Theo Hobson writes in the Guardian about A carnival of Christianity
The dominant trend of contemporary Christian theology might be called ecclesiastical fundamentalism. The one thing that everyone seems to agree on is the conceptual primacy of “church”. Postmodern theology explains that this religion is not an abstract system but a set of actual practices, performed (a crucial word) by various churches. Such is the current theological orthodoxy.
This evades the crisis at the heart of “church”. All forms of church define a Christian as one who belongs to this special society. In practice, that means accepting the authority of a particular institution. An institution must have rules; it must promote an orthodoxy and exclude people who want to think or behave differently. The problem is that Christianity is about a vision of total peace, of universal brother- and sisterhood. It is meant to oppose authoritarianism, legalism and exclusion. Was not the kingdom of God announced by Jesus betrayed by authoritarian institutions?…
Christopher Howse writes in the Telegraph about Pottering round old churches
Jonathan Sacks writes in The Times on the London bombings, Terrorism dishonours any cause which it claims to represent
Johann Hari wrote this, originally in the Independent but now available on his blog, The attacks on London – and the battles to come
9 CommentsFINANCE COMMITTEE
Mr Michael Chamberlain to reply as Chairman of the Finance Committee
Dr Susan Cooper (London) to ask the Chairman of the Finance Committee:
Q52 What are the financial implications for the Church of England of the Episcopal Church (USA) and the Anglican Church of Canada voluntarily withdrawing from the meetings and committees of the Anglican Consultative Council for the period up to the next Lambeth Conference?
Answer:
Financial implications would arise for the Church of England only if the Anglican Consultative Council were to approach us for an increase in our contribution. We have received no such approach. The budget which the Synod will be asked to approve on Monday incorporates a 3% increase in our contribution on 2006, the same as the increase between 2004 and 2005.
HOUSE OF BISHOPS
The Bishop of Peterborough to reply on behalf of the Chairman
The Revd Jonathan Baker (Oxford) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:
Q14 What attempts has the House of Bishops so far made to seek the views of other episcopal churches about the proposal to admit women to the historic episcopate?
Mr Martin Dales (York) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:
Q15 Have all our ecumenical friends been consulted and given sufficient time for their theological reflection on the report Women Bishops in the Church of England, only published last autumn?
Mrs Margaret Tilley (Canterbury) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:
Q16 Why has the House of Bishops thought it appropriate to invite the Synod to take a decision of principle whether or not to ordain women as bishops before receiving any responses from our ecumenical partners?
Mr James Cheeseman (Rochester) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:
Q17 What attempts has the House of Bishops so far made to seek the views of other episcopally led churches about the possibility of ordaining women to the historic episcopate?
Mrs Mary Nagel (Chichester) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:
Q18 Has there been any correspondence on behalf of the House with the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity on the possible inclusion of women in the episcopate since the publication of the Rochester Report?
Mrs Maryon Jägers (Europe) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:
Q19 Given that the Rochester Working Party recommended that the Anglican Communion be invited to make responses to its report, what steps have been taken to elicit those responses and with what results?
Answer:
With permission, Madam Chairman, I should like to answer the questions from the Revd Jonathan Baker, Mr Dales, Mrs Tilley, Mr Cheeseman, Mrs Nagel, and Mrs Jägers together.
The House of Bishops proposed in February that the Synod should have the opportunity at this group of sessions to decide whether it wished to start down the legislative road to enable women to become bishops. In making that proposal, which the Synod accepted, the House had been mindful of the diocesan synod motions already passed on the subject. What decisions if any to take now will of course be for the Synod itself to determine on Monday.
As to ecumenical views, a Methodist and a Roman Catholic served on the Rochester Working Party. Our ecumenical partners and other Provinces of the Anglican Communion were indeed sent copies of the report Women Bishops in the Church of England? [GS1557] on its publication last year and were invited to submit a response. Some ecumenical partner churches have now done so (and copies are available for inspection at the Information Desk); other responses are awaited.
4 CommentsHOUSE OF BISHOPS
The Bishop of Chelmsford to reply as Chairman of the Bishops’ Committee for Ministry
Mrs Jane Pitts (Liverpool) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:
Q10 In view of the harm the Church of England has inflicted on itself in its polarized arguments over the understanding of sexuality as a whole, would the House of Bishops consider not asking clerical candidates for any posts personal questions about their sexual orientation or attitudes to the same, with a view to respecting the individual’s conscience before God in this deeply felt issue?
Answer:
As is clear from the Ordinal under discussion at this Group of Sessions, clergy make public undertakings to ‘fashion their life according to the way of Christ’. They also make an Oath of Canonical Obedience to their bishop. Bishops have a duty, in confidence, to explore with a priest all matters which are affected by the oaths and declarations which they make. All such conversations should be conducted with great sensitivity and respect.
The House of Bishops’ teaching as set out in Issues in Human Sexuality represents the position of the House. There is a proper expectation that clergy should hold to its discipline.
14 CommentsHOUSE OF BISHOPS
The Bishop of Peterborough to reply as a member of the House’s Civil Partnerships sub-group
The Revd Paul Collier (Southwark) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:
Q11 Will the proposed Pastoral Statement on Civil Partnerships address the question of how a bishop should act if clergy such as myself exercise our right to enter a Civil Partnership, alongside a joyful celebration of a relationship of love, fidelity and commitment, and at the same time refuse to answer any questions about our private life, including whether the relationship is a sexual one or not?
The Revd Stephen Coles (London) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:
Q12 Synod was told in February that a report was being prepared in good time for the first registration of civil partnerships this December. Can Synod be given an update on the progress of this Pastoral Statement as there have already been some suggestive reports in the media about its contents?
The Revd Canon Paul Brett (Chelmsford) to ask the Chairman of the House of Bishops:
Q13 Is it true, as reported in the Church Times on 3 June that, if Church of England clergy wish to register civil partnerships under the new legislation, they will be required to assure their bishops that their relationships are ‘not sexual’ and, if so, how will a bishop ascertain whether such a relationship is sexual or not?
Answer:
With permission, Madam Chairman, I should like to answer the questions from the Revd Paul Collier, the Revd Stephen Coles and Canon Paul Brett together. The Bishop of Norwich, who chairs the House of Bishops’ sub-group of which I am a member, has been taking a funeral this afternoon and is sorry not to be here.
The House has now had two discussions of the implications of the new legislation that will come into force on 5 December. It has agreed to issue a Pastoral Statement and that is likely to be ready for issue within the next few weeks.
I do not intend to answer questions now based on press reporting of what the statement may or may not be going to say. Let me instead simply urge Synod to study the document calmly and prayerfully when it appears.
0 CommentsThe letter from 17 men bishops provoked the following two items in the Church of England Newspaper
Women clergy express anger at bishops’ Synod appeal
and
A debilitating delay? by Christina Rees which says in part:
Last week’s letter from the Bishop in Europe and other bishops bears closer inspection, not only because of its contents, but also because of its timing and signatories. Of the six diocesan bishops who signed the letter, three – the Bishops of Blackburn, Chichester and Europe – are known as being opposed women’s ordination. It is difficult to understand why they have asked for a longer period of discussion, when they have made it clear that they are opposed to ordaining women as priests or as bishops, now or at any time.
The Bishop in Europe was a member of the House of Bishops Working Party on Women in the Episcopate, which produced the Rochester Report. That Working Party spent over four years in study and discussion and considered over 700 written submissions and a number of face to face submissions.
The Bishop of Blackburn is currently a member of another working party set up earlier this year by the House of Bishops to explore some of the options outlined in the Rochester Report and to report to the House of Bishops in January. It seems particularly odd that these two bishops, both involved with the open processes of the General Synod and their own House of Bishops, should choose to sign a letter asking for that very process to be deflected and delayed.
On the other hand, for Church Society the 17 bishops didn’t go anyway near far enough, OPEN LETTER TO THE ARCHBISHOPS AND BISHOPS OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND
Fulcrum had this fence-sitting Response to the General Synod Motion on Women Bishops July 2005 but also re-published this article by Judith Rose to complement this one from Tom Wright.
8 CommentsUpdated twice Friday
The Archbishop of Canterbury issued this Statement on London Terrorist Attacks
The Bishop of London issued this statement on explosions and also this: London Explosions.
Times Online carried this report by Ruth Gledhill Muslim, Christian and Jewish leaders condemn attacks
Friday: Telegraph
Jonathan Petre Archbishop and the Pope condemn ‘evil’ attacks
Church Times
Helen Saxbee Religious leaders condemn London bomb attacks
BBC via ACNS
Rowan Williams Thought for the Day
Listen here with Real Audio
BBC Today radio programme
Andrew Hosken has been finding out how London is recovering this morning. The Rt Rev Rt Hon Richard Chartres, the Bishop of London, joins us from St Paul’s.
Listen here with Real Audio (Bishop Chartres segment is about 6 minutes in and lasts about 3.5 minutes)
9 CommentsInclusive Communion, an international umbrella body for several groups, issued a press release about the Listening resolution, which can be found here.
LGCM and its Anglican Matters subgroup issued a press release which takes a somewhat different tack. As it is not yet on the LGCM website it is reproduced here, below the fold.
The American Anglican Council issued these:
ECUSA Shameless in Its Defense of a New Gospel
Anglican Consultative Council Endorses Primates Regarding ECUSA
To put into context the letter recently published arguing for further delay in the process of deciding about women bishops in the Church of England, the full wording of the motion to be debated is published below the fold.
The motion does not, as was the expectation earlier, ask synod to decide anything about the specific options for proceeding (see here for what the Rochester report said about options.)
It only asks for a decision yes/no about proceeding further at all.
If a yes decision is made, it asks that a further report be published before the February 2006 synod meeting and that options should be debated at that time. (No action on this topic is proposed for the November 2005 meeting.) A committee of the House of Bishops chaired by Christopher Hill is already working on this report.
2 CommentsPRESS RELEASE: The Time is Right
The Church of England’s General Synod debates whether to proceed to legislation for women bishops on July 11th. InclusiveChurch calls for a single clause measure welcoming the consecration of women as bishops, with a recommended code of practice for Dioceses to respect the needs of those who are unable to accept the ministry of women as bishops.
The issue has already been debated for many years. Nearly 10,000 people have signed up to the InclusiveChurch Statement (at www.inclusivechurch.net). Of these, the vast majority are members of the Church of England. InclusiveChurch’s supporters are explicit and clear. Full inclusion, regardless of gender, is a gospel imperative. We wish to see women and men treated equally by the Church of England; equally valued and equally deployed according to calling, gifts and experience.
The Chair of InclusiveChurch, the Revd. Dr Giles Fraser, said
“We do not need more time to discuss the issue. We cannot justify the profligate waste of the talents, experience, gifts and ministry of half the human race. We worship an inclusive God and the Church of England needs to be willing to wake up to the implications of our faith.”
We note that fewer than 10% of the House of Bishops have asked for a further delay in the consecration of women as Bishops and we look forward to a Church which is led equally by women and men.
16 CommentsWhat follows is the complete text of the resolution previously published only in part.
Additional text is underlined. Links to additional text in italics.
ACC Constitution (Recommendations of the Windsor Report)
The Anglican Consultative Council
(a) takes note that the Secretary General has taken appropriate steps to implement and respond to the recommendations of Appendix One of the Windsor Report insofar as they relate to the administration of the Anglican Communion Office, and thanks him for this work;
(b) requests that the Standing Committee of the Council and the Archbishop of Canterbury give consideration to convening a meeting of the Standing Committee at the same time and in the same place as the next meeting of the Primates, and that they facilitate the opportunity for joint sessions of business and consultation;
(c) requests that the Schedule of Membership of the Council be amended to make the members of the Primates’ Standing Committee for the time being ex officio members of the Anglican Consultative Council in accordance with the text set out in Appendix One;
(d) resolves that the Constitution of the Council be amended by the deletion of existing Article 7(a) and replacing it with the text set out in Appendix Two;
(e) requests that the Schedule of Membership of the Council be amended to provide that the Primates and Moderators of the Churches of the Provinces of the Anglican Communion shall be additional ex officio members of the Council, and that in order to achieve appropriate balance between the orders of bishops, clergy and laity in the Council that the representative members shall thereafter be only from either the priestly and diaconal orders or from the laity of the appropriate Provinces as set out in Appendix Three, the execution of this amendment being subject to:
(i) the Primates’ assent to such a change at their next meeting;
(ii) two thirds of the Provinces of the Anglican Communion giving their approval of such a change by resolution of the appropriate constitutional body;
(iii) final amendment (if any) and approval by the Standing Committee in the light of such deliberations;
(iv) such provisions taking effect in relation to existing members of the Council only upon the occasion of the next vacancy arising in the membership.
Appendix One
The Schedule of Membership shall be amended by adding the new category:
“(e) Ex officio members
Five members of the body known as the Standing Committee of the Primates of the Anglican Communion in each case for so long as they shall remain members of such Standing Committee.”
and that the remaining categories in the schedule be redesignated accordingly.
Appendix Two
Article 7(a) of the Constitution shall be amended to read as follows:
“7(a) The Council shall appoint a Standing Committee of fourteen members, which shall include the Chairman and the Vice-Chairman of the Council, and the members listed in category (e) to the schedule to the Constitution. The Secretary General shall be the Secretary of the Standing Committee.”
Appendix Three
The Schedule of Membership shall be amended as follows:
3 Comments“(b) Three from each of the following, either two clergy (priests or deacons) and one lay person, or one priest or deacon and two lay persons.”
“ (c) Two from each of the following, consisting of one priest or deacon and one lay person.”
“(d) one lay person from each of the following:”
This press release from the Anglican Church of Canada tells of three addresses given by Andrew Hutchison at a Trinity College, Toronto conference Ties that Bind: Being in Communion in the Anglican Church of the 21st Century
The lectures can be found here:
A report on this from TLC by Aaron Orear:
Canadian Primate Says Spiritual Questions on Homosexuality Exist Throughout the Communion
The concluding statements of the conference are also at TLC:
A Responsible Place at the Table
My thoughts on the now-completed ACC meeting in Nottingham can be found at Anglicans Online this week, under the title The American Adventure. This complements my earlier AO report.
Further information about the missing annexes to that ACC resolution concerning the addition of Primates to ACC membership is still not available. When this become available, I will write further.
6 CommentsThe ACC has created a serious challenge for the Anglican Church
original here
The result of the vote at the Anglican Consultative Council in Nottingham on Weds 22nd June represents a serious challenge to the future of the Anglican Church. It is vital that those who celebrate the breadth and depth of the Anglican tradition begin to take seriously the threat to the future of our church.
St Paul says in the first letter to the Corinthians ‘Now the body is not made up of one part, but of many…..The eye cannot say to the hand, “I do not need you.” ’ It is clear that the continued exclusion of the Episcopal Church of the USA and the Anglican Church of Canada, in spite of their open, honest and generous responses to the Windsor Report and the Primates’ request is a contradiction of the words of St Paul.
The preface to the Book of Common Prayer, published in 1662, opens with the words “It hath ever been the wisdom of the Church of England to keep the mean between two extremes.” The Church has lived with diversity and difference since its foundation. Anglicans from a vast breadth of theological and liturgical understandings have respected one another’s right to be members. The path has not always been easy but the Church has held together over nearly five centuries.
The Anglican Church has made a unique contribution to Christian witness. We have always been Catholic and Reformed, standing between the extreme certainties which caused such terror and suffering in the Reformation era. We are commtted to maintaining the value of that inheritance. We are not surprised when something that has so much within it that works for good and redemption is under attack.
But this Church that we love is now under threat. The Gospel of broad and generous inclusion is being undermined by a dangerously monochrome interpretation of scripture.
The loss of our voice; the change in our ecclesiology; the equating of our Anglican tradition with other hard-line, protestant, or neo-conservative churches would be a serious and permanent diminishing of Christian witness to the world.
InclusiveChurch and its thirteen partner organisations in the Church of England have welcomed the process of reception of the Windsor Report and the institution of the “Listening process” agreed by the Anglican Consultative Council. We are working closely with other groups within the Anglican Commuion, both in the UK and abroad. We are committed to this so that we can try to ensure that the ecclesiology of the Anglican Communion is not subverted.
The decision taken at the ACC meeting in Nottingham to include all the Primates as full members of the Anglican Consultative Council sets an alarming precedent. There is a real possibility of imposed doctrinal and theological positions from a conservative grouping.
We cannot risk becoming a church where the Primates can equate homosexuality with bestiality; or where there is permanent subjugation of women and institutionalised inequality; or where genuine debate and searching are replaced by an imposed orthodoxy.
We are aware that the Church faces very different challenges around the world, and we have no wish to exclude from the church those who have a different interpretation of the Gospel. But for the sake of the Church we repeat clearly that we are committed to finding ways to ensure that the diversity of the Anglican Communion continues to be celebrated and encouraged.
InclusiveChurch deeply regrets the continued exclusion of ECUSA and the Anglican Church of Canada from full participation in the life of the Anglican Communion. We express our full support for their respect for the Anglican Communion and their membership of it.
We believe that the Gospel witness we offer must continue to grow and to that end we call on all members of our Communion to become aware of the risks we are facing. ‘The eye cannot say to the hand – “I do not need you.”’
Giles Goddard
Executive Secretary
InclusiveChurch
Official press releases on the discussion of same-sex blessings at the recent Methodist Conference at Torquay give a slightly different view to that portrayed in the press:
Official:
Statement on Press Coverage of the ‘Pilgrimage of Faith’ debate
Methodist Church receives major report on human sexuality
Text of the report Pilgrimage of Faith (This is downloadable only in MS Word format)
Press reports:
Guardian Stephen Bates Methodist leaders vote to bless gay couples
The Times Ruth Gledhill Methodists will bless gays
Telegraph Jonathan Petre Church opens the door to blessings for gays
The Methodists also discussed bishops, as reported by Paul Handley in the Church Times
Methodists will vote on bishops in 2007
Full text of What sort of bishops (This is downloadable only in MS Word format)
Official statement: Methodist Church moves towards Bishops
The Methodists also welcomed the the first report from the Joint Implementation Commission on the Anglican-Methodist Covenant, see Methodist Church welcomes Covenant report
1 CommentJudith Maltby writes in the Guardian today about the need for women bishops in the Church of England, Time for bishop’s move. She concludes:
The debate on women bishops is not, at its heart, a matter of internal governance, but about what sort of sign the Church of England wants to be to the world. How can a church which continues to bury the talents, which have been freely given to it, stand as a sign to our neighbours of God’s bounty? Will we put our trust in our “achievements” or in God’s scandalous generosity?
The talents have been given to the church by an open-handed God – a God who, contrary to our way of thinking, knows that the more grace you give away, the more there is. One hopes that, in York, the Church of England will resist the temptation to break out the shovels.
Geoffrey Rowell, who has written elsewhere this week on women bishops, write in The Times about Cassian, in Chastity of mind is the bridle of our rampaging desires. This includes the following passage:
As desiring animals we human beings are curious to know, and the old Genesis story of the fall of Adam tells how forbidden knowledge led to expulsion from the garden of innocence. It is the story of the growing up of all of us, and equally a recognition that knowledge has power for good and evil. There is promiscuous knowing as well as promiscuous relationships.
The explosion of information technology, the unfettered and unregulated “knowledge” that the internet offers, demands of us ascetic disciplines, of a piece with ancient spiritual wisdom though having new applications. To be overwhelmed by tsunamis of emails, to communicate simply at the touch of a button just because it is possible, is a modern form of unrestrained desire. We need to learn a chastity of communication, a disciplined and loving sensitivity, in this area as in many others.
Newman and the leaders of the Oxford Movement emphasised the importance of “reserve” in communication. Mystery is destroyed by over-definition, and no less through salvation by slogans. God reveals himself gradually, and the wisdom of God can only be learnt by patient pilgrimage. To know another person we have to learn to attend, to listen and to receive. So it is with the God in whose image we are made.
In the Telegraph Christopher Howse has been reading this article in the Church Times and so writes his column on The vicars who sacrifice goats
Two fascinating items from the USA:
A recent New Yorker article profiling Patrick Henry College in Virginia, GOD AND COUNTRY by Hanna Rosin, plus some helpful links from Doug LeBlanc including an Independent report.
A column that first appeared in the New York Times by John C Danforth Onward, Moderate Christian Soldiers.
1 Comment17 bishops of the Church of England have written a letter, which is published this week in the Church Times
Delay vote on women, say bishops
the Church of England Newspaper
Church urged to refrain from allowing women bishops
and also The Tablet (where the letter lacks one signature).
The letter (full text below the fold) is also reported in The Times as Senior clergy move to block ordination of women bishops
The bishops include 6 diocesans, one suffragan (Beverley, PEV for the Northern Province) who is an elected member of the House of Bishops, and 10 other suffragans (the Assistant Bishop of Newcastle is a suffragan in all but name).
Most of these bishops are well known to be opposed to the ordination of women as priests, never mind bishops. The exceptions are Tom Wright (Durham), Peter Forster (Chester) and Michael Langrish (Exeter).
8 CommentsUpdated
To complement the first Church Times article below, here from the Living Church is a transcript by George Conger of the interview on which the article was based: Q&A With the Archbishop of Canterbury
and this An Analysis of ACC-13 by George Conger
Church of England Newspaper
Church ‘has reinforced traditional teaching’ at ACC
Archbishop seeks to reassure after controversial Israel vote
Church Times
This week:
Williams: ‘we’ve held the line’ by Pat Ashworth
Feelings run high over resolution on Israeli investment by Pat Ashworth
UK policy on Zimbabwean refugees ‘inhuman’ by Bill Bowder
And more from last week:
The US and Canada justify their moves on sex by Pat Ashworth
ACC chairman ticks off Primates
Two recent Globe and Mail reports relating to this:
Same-sex marriage creates rift for Anglicans
Gays seen as part of Anglican power struggle
Part of the text of the second article follows.
8 CommentsIn the final session of the Anglican Consultative Council meeting at Nottingham, the Resolutions Committee proposed a Supplementary Resolution of Thanks to the Episcopal Church USA and the Anglican Church of Canada.
According to the American Anglican Council:
The resolution prompted an amendment followed by intense and heated debate with several delegates expressing concern that it undermined the Resolution Concerning the Primates’ Statement at Dromantine and indicated a subtle approval of the US and Canadian presentations. The Archbishop of Canterbury intervened offering language that was accepted by the body. This debate illustrated that the Council remains deeply divided on the presence and presentation of the North American delegations as well as demonstrated the delegates’ concern that any resolution of thanks be consonant with the mind of the Council, thereby maintaining the integrity of the decisions of the meeting.
The resolution is shown below with the original language and the amended text:
0 CommentsThe Anglican Consultative Council:
- Notes
the helpful manner in whichwith appreciation the response of the Episcopal Church (USA) and the Anglican Church of Canadarespondedto the request of the Primates’ Dromantine Statement;- Expresses its appreciation for the presentations made on Tuesday, 21st June; and requests the observers from those Provinces to convey that appreciation back to their Provinces;
- Reminds all parties to have regard for the admonitions in paragraphs 156 and 157 of the Windsor Report
[NOTE: The Windsor Report, paragraphs 156 and 157 were included.]