TA article.
Meanwhile, Zefrog has Anti-Sexual Orientation Regulations Vigil Outside Parliament – Report. It seems the demonstration was quite small.
Ekklesia has a report too: Christians demonstrate against anti-discrimination measures. (Note: this appears to relate to an earlier demonstration, see Zefrog comment below.)
The BBC has Lords support gay equality laws.
The Archbishop of York has published his speech. Anglican Mainstream has it here.
Thursday morning
BBC Gay laws ‘a major step forward’ (Note: story originally contained untrue statement about the General Synod, now corrected.)
The Times carries a comment article by Roy Hattersley criticising Lord Carey’s reported earlier remarks about disestablishment but also mentioning the SORs (which Carey had not done): Be off with you, Lord C.
Ekklesia has Victory goes to equality in House of Lords vote.
American bishops: reports and responses
Rowan Williams has issued this statement:
This initial response of the House of Bishops is discouraging and indicates the need for further discussion and clarification. Some important questions have still to be addressed and no one is underestimating the challenges ahead.
Laurie Goodstein in the New York Times reported Episcopals Rebuff Demands on Stance on Gays
Rachel Zoll of the Associated Press filed Episcopal Bishops Reject Ultimatum and later filed Episcopal bishops reject ultimatum from Anglican leaders.
Rebecca Trounson in the Los Angeles Times Episcopalians brace for possible church split
Reuters U.S. church wants meeting with Anglican head
Bishop Chane of Washington reported in a Pastoral Letter on his diocesan website, including this:
The first resolution, “Mind of the House of Bishops Resolution Addressed to the Executive Council of the Episcopal Church” passed in the House by a simple voice vote after several hours of debate. The second resolution, “To the Archbishop of Canterbury and the members of the Primates’ Steering Committee” passed unanimously. The third resolution, which puts forth “A Statement from the House of Bishops-March 20, 2007” passed by a standing vote after some modifications in language.
Episcopal Majority continues its roundup from the blogs here. (It started here.)
Update at midnight
Stephen Bates in the Guardian has US rejects Anglican ultimatum:
The worldwide Anglican church was facing its long-awaited split last night after the bishops of the US Episcopal church firmly rejected an ultimatum, proposed at a meeting of Anglican leaders in Tanzania last month, to allow American conservatives to have their own leadership because of opposition to their church’s liberal stance on homosexuality.
The decision appears to kill the hopes of Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury, and nominal head of the 78 million-strong worldwide communion, that he can prevent the church from dividing following the liberal US church’s decision to elect an openly gay bishop in 2003. The American bishops called unanimously for a meeting with Dr Williams, who has steered clear of visiting the US over the last four years, at the earliest possible opportunity, at their expense…
Ruth Gledhill in The Times has Anglicans closer to schism as US bishops reject gay ultimatum:
22 CommentsThe Anglican Church took another step towards its apparently inevitable schism when US Episcopal bishops rejected the ultimatum from primates of the Anglican Communion to fall into line over homosexuals.
The bishops of the Episcopal Church accused Anglican primates of trying to drag their Church back into “a time of colonialism”. They said late on Tuesday night that they would resist the primates’ demand that they set up a new pastoral scheme with a “primatial vicar” to make a traditionalist enclave for antigay conservatives who reject the oversight of liberal bishops. They said that the scheme “violated” their canons, or Church law.
Christian gays in Britain yesterday welcomed the US decision and accused the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, who chaired last month’s primates’ meeting in Tanzania, of trying to “sell them down the river” and of pandering to “forces of the extreme Right”.
Dr Radner's IRD connection
Ephraim Radner who just attended the HoB meeting at Camp Allen to deliver this paper, is a member of the Covenant Design Group, and of the Anglican Communion Institute, and whose day job is being Rector of the Church of the Ascension, in Pueblo, Colarado, is now also a Director of the Institute for Religion and Democracy. You can see this by looking here.
Jim Naughton who wrote Following the Money, thinks this is a bad thing, as explained in Shining a little light on the IRD:
By the way, am I the last one to learn that the Rev. Ephraim Radner, who is helping to write the proposed Anglican Covenant, is a member of the IRD’s board? Does it bother anybody else that this sensitive work is being done by a man so closely allied with an organization that aims to “restructure the permanent governing structure” of “theologically flawed” Protestant denominations? (see FtM, Part one, footnote 3.)
The board is chaired by Roberta Ahmanson, whose billionaire husband Howard has said that while he no longer thinks it is “essential” to stone gay people, adds “It would still be a little hard to say that if one stumbled on a country that was doing that, that it is inherently immoral, to stone people for these things.” (See FtM, Part one, footnote 13.)
The Rev. Philip W. Turner is a member of the IRD’s Board of Advisors. He, like Radner is one of the six members of the Anglican Communion Institute. It is worth keeping these ties in mind when reading the ACI’s frequent interventions in the current debate over homosexuality and church order.
This was discussed on titusonenine and at Stand Firm and Dr Radner himself wrote:
18 CommentsYes, I am a new board member of IRD. I have great respect for the the organization, in that it was one of the first to attempt to provide views regarding church-supported political activities around the world that challenged the standard liberal claims of our mainline denominations. These views simply were not being heard within our church structures — a form of conscious and unconscious censorship that I know first hand, and that has deeply limited and wounded these churches (including the Episcopal Church’s) intellectual and moral integrity. IRD’s work in bringing attention to matters of religious freedom around the world, woefully and ignominiously ignored by American Christian denominations, has been a critically needed witness. I do not in fact agree with all of IRD’s past positions or even current ones, but I respect and co[n]tinue to respect its work and its leaders. But I have made it clear that I am my own person. I am, for instance, a Democrat who often, although not always, votes with my party, but also struggles with it for a host of reasons. I try to be responsible and critical in my political thinking and acting. Diane Knippers was a great leader and Christian, whose witness inspired me in many ways, and I am more than willing to help carry on a work she began. Obviously, one is judged by one’s associations. I am, for instance, in the same church as Jim Naughton. What are we to make of this? It is odd, and in fact sad, to the utmost that the Church of Jesus Christ has crumbled to such an extent that Mr. Naughton (along with many others on the left and the right) is more interested in political segregation as a way of exercising his ecclesial vocation than in understanding.
full text of American bishops statement
For context see here.
A Statement from the House of Bishops – March 20, 2007
We, the Bishops of The Episcopal Church, meeting at Camp Allen, Navasota, Texas, for our regular Spring Meeting, March 16-21, 2007, have received the Communiqué of February 19, 2007 from the Primates of the Anglican Communion meeting at Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. We have met together for prayer, reflection, conversation, and listening during these days and have had the Communiqué much on our minds and hearts, just as we know many in our Church and in other parts of the world have had us on their minds and hearts as we have taken counsel together. We are grateful for the prayers that have surrounded us.
We affirm once again the deep longing of our hearts for The Episcopal Church to continue as a part of the Anglican Communion. We have gone so far as to articulate our self-understanding and unceasing desire for relationships with other Anglicans by memorializing the principle in the Preamble of our Constitution. What is important to us is that The Episcopal Church is a constituent member of a family of Churches, all of whom share a common mother in the Church of England. That membership gives us the great privilege and unique opportunity of sharing in the family’s work of alleviating human suffering in all parts of the world. For those of us who are members of The Episcopal Church, we are aware as never before that our Anglican Communion partners are vital to our very integrity as Christians and our wholeness. The witness of their faith, their generosity, their bravery, and their devotion teach us essential elements of gospel-based living that contribute to our conversion.
We would therefore meet any decision to exclude us from gatherings of all Anglican Churches with great sorrow, but our commitment to our membership in the Anglican Communion as a way to participate in the alleviation of suffering and restoration of God’s creation would remain constant. We have no intention of choosing to withdraw from our commitments, our relationships, or our own recognition of our full communion with the See of Canterbury or any of the other constituent members of the Anglican Communion. Indeed, we will seek to live fully into, and deepen, our relationships with our brothers and sisters in the Communion through companion relationships, the networks of Anglican women, the Anglican Indigenous Network, the Francophone Network, our support for the Anglican Diocese of Cuba, our existing covenant commitments with other provinces and dioceses, including Liberia, Mexico, Central America, Brazil, and the Philippines, our work as The Episcopal Church in many countries around the world, especially in the Caribbean, Latin America, Europe, and Taiwan, and countless informal relationships for mission around the world.
25 CommentsSORs: Lords will vote today
Updated noontime
The House of Lords debate and vote this evening will be accompanied by a demonstration outside.
First the official Order Paper:
Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007
Baroness Andrews to move that the draft Regulations laid before the House on 13 March be approved. 12th Report from the Statutory Instruments Committee and 14th Report from the Merits Committee (Dinner break business)Baroness O’Cathain to move, as an amendment to the above motion, to leave out all the words after “that” and insert “this House, having regard to the widespread concerns that the draft Regulations compromise religious liberty and will result in litigation over the content of classroom teaching, and having regard to the legality of the equivalent regulations for Northern Ireland, declines to approve the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007.”
Now the demonstration:
Anglican Mainstream Christians Called to Join Prayer Vigil Against Gay Rights Law
Today’s press coverage:
The Times Greg Hurst and Ruth Gledhill Peer seeks to block gay rights rules and more letters to the editor at Clash over sexual orientation.
From the Telegraph blogs, Jonathan Isaby asks Were senior Tory rebels nobbled?
Malcolm Duncan of Faithworks writes on his blog, The SORs: make up your own mind!
What the PM’s Official Spokesperson said about the alleged lack of debate from Downing Street Says
zefrog has Fundamentalist Vigil Outside Parliament on Wednesday
Craig Nelson has The Christian Right plans another torch-lit “rally”
Update
Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor was on the BBC radio programme Today (listen here), see BBC report Gay adoption vote due for Lords and Zefrog has Murphy-O’Connor on Today. Also, see Could someone in the press actually read the Equality Act (2006)? on rhetorically speaking..
Kerron Cross has Sexual Orientation Regulations – Mass Lobby or Mass Hysteria?
The Evangelical Alliance has a press release: Christians should join in prayer as the House of Lords makes a decision on the Sexual Orientation Regulations
6 CommentsAmerican bishops respond to primates
Updated Wednesday afternoon
Episcopal News Service has: Bishops request meeting with Archbishop of Canterbury, Primates’ Standing Committee
Living Church has Bishops Reject Primates’ Ultimatum and earlier had House of Bishops Begins Discussion of Primates’ Communiqué.
See also Bishops’ ‘Mind of the House’ resolutions.
Full text of the Mind of the House of Bishops Resolution Addressed to the Executive Council of the Episcopal Church
Resolved, the House of Bishops affirms its desire that The Episcopal Church remain a part of the councils of the Anglican Communion; and
Resolved, the meaning of the Preamble to the Constitution of The Episcopal Church is determined solely by the General Convention of The Episcopal Church; and
Resolved, the House of Bishops believes the proposed Pastoral Scheme of the Dar es Salaam Communiqué of February 19, 2007 would be injurious to The Episcopal Church and urges that the Executive Council decline to participate in it; and
Resolved, the House of Bishops pledges itself to continue to work to find ways of meeting the pastoral concerns of the Primates that are compatible with our own polity and canons.
Full text of the resolution addressed To the Archbishop of Canterbury and the members of the Primates’ Standing Committee:
We, the Bishops of The Episcopal Church, meeting in Camp Allen, Navasota, Texas, March 16-21, 2007, have considered the requests directed to us by the Primates of the Anglican Communion in the Communiqué dated February 19, 2007.
Although we are unable to accept the proposed Pastoral Scheme, we declare our passionate desire to remain in full constituent membership in both the Anglican Communion and the Episcopal Church.
We believe that there is an urgent need for us to meet face to face with the Archbishop of Canterbury and members of the Primates’ Standing Committee, and we hereby request and urge that such a meeting be negotiated by the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church and the Archbishop of Canterbury at the earliest possible opportunity.
We invite the Archbishop and members of the Primates’ Standing Committee to join us at our expense for three days of prayer and conversation regarding these important matters.
Here are some more Episcopal News Service reports of what went on in the American House of Bishops prior to the release of the statements linked above:
‘Mutual respect’ marks bishops’ deliberations and Bishops approach Communique, Covenant with prayer, reflection
A presentation to the House of Bishops on the Proposed Anglican Covenant by Ephraim Radner
Interpreting the Proposed Anglican Covenant through the Communique by A. Katherine Grieb
God’s Mission and the Millennium Development Goals by Ian T. Douglas
Blogosphere reactions
Episcopal Majority is rounding these up here at Responses to the Bishops.
Ruth Gledhill is now on the case at TEC rejects forces of ‘colonialism’
Dave Walker has The Episcopal Bishops say ‘No!’
Press coverage:
Los Angeles Times Episcopal rejection of demands looks likely
An earlier report, not directly related to the HoB meeting, was this in the New York Times
Money Looms in Episcopalian Rift With Anglicans by Laurie Goodstein and Neela Banerjee
SORs: Commons vote
Updated Tuesday afternoon
From Hansard:
Sexual Orientation Discrimination
That the draft Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007, which were laid before this House on 12th March, be approved.—[Kevin Brennan.]
The House divided: Ayes 310, Noes 100.
Division lists here. The debate record of points of order prior to the vote starts here (scroll to end).
Update Analysis of the voting by The Public Whip
BBC Gay adoption rules ‘rail-roaded’
Telegraph Last ditch attempt to block gay rights bill
Statement on SOR vote from Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor
Tuesday morning
Letters to The Times include one from the Prolocutors of the Convocations of Canterbury and York.
See Bishops’ opposition to laws on gay rights
Telegraph MPs back gay rights Bill despite protests
Daily Mail You’re abusing Parliament over gay vote, Catholic leader tells Blair
Update Tuesday afternoon
Ekklesia Christian groups told not to ‘play on people’s fears’ over Sexual Orientation Regulations and also Anglicans pin hopes on unelected bishops to block anti-discrimination measures
Faithworks press release Faithworks urges Christians to read the Sexual Orientation Regulations and draw their own conclusions and also A brief guide to the Sexual Orientation Regulations (PDF)
18 Comments