Press release from the Church of England
Civil partnerships and same-sex relationships – a statement by the House of Bishops of the Church of England
The House of Bishops today issued a statement about the continuing debate within the Church of England about same-sex relationships. Speaking on behalf of the House, the Bishop of Norwich, the Rt Revd Graham James, said:
“Contrary to popular perception the House of Bishops has spent very little time over recent years discussing homosexuality. The last substantive engagement with the issue was in 2005 when the House agreed to issue a pastoral statement prepared by a group under my chairmanship on the implications of the introduction of civil partnerships. The House has now agreed that the time has come to commission two new pieces of work.
“First it has asked for a review of the 2005 statement in the light of subsequent developments. The review will include examination of whether priests in civil partnerships should be eligible for appointment as bishops. The 2005 statement was silent on this issue and, while the relevant legal background was analysed in a recently published Legal Office note, the House acknowledges its responsibility to address the policy issue. To avoid pre-empting the outcome of the review the House has concluded that clergy in civil partnerships should not, at present, be nominated for episcopal appointment. The review will be completed in 2012.
“Secondly, the House has committed itself to a wider look at the Church of England’s approach to same-sex relationships more generally in the light of the listening process launched by the Lambeth Conference in 1998. The Bishops will produce a consultation document in 2013. The House’s decision is motivated by a desire to help shape the continuing debate constructively and not by any view about what the outcome should be.”
The statement follows:
A Statement from the House of Bishops of the Church of England
“It is now nearly six years since the House issued its Pastoral Statement prior to the introduction of civil partnerships in December 2005. The preparation of that document was the last occasion when the House devoted substantial time to the issue of same sex relationships. We undertook to keep that Pastoral Statement under review. We have decided that the time has come for a review to take place.
“Over the past five and half years there have been several developments. Consistent with the guidelines in the Pastoral Statement a number of clergy are now in civil partnerships. The General Synod decided to amend the clergy pension scheme to improve the provision for the surviving civil partners of clergy who have died. More recently Parliament has decided that civil partnerships may be registered on religious premises where the relevant religious authority has consented (the necessary regulations are expected this autumn).
“The review will need to take account of this changing scene. The Pastoral Statement was not concerned with clergy alone but with the whole people of God. We recognise that bishops and clergy have found ways of engaging pastorally with those in civil partnerships, both at the time of registration and subsequently. Within the Anglican tradition our theological thinking is formed by a reasoned interpretation of Scripture, within the living tradition of the Church informed by pastoral experience. The House believes there is a theological task to be done to clarify further our understanding of the nature and status of these partnerships.
“These are the background issues for a review of the 2005 Statement. It will be undertaken in the context of the Church of England’s teaching on same sex relations as set out in the General Synod motion of November 1987 and Issues in Human Sexuality (a teaching statement from the House of Bishops in 1991). It will also be consistent with the approach taken by the Anglican Communion in Resolution 1.10 of the Lambeth Conference 1998 and subsequently.
“Among the matters to be considered in the review of the 2005 Statement there is one of some importance which the House did not address in advance of any experience of civil partnerships. This is whether clergy who have registered civil partnerships should be eligible for nomination to the episcopate. The House has concluded that it would be wrong to pre-empt the outcome of the review and that clergy in civil partnerships should not at present, therefore, be nominated for episcopal appointment. The House’s intention is to complete the review, which will need to take account of the legal analysis set out in GS MISC 992 (Choosing Bishops – the Equality Act) during 2012.
“The House has also decided that more work is now needed on the Church of England’s approach to human sexuality more generally. In February 2007, the General Synod passed a motion commending ‘continuing efforts to prevent the diversity of opinion about human sexuality creating further division and impaired fellowship within the Church of England and the Anglican Communion.’
“Alongside the review of the 2005 Pastoral Statement, the House intends, therefore, to draw together material from the listening process which has been undertaken within the Church of England over the recent years in the light of the 1998 Lambeth Conference resolution. The House wishes to offer proposals on how the continuing discussion within the Church of England about these matters might best be shaped in the light of the listening process. Our intention is to produce a further consultation document in 2013.”
The statement has been issued to General Synod members today, as GS Misc 997E. It is available on the Church of England website at http://www.churchofengland.org/media/1289380/gsmisc997.pdf.
TA Footnote: the 2005 pastoral statement on Civil Partnerships is here.
21 CommentsUpdated Friday morning
Savi Hensman has written for Cif belief When is Gafcon going to start listening?
Religious ultra-“conservatives” have launched an Anglican Mission in England (Amie). This is “dedicated to the conversion of England and biblical church planting”.
Leaders of Gafcon (Global Anglican Future Conference) and FCA (Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans) see themselves as championing traditional Anglicanism. Others regard them as out of step with church tradition, and object to their attempts to undermine others in the family of churches making up the Anglican Communion.
In May, a statement was issued by the council of primates (most senior bishops) of Gafcon/FCA, which lamented “the promotion of a shadow gospel that appears to replace a traditional reading of Holy Scriptures and a robust theology of the church with an uncertain faith and a never ending listening process”. Yet for many, the “listening process” on sexuality never truly started…
In this week’s Divine Dispatches Riazat Butt writes about AMiE:
If You Seek Amie then you’ve come to the right place. Amie is of course an acronym for the Anglican Mission in England – not to be confused with Amie – The Associate Member of the Institute of Engineers. And what a misnomer of an acronym it is. What’s that saying? Beware of strangers bearing gifts. Amie states, not at all ominously, that its intention is to support “those who have been alienated so that they can remain within the Anglican family. Churches or individuals may join or affiliate themselves with the Amie for a variety of reasons. Some may be churches in impaired communion with their diocesan bishop who require oversight. Others may be in good relations with their bishop but wish to identify with and support others.”
So, in non-Anglican parlance, this means if you don’t like your bishop you can have another one that fits more neatly with your world view. They don’t even have to be a bishop in the Church of England. I have three words for you – cross-border intervention. I also have four words for you – church within a church. What do the sages at Lambeth Palace and Bishopthorpe have to say about this parking of tanks on the CoE lawn? I’ll tell you – nothing! What should they say? Get off my land, that’s what.
Update
The Church Times has the headline: Group names five bishops ready to defy diocesans.
24 Comments…The three unnamed clerics were ordained in Kenya on 11 June by the Archbishop of Kenya, Dr Eliud Wabukala, who chairs the GAFCON Primates’ Council, formed after the Global Anglican conference in Jerusalem in 2008. All three come from the diocese of Southwark. The diocese said on Wednesday that it had received no request for permission to officiate there.
Dr Williams was in Kenya last week. A Lambeth spokeswoman was unable to say this week whether the two had discussed this development.
The Revd Charles Raven, the director of the Society for the Propagation of Reformed Evangelical Anglican Doctrine, wrote on the organisation’s website on Thursday of last week that the three men had gone to Kenya to be ordained “because the English diocesan bishop concerned had refused to give any assurances that he would uphold biblical teaching on homosexual practice”.
The chairman of the AMiE steering committee is the Revd Paul Perkin, Vicar of St Mark’s, Battersea Rise, and the group’s secretary is Canon Chris Sugden.
Dr Sugden said that the group was awaiting a response from Dr Williams to Dr Wabukala’s request that the three clergy be granted permission to officiate under the Overseas Clergy Measure. The chairman of Reform, the Rt Revd Rod Thomas, said that “episcopal oversight” of the three men “has been delegated to the AMiE bishops”…
Following on from this announcement, the Sunday Times carried an advertisement for a new Communications Director which you can see here. Further information about the post can be found here and then here.
But what has attracted some attention, for example here, and over here, is the sentence in the advertisement that reads as follows:
This is no ordinary Communications Director job. We are looking for somebody who will share our values and whilst not necessarily an Anglican, is a practising Christian (this post is subject to an occupational requirement that the holder be a practising Christian under Part 1 of Schedule 9 to the Equality Act 2010 because of its representational role and its responsibility for maintaining a Christian ethos within the national Church, as one of its senior officers).
Now, this has been assumed by some people to be a reference to Clause 2 of Part 1 of Schedule 9. That clause is the one which contains all the exemptions relating to gender, marital status, sexual orientation and so forth.
However, I do not believe that is what they meant to reference. I believe the intention was to reference Clause 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 9. This reads (scroll down at the previous link):
Other requirements relating to religion or belief
3 A person (A) with an ethos based on religion or belief does not contravene a provision mentioned in paragraph 1(2) by applying in relation to work a requirement to be of a particular religion or belief if A shows that, having regard to that ethos and to the nature or context of the work—(a) it is an occupational requirement,
(b) the application of the requirement is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, and
(c) the person to whom A applies the requirement does not meet it (or A has reasonable grounds for not being satisfied that the person meets it).
This is the clause that transposes into the Equality Act 2010 the exemption formerly contained in The Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003. This exemption was, and is, entirely separate and distinct from others which were formerly contained in the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, as amended and The Employment Equality (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2003. All of these are now bundled into Clause 2.
So, why have other interpretations been put upon this advertisement? I think there are two causes.
The first is the febrile atmosphere which has arisen following the official publication of the (previously leaked) legal advice issued about Choosing Bishops – Equality Act 2010.
The second is the fact that during the passage of the Equality Act, Secretary General William Fittall gave evidence to a parliamentary committee in which he specifically cited this job as an example of a senior post, likely to be held by a lay person, which he considered should fall within the ambit of the Clause 1 exemptions. Here is what he said at the time. The context of his remarks was a Labour government proposal incorporated in the draft bill to modify the wording of the Clause 2 exemption to be more explicit about who was to be included. This was fiercely resisted by the CofE, and was the reason why a large number of bishops turned out to vote in the House of Lords in favour of an amendment which deleted the proposed changes. The amendment passed, and so the scope of the exemption today remains exactly what it was before.
It is therefore understandable that some would now be suspicious. And, if my interpretation of the intention to invoke only Paragraph 3 is correct, it might be helpful if future advertisements were worded more precisely.
The official CofE response to queries on this is as follows:
8 Comments‘The occupational requirement that the postholder be a practising Christian means what it says, neither more nor less. Staff are appointed to senior positions in the national institutions of the Church of England by fair and competitive processes. They have to be able to show that they can serve it in all its diversity and operate its equal opportunities policies. Suggestions that appointments are made in pursuit of a particular cultural or partisan agenda are completely unfounded.’
The Standing Commission on Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church has issued a report on the Anglican Covenant.
See this ENS news report: Task force releases report on Anglican Covenant.
“The SCCC is of the view that adoption of the current draft Anglican Covenant has the potential to change the constitutional and canonical framework of [the Episcopal Church], particularly with respect to the autonomy of our Church, and the constitutional authority of our General Convention, bishops and dioceses,” says the report.
The full text of the report can be found here as a PDF.
Mark Harris has commented on it: The Standing Commission on Constitution and Canons’ report. There it is.
Lionel Deimel has Analysis of the Report from the Standing Commission on Constitution and Canons.
11 CommentsPress release from Fulcrum:
Fulcrum Statement on Interventionist Anglican Mission in England
Executive Summary
Fulcrum expresses serious concern at the launch of the Anglican Mission to England (AMIE) and calls for immediate dialogue within the entire evangelical constituency over this development, for reasons including:
- A name reflecting breakaway movements in the USA inviting the conclusion that this is the true purpose of the new society
- The creation of a society with a conservative evangelical ‘political’ agenda not simply mission
- The creation of a panel of bishops that signals the intention of offering alternative oversight without collaboration with senior leaders of the Church of England
- Indications that the society will take its own path in the authorisation of ministry, as evidenced by its approval of the recent secret ordinations in Kenya, which is an escalation of the earlier regrettable Southwark ordinations
For the full statement, go to the Fulcrum website.
32 CommentsAccording to the remarks of the Archbishop and Primate of the Anglican Church in North America, Robert Duncan, speaking on 21 June:
Our global commitments remain strong and we continue to be seen as “gospel partners” and bearers of “authentic Anglicanism” (South-South Encounter IV) by most of the world’s Anglicans. The GAFCON Provinces accord our Province status as the North American Province and I am seated as a Primate in the Primates Council. I was privileged to be present at Archbishop Ian Earnest’s invitation at the All Africa Bishops Conference (of the Council of Anglican Provinces of Africa) last August in Entebbe and was accorded a seat there for public and state events as one of the archbishops of the provinces. It is the greatest of joys to welcome Archbishop Ian Earnest – Archbishop of the Province of the Indian Ocean and Chairman of CAPA – to this Provincial Council as speaker, observer and friend, and to our College of Bishops as Bible teacher and consultor. It is also a privilege to welcome Fr. Thomas Seville, CR, of the Faith and Order Commission of the Church of England here as participant and observer, in partial response to the action of the General Synod of the Church of England in February 2010 regarding consideration of an appropriate form of recognition or relationship with the Anglican Church in North America.
Mark Harris has commented at length about this, in So, explain again just what the Church of England is up to in America?
19 Comments…Participant and observer….sounds like more than just an exploratory visit. What in the world is the Church of England proposing to do “regarding consideration of an appropriate form of recognition or relationship with the ACNA”?
I presume the Archbishop of Canterbury, not in communion with ACNA as yet, knows that the Archbishop of ACNA is not the Archbishop of a Province of anything, much less a Province of the Anglican Communion. So it must be that in sending Fr. Seville over to participate and observe, the CofE is feeding the optimistic fires of ACNA’s Archbishop for recognition…
Today the Church Times has this leader: Gay bishops again.
After summarising the non-story aspect of last weekend’s reports, it comments on the content:
In May, our view was a negative one, since the document listed several reasons why the appointment of a gay bishop could be blocked. This week’s positive spin has not changed our opinion. As the leaders of the “gay-led” Metropolitan Community Church in Manchester wrote to Dr Williams this week, “We note that [unlike a gay candidate] heterosexual candidates for bishoprics are not asked to repent of any sexual activity with which the Crown Appointments Commission may be uncomfortable.” More than one serving bishop has said that he would have considered it an impertinence had he been asked about his sexual history.
The legal advice has no more weight now than before it was circulated to Synod members. It was not approved by the Bishops when they discussed it in May, not least because, to many, the brief was not how to remove discrimination within the Church, but how to continue it untroubled by the law.
The earlier report in the Church Times was House of Bishops divided on keeping out homosexuals.
Letters to the editor on the subject in the following two weeks are first here, and then here.
4 CommentsUpdated Friday evening
This press release from GAFCON New Anglican Mission Society announced
The Anglican Mission in England (AMIE) held its inaugural event on Wednesday June 22 during an evangelical ministers’ conference in central London.
AMIE has been established as a society within the Church of England dedicated to the conversion of England and biblical church planting. There is a steering committee and a panel of bishops. The bishops aim to provide effective oversight in collaboration with senior clergy.
The AMIE has been encouraged in this development by the Primates’ Council of the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans (GAFCON) who said in a communiqué from Nairobi in May 2011: “We remain convinced that from within the Provinces which we represent there are creative ways by which we can support those who have been alienated so that they can remain within the Anglican family.”
The AMIE is determined to remain within the Church of England…
This society is, it appears, a renaming of this one.
Update
There is more information, including a list of names of bishops, in this: The Anglican Mission in England – Seeing the Church of England Again for the First time.
Church of England press release:
The Church of England has today submitted its response to the Government’s consultation on Civil Partnerships in Religious Premises.
A Church of England spokesman said: “Given the decision that Parliament has already taken to amend the Civil Partnership Act 2004 in the Equality Act 2010, the response focuses on the need to assure that the forthcoming regulations continue to provide unfettered freedom for each religious tradition to resolve these matters in accordance with its own convictions and its own internal procedures of governance.
“That means that there needs to be an ‘opting in’ mechanism of the kind that the Government has proposed. In the case of the Church of England that would mean that its churches would not be able to become approved premises for the registration of civil partnerships until and unless the General Synod had first decided as a matter of policy that that should be possible.”
The full text of the submission that addresses the specific questions raised by the consultation is set out below.
Some key passages relating to whether the Church of England will allow its premises to be so used are copied below the fold (emphasis added).
33 CommentsThe Tablet had an article last week by Francis Davis entitled Players in the public square.
Catholic bishops are often overshadowed in the national debate by their Anglican counterparts, as shown in the furore caused by the Archbishop of Canterbury’s critique of the Coalition Government last week. A Catholic academic and political adviser asks why this may be…
A sample of the analysis:
23 Comments…For a start, there are more than 100 Church of England bishops across 43 dioceses compared with 29 Catholic bishops across 19 dioceses in England. Catholic bishops in these dioceses shepherd around 4,000 clergy in England while the Anglican tally is double that number, bringing with them spouses and children whose joys and sorrows have direct consequences for the success of diocesan ministry.
The Anglicans have more than twice the number of schools – 4,820 with more than a million pupils – giving them greater presence in communities and opportunities for encounter. These schools are mainly primaries while the Catholic Church has far more secondary schools. There are 2,000 Catholic schools altogether in England and Wales educating 860,000 children.
I have also selected for closer examination the 19 Church of England bishops whose dioceses most closely compare with their Catholic counterparts. In these dioceses, Catholic bishops are generally older and remain in post longer than the Anglicans. The average Catholic episcopal age is 66 and their average service a decade at the diocesan helm compared to 60 and just over seven years for the Anglicans. Church of England bishops normally retire a decade younger than their Catholic counterparts.
This contrast in institutional reach and episcopal age is mirrored by matters of formation and experience. Each of the 19 Church of England bishops I surveyed had at least one degree from Oxford, Cambridge, London or another leading university. Only nine Catholic bishops in England have degrees from outside Catholic institutions, with some having pursued all their studies from secondary age in a seminary. Four of the current Anglican bishops have published more books between them than all English Catholic bishops combined since the Second Vatican Council. This is not only a question of class, as half of both groups surveyed were schooled in grammar or other state schools…
Third Sector reports:
The charity Catholic Care has been refused permission to appeal against a ruling that it cannot exclude gay couples from using its adoption service.
That earlier ruling was reported here on 26 April: Charity Tribunal rejects appeal from Catholic adoption agency.
This latest ruling can be found at Decision on Application for Permission to Appeal (7 June 2011).
6 Comments…In the document, Alison McKenna, principal judge of the charity tribunal, wrote: “I have concluded that the grounds of appeal before me do not identify ‘errors of law’ in the decision.
“In the circumstances, I conclude that there is no power for the tribunal to review its decision in this case and I have also, for the same reasons, concluded that permission to appeal should be refused.”
Benjamin James, a solicitor at the law firm Bircham Dyson Bell, acting on behalf of Catholic Care, told Third Sector the charity could appeal to the Upper Tribunal for a review of the charity tribunal’s decision not to allow the appeal. He said trustees had not decided whether to do so.
Press release from the Equality and Human Rights Commission: Religion or belief discrimination in Britain
A review of research evidence commissioned by the Equality and Human Rights Commission indicates there are different perceptions about the legal protections for religion or belief and about the level of discrimination towards different religions or beliefs.
Evidence in the report shows that people’s understanding of their rights around religion or belief is not always matched by recent changes to equality law. The Commission is concerned that this could be preventing people from using their rights…
View the report: Religious discrimination in Britain: A review of research evidence, 2000-10 by Paul Weller of the University of Derby.
(The Commission’s statistical briefing paper on Religion or Belief is also available.)
Read the interview with Trevor Phillips in the Telegraph: Trevor Phillips wades into debate on religion in modern society by Jonathan Wynne-Jones. This interview has provoked a lot of reactions from all sides, and I will add some further links to these later.
Some responses:
Evangelical Alliance Evangelical Alliance responds to Trevor Phillips on religious freedom and Trevor Phillips’ comments on freedom of religion and belief miss the point, says Evangelical Alliance
Christian Concern Equality Commission questions Christian ‘integration’
British Humanist Association Humanists call for EHRC Chair Trevor Phillips to apologise, following ‘sectarian and divisive’ statements
3 CommentsUpdated twice on Monday evening
There has been an outburst of media reports yesterday all based on the release by the Church of England of a legal opinion prepared by the Legal Office, with this title. Many of them are wildly inaccurate.
The document was officially published here, and an html version is now available here.
As the cover note shows, this is published to synod members for information only. No synodical action is planned in respect of it.
I attach for the information of Synod members a copy of a note on the Equality
Act prepared by the Legal Office in connection with episcopal appointments for
members of Crown Nominations Commissions and diocesan bishops and their
Advisory Groups.
The document is identical to the one leaked over three weeks ago to the Guardian and published in full by them. See the links in this report on TA dated 26 May: House of Bishops tied in knots over gay bishops and in particular this link to “legal document”.
Updated paragraph
The regular pre-synod press briefing is scheduled for this morning. There may be more to report following that event. took place this morning. It was confirmed that this document is being issued for information only (due at least in part to having been previously leaked by the Guardian) and that it presages no synodical action and proposes no change from recent past practice in selecting bishops.
Second update
Reform has issued a press statement: Reform calls for legal advice on Bishops’ Appointments to be withdrawn.
37 CommentsThe Anglican Church of Canada has produced further material, in addition to its excellent study guide and linked materials which were mentioned earlier.
see the press release: Governance Working Group analyzes Covenant.
…This GWG report is one step in the Anglican Church of Canada’s ongoing consideration of the Covenant. A resolution at General Synod 2010 (A137) requested several actions to advance this work. First, the Anglican Communion Working Group was asked to prepare materials for parishes and dioceses to study the Covenant and give feedback. These materials were released June 9 and are available online.
Both the GWG and the Faith, Worship, and Ministry Committee were asked to assess the Covenant by “providing advice on the theological, ecclesiological, legal, and constitutional implications.”
The resolution also requested that “conversations, both within the Anglican Church of Canada and across the Communion, reflect the values of openness, transparency, generosity of spirit, and integrity, which have been requested repeatedly in the context of the discussion of controversial matters within the Communion.”
After this period of consideration, the Council of General Synod will bring a recommendation regarding adoption of the Covenant to General Synod 2013.
The report itself is here as a PDF. There is also an Executive Summary, also a PDF.
I have reproduced below the fold those parts of the Executive Summary which are of most relevance outside Canada. A read of the full report is highly recommended, as many of the issues raised by it should be of concern to all Anglicans worldwide.
13 CommentsThe Anglican Journal reports: Canada’s top court denies appeal to dissident Vancouver churches
Press releases:
New Westminster: Supreme Court Denies Leave to Appeal
Anglican Network in Canada: Congregations Evicted from their Church Buildings
http://www.anglicanessentials.ca/wordpress/index.php/2011/06/17/anic-news-release-supreme-court/
Letters:
Pastoral letter from the Bishop of New Westminster (pdf)
Letter from the Canadian primate to the Bishop of New Westminster (pdf)
Press reports:
Vancouver Sun Top court refuses to hear appeal over four parish properties
National Post Breakaway Anglicans lose last legal avenue to claim ownership of church buildings, land
21 CommentsUpdated Friday morning
The Telegraph has a report about what the Second Church Estates Commissioner, Tony Baldry MP, has written in this week’s Church Times about the row following the article published last week in the New Statesman by the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Tim Ross wrote this: Baldry: Archbishop must stop ‘shouting’ at ministers
The Archbishop of Canterbury should stop “shouting” at the government like a noisy protester in Parliament Square if he wants Church of England bishops to keep their seats in the House of Lords, a senior Conservative MP has suggested.
Here’s an excerpt:
Writing in the Church Times newspaper, he said that “dismayed” Tory MPs and ministers “simply feel monumentally misunderstood by the Archbishop”, who they believe has failed to grasp the scale of the financial difficulties that the coalition inherited from Labour.
Mr Baldry said that when he was appointed to be commissioner last year, he hoped it would be possible to avoid the “disintegration” of the relationship between the Church and Parliament.
“I am disappointed that, less than a year into this Parliament – a Parliament almost certainly of a five-year term – the perception of many MPs sitting on the Coalition benches is that the Church of England is shouting at us from the other side of the street,” he said.
“Later in this Parliament, the Church of England is going to want the understanding of MPs, not least when they debate the place of the Church of England in a reformed, mainly elected Second Chamber.”
He suggested that a further source of friction could develop over plans to consecrate women bishops, which have already caused an internal rift and led hundreds of Anglicans to convert to Roman Catholicism in protest.
Some MPs want the government to strip the Church of its exemption from equality rules and force traditionalists to accept women bishops.
The original is now available to all subscriber-only for one week, but here is one sentence from it that may explain why it is not the substance of the NS article but the reporting of it that is the cause of this response:
They [government ministers] simply feel monumentally misunderstood by the Archbishop. Lambeth Palace took care to circulate the full texts of the Archbishop’s New Statesman editorial to every MP; but, so far as my colleagues are concerned, it is no good responding to criticism by saying that that is not what the Archbishop said. In public life and politics, it is what is heard that matters.
Further update The full text of Baldry’s article is available via this page.
30 CommentsThe Sydney Morning Herald reported that Same-sex marriage will lead to polygamy, says Jensen
ALLOWING same-sex couples to marry could lead to the acceptance of polygamy and incest, the Anglican Archbishop of Sydney, Peter Jensen, has warned.
Writing in the church’s newspaper, Southern Cross, Dr Jensen said the push for same-sex unions to be enshrined in the Marriage Act was not a drive for the extension of rights but the redefinition of ”one of the indispensable foundations of community”…
The full text of Archbishop Jensen’s article in Southern Cross titled Real Marriage can be found here (pdf).
Reaction in Australia was quite strong, see these letters, and also this report: Jensen gay marriage comments alarmist: AME.
35 CommentsAustralian Marriage Equality convenor Alex Greenwich hit back at the comments, saying any amendments to the Marriage Act would only mean that celebrants outside the Anglican community could perform same-sex marriages.
“The Archbishop should acknowledge we live in a secular, multi-faith society, and as such he must understand that his views should not be imposed on those religions that want to perform same-sex marriages, such as the Quakers and progressive Synagogues,” Mr Greenwich said in a statement on Saturday.
“Not one of the alarmist predictions made by the Archbishop have come to pass in any of the countries that allow same-sex marriages to take place, including Catholic Spain, Portugal and Argentina.”
Affirming Catholicism is holding a day conference on Thursday 30 June at St Matthew’s Westminster.
The full title is: Thy Kingdom Come! Prayer and Mission in the building of The Kingdom.
Details can be found here.
Speakers include:
Victoria Coren has written this: Bashing the Bishop.
… Dr. William’s oeuvre has caught the imagination, snatched headlines and triggered a national debate. Maybe we should swap jobs? Except I’d make a terrible archbishop.
It’s exactly what he should be doing, of course: getting stuck in to matters of public ethics, questioning the national conscience, being a strong and relevant voice on issues of social concern. I can understand why some in the press feel obliged to disagree with him – and this is a good thing; we all want to live in a country of robust debate – but the way that some have slammed him for speaking out at all is just embarrassing. It’s like they don’t understand who he is, what he does or what the role’s about…
(The NoTW article she mentions is here.)
Paul Vallely wrote at the Independent on Aid and what the Archbishop should have said.
Those naughty people at the New Statesman. Apparently when the Archbishop of Canterbury arrived to do his week as guest editor he was planning to write the main editorial on aid to Africa. But Rowan Williams was persuaded to offer, instead, his thoughts on the state of the coalition government one year in. The paper got the headlines it wanted but we have been deprived of his thoughts on the place we used to call the dark continent. So what might he have said? And why does it matter?
At least one other bishop has spoken up in support of the archbishop:
John Pritchard of Oxford is reported in the Witney Gazette Bishop John joins attack on ‘disastrous’ Government cuts.
3 CommentsUpdated Monday evening
The Church of St-Matthew-in-the-City in Auckland, New Zealand published this petition on its website: Petition to the Anglican Bishops of New Zealand. The heading reads:
Stop White Collar Crime – Ask NZ bishops to end their discrimination against gays and lesbians
Following an explanation of the specific NZ circumstances, it says:
We respectfully ask the bishops of the Anglican Church in New Zealand to be true to the values of the Gospel and end the discriminatory practices that prevent the selection and ordination of gays and lesbians who are in committed relationships.
Bishop Philip Richardson, Bishop in Taranaki then wrote this response: White collar crime?
And the anglicantaonga website also published a news article about the exchange, Bishop refutes “white collar crime”.
A new petition urging bishops to end their “discrimination” against gays and lesbians misunderstands both church law and the power of bishops to change church doctrine.
That’s the view of Bishop Philip Richardson, who has released a public response to the “Stop White Collar Crime ” petition being driven by Auckland’s St-Matthew-in-the-City…
Both Kiwianglo’s Blog and Anglican Down Under have drawn attention to this. Both seem to think this dialogue is a good development. Scroll down here to see Ron Smith’s comments. Peter Carrell has identified the following key passage from Bishop Richardson’s response:
I believe that General Synod needs to reach an agreed position on these three inter-related issues, in the following order:
First , whether sexual orientation towards those of one’s own gender is a consequence of wilful human sinfulness, or an expression of God-given diversity. This in itself requires the process of collective biblical exegesis, prayer and discussion and debate which we are engaged in.
Depending on our collective answer to the first question, the church might then be in a position to move to the development of a formulary for the blessing of committed, life-long, monogamous, relationships other than marriage.
It is worth making the point that as bishops of the Diocese of Waikato and Taranaki we have suspended the licenses of heterosexual ministers living in relationships other than marriage (for example, in civil unions) for exactly the reason that there is no agreed position in this church on the status of committed relationships other than marriage.
Thirdly, the church could agree that such relationships so blessed and formally recognised by the church meet the standards of holiness of life that is the call on every Christian life, and is required to be reflected in the lives of those called by God and affirmed by the church to holy orders.
Update
Bosco Peters has written a response to this: Gay Ordinations Invalid?