Updated again 11 pm Sunday
Further reports:
BBC Anger at Anglican gay ‘wedding’ and a full report on the radio programme Sunday. Interviewees include Martin Dudley, Colin Slee, and David Banting. Permanent URL now available: go here. (12.5 minutes)
Associated Press Anglican Church: Gay ‘wedding’ broke rules
Press Association Gay ‘marriage’ for Anglican priests
Reverend Martin Dudley, who led the ceremony, said he disagrees with the official guidance.
He added: “I was asked by a friend and colleague to bless their civil partnership. I said ‘of course I will’.
“Peter is a dear friend and I have gay friends and one respects them for who they are. It seemed perfectly reasonable.
“I certainly didn’t do it to defy my bishop or to make a statement, I did it as a matter of pastoral care for someone for whom I have a very high regard.”
Mr Dudley said the traditional marriage liturgy was significantly altered for the occasion, which he described as ‘glorious’.
There were around 300 guests, including a number of clergy and Cowell’s mother who read the lesson.
Dudley added: “I know about the bishops guidelines and I disagree with them. It just seems to me to be utter hypocrisy to deny the fact that there are significant numbers of gay men and women within the church and significant numbers of gay clergy.
“It seems to me that Jesus would have been sitting in the congregation.”
He said differing opinions in the church are fine as long as people disagree “in love and understanding”.“You can’t allow the cultural and theological prejudices of the Bishop of Uganda for example, to govern how we are going to go forward in a very diverse community where the law and society accepts homosexual relationships in civil partnerships.”
From the comments on the Telegraph site:
19. Posted by The Revd Dr Martin Dudley on June 15, 2008 08:54 AM
As the Rector of St Bartholomew the Great, who officiated at this service, I would like to add a little clarity to the story.First, it was not a wedding or a marriage but the blessing of a civil partnership. Mr Wynne-Jones was well aware of this from his conversation with me today. If others construe it as a wedding, than they do so deliberately in order to ferment division.
Second, it was not and was intended to be a provocative act. It was not undertaken in defiance of the Bishop of London and there was no plea from him that I should not officiate at the service.
Third, we should remember that this service celebrated the love that the two persons involved have for each other. I officiated at it because Fr Peter Cowell has been my friend and colleague for many years. 300 people joined in the service; nearly 200 received communion, and there were dozens of other clergy present. It was not a rally or a demonstration. If other people want to turn into a loveless battlefield for the future of the Church of England, then it is they who will carry responsibility for the consequences.
Fulcrum reports a communication from Lloyd Ashton, Media Officer to the Anglican Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia which reads:
…News reports in the United Kingdom have described a London Anglican church blessing for two male Anglican clergy, one of whom is a New Zealander.
The New Zealand priest involved has felt it appropriate to lay down his clergy license, in the light of Anglican Communion processes and discussions in the area of same gender Blessings and ordination.
Both the bishops to whom the priests were licensed, one in New Zealand and the other in the United Kingdom, were not aware of the ceremony.
The Bishop of Waikato and the Waikato priest concerned have released this joint statement. They will make no further comment on this matter.
The Associated Press reports that:
London’s bishop said Sunday he would order an investigation into whether two gay priests exchanged rings and vows in a church ceremony, violating Anglican guidelines.
The priests walked down the aisle in a May 31 service at one of London’s oldest churches marked by a fanfare of trumpets and capped by a shower of confetti, Britain’s Sunday Telegraph reported.
The bishop, the Right Rev. Richard Chartres, said such services are not authorized in the Church of England. He said he would ask the archdeacon of London to investigate.
And also that:
Church of England spokesman Lou Henderson said the archbishop of Canterbury, the Anglican Communion’s spiritual leader, was unlikely to make any public comment about the controversy.
Channel 4 News had a report this evening, which you can watch by going here.
From New Zealand, the local angle in Anglicans incensed by gay ‘wedding’:
… The fallout for Dr Lord, who was ordained at Waikato Cathedral Church of St Peter in December last year, had been swift. In a joint statement with the Bishop of Waikato yesterday, he said he “felt it appropriate to lay down his clergy licence”. This means he is unable to work as an Anglican priest…
There are further stories on the newspaper websites:
The Times Anglican church in meltdown over gays and women
Daily Mail Rector faces the sack after holding Britain’s first gay ‘wedding’ in an Anglican church
Telegraph Controversial vicar investigated after Anglican church’s first gay ‘wedding’
Updated Saturday evening
The Episcopal Café reports on a Same sex wedding held in London church.
The complete order of service is available as a PDF file from there.
Update
From tomorrow’s Sunday Telegraph Jonathan Wynne-Jones reports:
Male priests marry in Anglican church’s first gay ‘wedding’
First gay ‘wedding’: Only the bride was missing
First gay ‘wedding’: All eyes on Archbishop of Canterbury
Some quotes from the Telegraph:
The Most Rev Henry Orombi, the Archbishop of Uganda, said that the ceremony was “blasphemous.” He called on Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, to take decisive action if the Anglican Church were not to “disintegrate”. Archbishop Orombi added: “What really shocks me is that this is happening in the Church of England that first brought the Gospel to us.
“The leadership tried to deny that this would happen, but now the truth is out. Our respect for the Church of England will erode unless we see a return to traditional teaching.”
The Rt Rev Michael Scott-Joynt, the Bishop of Winchester – a powerful conservative figure – said that the service represented a wedding “in all but name”. He said: “Strictly speaking it is not a marriage, but the language is clearly modelled on the marriage service and the occasion is modelled on the marriage service. This clearly flouts Church guidelines and will exacerbate divisions within the Anglican Communion.”
The bishop said that it was up to the Rt Rev Richard Chartres, the Bishop of London, to act, adding that it would become a high-profile test case of Church authority.
“Can we stand for the clear teaching of the Church of England or are we powerless in the face of these actions, which I regret enormously have taken place,” he said.
From the Mail on Sunday by Jonathan Petre:
Row as rector holds Britain’s first gay ‘wedding’ in an Anglican church and another copy with a slightly different headline here.
Some quotes from the Mail:
Tory MP Sir Patrick Cormack, a prominent Anglican, said: ‘This is extraordinary. I am surprised the rector of such an important church should act in apparent defiance of his bishop.’
Alison Ruoff, a member of the Church of England’s General Synod, said: ‘It is incredibly sad that people are prepared to sin against God and the Church.’
… Mr Dudley said he was unrepentant. He said he had written to Bishop Chartres 18 months ago for guidance on blessings for same-sex couples in civil partnerships, but was told the Church’s House of Bishops had not approved them.
‘Bishop Chartres asked me not to offer them and I do not offer them,’ he said.
‘But if close friends ask me to bless them, I do not say no.
‘It would be an act of hypocrisy to do anything else.
I was ordained alongside gay candidates of the priesthood and many of my clergy friends are gay, though I am not.’
He said he regarded the service as a blessing rather than a marriage and added that he was not worried about discipline because he had acted with integrity.
A Church spokesman said: ‘The Church of England is absolutely firm on the point that a marriage can only be between a man and a woman.
‘The Church has no liturgy for blessing same-sex unions.’
Agence France-Presse reports that:
30 CommentsA Church of England spokesman told AFP they had “no reason” to believe that the ceremony did not take place but added: “What we seem to have here is a fairly serious breach of the rules by an individual or groups of individuals.”
… The Church of England spokesman said he hoped the news would not affect relations between member churches, stressing: “The Church of England has not changed its rules (on the subject) at any stage.”
The Bishop of London, Richard Chartres, in whose diocese the ceremony took place, was unavailable for comment, his spokesman told AFP.
Simon Barrow wrote about it on Comment is free at Compass points.
Alan Wilson responded to this journalism with Middle Class whining from Dystopolis.
Today, the Church Times has this news report by Ed Beavan C of E volunteers ‘add civic value’ to the nation, and this leader: A patchwork cannot give blanket cover.
The Tablet has an article by a report author, Francis Davis titled ‘Damned if you do …’.
Unfortunately, two further articles, one in the Church Times by Bishop Stephen Lowe and one in the Tablet by Frank Field are both behind paywalls for another week.
Stephen Morgan has a review of the report here at Thinking Faith.
And, at Wardman Wire Simon Barrow writes again, in Churches and public service – Thinking Aloud. Matt Wardman writes:
0 CommentsOver the next several weeks, we will be publishing a number of articles from a range of viewpoints – aiming to get beyond the initial reactions which many commentators have felt obliged to publish without reading the document itself. Most of these initial reactions seem to be attempts to create narratives supporting existing positions. That is a criticism that I would extend to all over-rapid reactions – including those I agree with who have indulged themselves.
There is much there relevant to the policy research and formation process with respect to the Third Sector, as well as the position of Christian churches in the UK, and their relation to government. I’m hoping to obtain a very wide range of perspectives in this second “online symposium” (our first one back in February was about MP Pay and Expenses).
We start off with an overview from Simon Barrow…
A note to General Synod members, GS Misc 889, announces the latest appointments that the Government has made in relation to this area of activity. Here’s what it says:
Crown Appointments
1. In February the General Synod decided that the Government should be invited to agree that there should be a continuing and not merely formal, role for a senior civil servant, at the heart of Government in the selection processes for senior Crown appointments in the Church of England. The Synod also decided that it wanted the Government to continue to provide the necessary staff-work to support the Crown’s (including the Lord Chancellor’s) parochial patronage responsibilities.
2. Following discussions with the Archbishops the Prime Minister has invited Mr Paul Britton to be his Appointments Secretary for senior ecclesiastical appointments and his adviser within the senior Civil Service on Church/State relations. Mr Britton, who is an Anglican and lives in the diocese of Rochester, will remain Director General, Domestic Policy Group, Cabinet Office and Head of the Economic and Domestic Affairs Secretariat. He will work with the Archbishops’ Appointments Secretary on the consultations for diocesan bishop appointments and will attend meetings of the Crown Nominations Commission. In relation to Crown appointments to cathedrals he will be assisted by Ms Emma Boggis, another senior civil servant in the Economic and Domestic Affairs Secretariat, who is also an Anglican and will take part in the selection processes for the Crown deaneries. Work on parochial appointments will remain with Mr Nick Wheeler.
3. The Archbishops have welcomed these new arrangements.
William Fittall
Secretary General
Church House
Westminster SW1P 3AZ
June 2008
1 CommentThe Prime Minister’s Spokesman said:
Asked if the Prime Minister accepted that the Church of England had been marginalised in the last few years, and that it had not been listened to perhaps as much as voices from other faiths, the PMS replied that the Prime Minister would not accept that at all. The Prime Minister was obviously keen on engaging with all of the major religious groups in this country to ensure that their views were properly aired. We had worked very closely with the Church of England and other religious groups on a number of important policy issues such as the campaign on global debt reduction, which was very much lead by the Church, and which the Government responded to in a very significant way.
Francis Davis one of the report’s authors wrote this: ‘Moral, But No Compass’ – a challenge to every politician.
A Telegraph leader says: The Church of England sees sense.
And George Pitcher writes Labour has bungled religion.
The Times has David Aaronovitch saying The Church of England should drop its martyred tone.
And the letters page has several who disagree with the report: A grown-up Church should not need the State.
At Ekklesia Simon Barrow has written about A wonky church and welfare debate.
And there is a further news report at Church and welfare debate continues as new report is published.
And here’s a speech on the same topic, given last week by the Archbishop of York to the Institute of Jewish Policy Research: Archbishop’s Speech on The Role Of Religion In Politics.
1 CommentHere is the official Church of England press release on Moral, But No Compass: Von Hügel Institute: Government ‘moral without a compass’ says report into Church and Welfare.
The government is ‘planning blind and failing parts of civil society’ when it comes to faith communities in general and aspects of charity law and social policy in particular, concludes a report by the Von Hügel Institute, an academic research centre and think tank based at St Edmund’s College, Cambridge University. “The government has good intentions, but is moral without a compass,” the authors say.
The report, Moral, But No Compass – Government, Church, and the Future of Welfare, was commissioned by the Rt Rev Stephen Lowe, Bishop for Urban Life and Faith, who officially received the report today on behalf of the Archbishops’ Council of the Church of England. It was researched and written by Francis Davis, co-Director of the Centre for the Study of Faith in Society at the Von Hügel Institute, Elizabeth Paulhus, a researcher at the Institute, and Andrew Bradstock, co-Director of the Centre for the Study of Faith in Society at the Institute.
The Institute’s research involved interviewees from politics, churches, other faiths, the civil service and the voluntary sector. It ‘uncovered huge gaps in government evidence about faith communities in general and the churches in particular,’ according to the report.
“We encountered on the part of Government,” the report says, “a significant lack of understanding of, or interest in, the Church of England’s current or potential contribution in the public sphere. Indeed we were told that Government had consciously decided to focus its evidence gathering almost exclusively on minority religions. We were unsurprised to hear that some of these consequently felt ‘victimised’…”
And the CofE comments:
…Welcoming this report, Bishop Stephen Lowe said: “We had little information about our own capacity or indeed level of existing activity. We had only a sketchy idea of political aspirations for our involvement. We needed an informed and reflective assessment of the position for the Church to consider the nature and extent of its future participation…I am delighted with the outcome.”
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, and the Archbishop of York, Dr John Sentamu, called it a ‘fascinating and important report’.
“On the one hand it highlights and details some truly remarkable examples of public good delivered by the Church and faith based organisations – sometimes funded by the state, though mostly not – and a general picture of committed social engagement which if grasped imaginatively by the state could, indeed would, yield some extraordinarily positive results,” the Archbishops said.
“On the other it reveals a depressing level of misunderstanding of the scale and quality of contribution faith-based organisations make to the civil and civic life of our nation – our common good. This is particularly true in relation to the contribution of the Church of England, and its membership, on which the report focuses.
“In short, this report urges the Church, government and others, notably the Charity Commissioners, to sit up, take note and to better understand each others roles and intentions in order to make the most of one of this nation’s most diverse, creative and enduring assets – the Church..
“We all need to consider very seriously the report’s recommendations and take appropriate action – for the good of the nation.”
The press release includes the full list of recommendations made by the report. Some of those are addressed not to the government but to the church. These are reproduced below the fold.
0 CommentsSee below for earlier reports.
Here is the publisher’s website description:
Moral, But No Compass
Government, Church and the Future of Welfare
In the heyday of Thatcherism the Church of England and the Conservative government of the day locked horns over the principles, policies, and strategic direction of the welfare state. The ensuing public debate, fraught with emotion, led to fundamental shifts in the political climate, not least with regard to the poorest members of UK society.
This new major study for the Church of England, drawing on hundreds of interviews and survey questionnaires, describes the modern setting in which the Labour Party’s welfare and related voluntary sector policies often are experienced as “discriminatory”, inadequately rooted in evidence and at risk of failing the faith communities. The government is “moral, with no compass” and needs to recover a principled approach to public service reform grounded in gift, covenant, advocacy and justice. Such an approach also demands a richer appreciation of the “civic value” added to the life, identity and health of the nation by Christian institutions in partnership with the whole realm of civil society. The Church too must adapt to the changing times, overcoming its (mistaken) perception that it is well understood by society. If the crisis of evidence and conversation can be repaired, the Church is in a position, should it so wish, to engage in even more extensive social entrepreneurship, community activism and public advocacy.
The report covers:
• Historical background of welfare;
• Critical assessment of the Labour and Conservative Party’s policy positions;
• The failures of third sector evidence and policy design in Government and at the Charity Commission;
• Analysis of the assets and membership of social voices, both secular and faith-based;
• New data on the capability and potential of Anglican dioceses as social incubators;
• Fresh insights into the role of cathedrals as civic actors and economic hubs;
• New information on the civic contribution of bishops.
• The Church’s view of principles needed by Government for ethical commissioning, as well as its reservations about the present funding regime.ISBN: 978-1-898366-91-1
And here is further comment by Simon Barrow in Church Caught In A Spin Over Welfare.
3 Comments…The initial reporting about Moral, But No Compass has been rather selective, “well spun” and based on what was either a leaked document or a deliberately placed one. In any event, the full report was originally embargoed until a press conference in London tomorrow at 11am and will still be unveiled in full then, though the tone of reception and response has already been established. The archbishops of Canterbury and York will apparently issue a statement.
There is much more to be said about this (I’m respecting the embargo, even if the rush to summary judgment has already begun), but my opening comment on behalf of Ekklesia was as follows: “We believe a more careful, calm and critical evaluation is needed of the role of faith groups in public service provision. It is particularly important that the needs of the vulnerable and the reasonable expectation of all people (whether religious or non-religious) for equal treatment from public services should not be subsumed too readily in a ‘contracting-out’ culture that can put the interests of providers – government, voluntary and private agencies – ahead of those they are supposed to be helping. Research and thought is badly needed, but a confused ‘debate’ fuelled by sensational headlines and half-truths will not help anybody.”
Updated Sunday
This is apparently (some variations exist in the reporting) the title of a report commissioned by the Church of England (180 pages) to be published on Monday. The Times already has seen it, and has published several articles about it:
Church attacks Labour for betraying Christians
The policies of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown have helped to generate a spiritual, civic and economic crisis in Britain, according to an important Church of England report.
Labour is failing society and lacks the vision to restore a sense of British identity, the report says in the Church’s strongest attack on the Government for decades. It accuses the Government of “deep religious illiteracy” and of having “no convincing moral direction”.
The report, commissioned for the Church of England and to be published on Monday, accuses the Government of discriminating against the Christian Churches in favour of other faiths, including Islam. It calls for the appointment of a “Minister for Religion”, who would act as the Prime Minister’s personal “faith envoy” and who would recognise the contribution of faith communities to Britain across every government department…
Other Times articles:
Ignored and spurned, the Church has lost its faith – in government
Hunger to put faith into action is frustrated by secularist agenda Analysis by Ruth Gledhill
Times Leader: Church and State
Ruth Gledhill’s blog has substantial quotes from the report, at Church critiques Government’s ‘moral compass’
The Telegraph has also seen it, and published this:
Christianity ‘discriminated against by Gordon Brown’s Government’ by Jonathan Wynne-Jones
The Associated Press report includes:
The Church declined to release the report before a scheduled publication Monday and would not comment on specific recommendations.
Peter Crumpler, spokesman for the Church of England, said the institute was asked to prepare a report “that could assist our reflections and contribute to our conversations with government.”
“The hard-hitting report raises issues of considerable importance, the authors say, and makes recommendations that challenge the Government to recognize the Church’s involvement and potential in public service reform,” he said.
Lowe said the report has not yet been discussed, or endorsed, by senior members of the clergy.
“The report is not an attack on the government, but a call for greater understanding by all politicians of the role of the Church of England in the community life of this country,” Lowe said in a statement.
Update Sunday morning
The BBC Sunday radio programme has a 12 minute segment on this report. Listen here.
Or there is a podcast available here.
Government moral report
A report commissioned by the Church of England says that the UK’s Labour Government is moral, but it doesn’t have a moral compass. The report, released on Monday 9 June, also says that the Government discriminates against the Christian Churches in favour of other faiths, and is guilty of deep religious illiteracy.Roger spoke to one of the report’s authors, Francis Davis from the Von Hugel Institute at St Edmund’s College, Cambridge. He was also joined by the Bishop who commissioned the report, Stephen Lowe, and by the Communities and Local Government Secretary Hazel Blears.
BBC Ministers ignore us, says Church
Simon Barrow reports on Ekklesia that Row breaks out over report to Church on its welfare role:
22 CommentsA report looking at the role of the Church of England and other faith communities in welfare has been spun into an attack on government before it has even been published and properly digested, say the researchers involved in producing it.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s ‘Sunday’ programme this morning, co-author Francis Davis from the Von Hugel Institute in Cambridge, which was commissioned by the Church of England’s urban affairs bishop, the Rt Rev Stephen Lowe, but produced its work independently, urged people to “carefully read and study the report” when it is published tomorrow rather than “quoting selectively from it.”
Another of the report’s academic authors, Dr Andrew Bradstock, is also deeply unhappy about the way that a lengthy and detailed document, embargoed until 9 June, has been spun by journalists into an attack on government.
“The purpose of this document is to resource an ongoing conversation, not to leap to conclusions or start apportioning general blame”, Dr Bradstock told Ekklesia this morning.
He points out that while the research indicates that some government departments have a sketchy view and little hard data on the church’s grassroots voluntary work, it is not suggesting a lack of moral purpose in any quarter – though it is raising tough questions and the need for action to address the shortcoming of the current situation…
The document GS 1685A has been released, though not yet on the CofE website. This is the covering Note from the Presidents explaining what the House of Bishops has decided to do.
The full text of the document can be read here.
The text of the motion to be put is below, but do read this in the context of the whole document:
A member of the House of Bishops to move:
0 Comments‘That this Synod:
(a) reaffirm its wish for women to be admitted to the episcopate;
(b) affirm its view that special arrangements be available, within the existing structures of the Church of England, for those who as a matter of theological conviction will not be able to receive the ministry of women as bishops or priests;
(c) affirm that these should be contained in a national code of practice to which all concerned would be required to have regard; and
(d) instruct the legislative drafting group, in consultation with the House of Bishops, to complete its work accordingly, including preparing the first draft of a code of practice, so that the Business Committee can include first consideration of the draft legislation in the agenda for the February 2009 group of sessions.’
The Church Times and the Church of England Newspaper both have stories about the Ministry Division report that was leaked to the Sunday Telegraph, as reported earlier here.
Bill Bowder wrote Bishops question the clergy’s ability to cope in the Church Times.
Toby Cohen wrote Church report questions the ability of the clergy. The text of that story is not yet on the web, but is reproduced, with permission of the CEN, below the fold here. Update Religious Intelligence now has the original here.
The Ministry Division issued this press statement:
“This paper, written for consideration by the House of Bishops, represents part of the ongoing work of the Ministry Division in supporting and developing clergy at all stages of their ministry. The initial research exercise sought views on how our current programme of training should be developed to fully meet the challenges facing the Church in the future. One insight not reported [in the Sunday Telegraph] was that more than eight in ten bishops expressed confidence that our newly ordained clergy have the gifts and abilities to meet such challenges and opportunities.”
The Church Times also had a leader: Criticising the clergy? It’s not all bad:
0 CommentsIT IS possible to say anything about the clergy and for it to be broadly correct. Say that they are not adequately trained to lead mixed teams of professionals and volunteers, and most clerics will probably agree. Say that they lack theological or pastoral or managerial experience, and there will be few gainsayers. Say that aspects of worship, welcome, pastoral provision, discipleship, etc. in their churches are not the best they could be, and suspicion would attach to a priest who demurred. It is not suprising, therefore, that a survey of bishops, circulated last December and leaked this week, should articulate the same concerns about the capacity of priests and the adequacy of their training. Bishops naturally spend their energies on pastoral emergencies, hard-to-fill parishes, and hard-to-place clerics. It is all too easy for them to lose sight of the scores of competent priests working quietly in their dioceses, causing their bishops no anxiety…
Press release: Wider wedding welcome for couples as the Church of England names the day
The day is 1 October 2008.
Marriage Law Review & the Marriage Measure
Guidance from the House of Bishops (PDF – 37 pages)
Copy of the legislation via here (available as html or PDF).
Specimen “welcome form” (.doc – 5 pages) available here.
11 CommentsFor background to this matter, see the Church Times blog entry General Synod to debate evangelising other faiths.
Now, the Telegraph has a report by Martin Beckford headlined Church of England accused of censoring debate on Islam. Regardless of the headline, it appears definite that the item will not be debated in July.
A spokesman for the Church of England insisted the debate on the missionary role of clergy had only been dropped because the other Private Member’s Motion had more signatures.
He said: “Owing to time constraints, the Business Committee has been able to schedule only one such motion for July, on the subject of Church Tourism, which heads the list in terms of the number of signatures from members.”
This is indeed the case, see the list here.
4 CommentsWe reported earlier on the plan to publish guidelines on bullying in church contexts.
Last week, the Church Times had a news article by Ed Beavan Report urges Church to face up to its bullies.
The report is now available online and can be downloaded as a .doc file here. h/t Dave Walker who also had trouble finding it on the web.
5 CommentsUpdated again Tuesday evening
Jonathan Wynne-Jones has a report in the Sunday Telegraph headlined ‘Poor quality’ of vicars alarms Church leaders.
This is based on a Ministry Division report entitled Quality and Quantity Issues in Ministry.
…It found that there are “serious concerns” at the top of the Church hierarchy over the quality of its clergy.
The internal report suggests that the standards of new clergy has dropped, because of the demands on the Church to fill vacant posts, while many vicars who have been in the job several years have lost their energy and enthusiasm.
To tackle the problems, the Church is to vet new applicants for ordination more vigorously and is considering changing the selection criteria and a pay review…
…The report, which was produced by the Ministry Division, the Church body responsible for staff issues, reveals deep anxiety amongst bishops over the competence of its paid ministers.
A survey of diocesan bishops found that one-third believe that more than half of current clergy – as many as 6,000 – are unable to cope with the demands of the job.
In addition, 90 per cent of the bishops believe that a third of the new intake of clergy do not have the necessary gifts and abilities…
Sunday evening update
Dave Walker has a roundup of responses on other blogs.
Tuesday evening update
Bishop Alan Wilson has written an informative article at Vicarage Allsorts: Clergy Supply. This shows that we have slightly more clergy than we did in 1950. One of the main reasons is that we now have far more “active retired” clergy than before, 4468 vs. 1262. (Click on the graphic in his article to get the numbers larger.)
And he has written a further article, Vicarage Allsorts: Clergy Quality.
Since Chaucer’s time there’s been public anxiety about this subject. 200 years ago Sidney Smith lamented the decline in the quality of clergy since the enforcement of residence was preventing gentlemen from desiring ordination. In the roaring 20’s, Hensley Henson bemoaned the decline in the quality of ordinands since the first world war. The document quoted in last week’s Sunday Telegraph, however, is barking up a very different tree. A more accurate headline than “poor quality of vicars alarms church leaders” would probably be “desperation to inject alarm into drab HR questionnaire twits journalist.”
As Dave Walker notes, Bishop Pete Broadbent also supplied further information here, i.e. in the comments below.
53 CommentsThe Bishop of Rochester is attracting considerable attention in the UK media at present arising not only from his support for Paul Eddy’s private member’s motion, but also from an article he wrote for a new magazine, which you can now read in full: Breaking Faith With Britain.
BBC Robert Pigott Britain left with ‘moral vacuum’
Church Times Bill Bowder Christians have duty to witness to their faith, says Bishop Nazir-Ali
The Guardian has today published a profile by Riazat Butt Nazir-Ali is a prophet and prophets are rejected by their own, as Jesus was. He is a serious man for serious times and a Leader: Bishop’s move.
And Simon Barrow has written a thoughtful piece on Comment is free titled Blinkered bishop.
Over at the Telegraph Martin Beckford has written two pieces: Bishop of Rochester ‘doing the BNP’s work’ and Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali: Radical Islam is filling void left by collapse of Christianity in UK. And this comment piece by George Pitcher: Right or wrong, the Bishop of Rochester named our ills.
The Times has Radical Islam taking advantage of Christianity’s decline, says bishop by Hollye Blades.
Cartoon by Dave Walker.
22 CommentsAs noted previously, a petition for lay members of the Church of England was recently published. Here is the covering letter for that petition:
2 CommentsAN INVITATION TO LAY MEMBERS OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND
FROM: Canon Dr Susan Atkin
Professor Anthony Berry
Hilary Cotton
Robert Key MP
Baroness Pauline Perry
Christina Rees
Lord Walpole
TO: Lay members of the Church of EnglandGreetings! You are invited to show your support for the letter sent in May 2008 by senior clergywomen to the House of Bishops. The letter, the text of which is below and which is also attached, urges the bishops to proceed with opening the episcopate to women without any further delay, and to resist anything in legislation that includes discrimination against women. General Synod will be meeting from 4 – 8 July, and we hope to be able to show strong lay support for the clergywomen’s stance. If you wish to sign, please go to the petition website below.
The website for the petition for lay members is http://www.gopetition.co.uk/online/19571.html
Please send this website link to any of your friends whom you believe should be made aware of its existence. If they are not equipped with a computer please enable them to sign by offering them the facility of doing so via your computer.
If you feel you are unable to sign, thank you for reading this and for considering doing so.
Updated Saturday
Today, the Church Times reports that ‘Chaos’ warning as rumours fly after Bishops’ meeting by Bill Bowder.
.. A spokesman for Forward in Faith said that it did not comment on speculation based on leaks.
News of a possible decision by the Bishops not to offer legal provision for the objectors was reported in The Sunday Telegraph this week. It said the move had been opposed by a “substantial minority”, and that the Archbishop of Canterbury had argued that, although creating jurisdictions with male bishops only would further divide the Church, it would honour promises made to traditionalists.
On Tuesday, however, a Church of England spokesman refused to confirm whether the Bishops wanted a simple “code of conduct” for objectors, in order to keep the legislation to a minimum, and had rejected the idea of a third province. He also declined to comment on whether they wanted to end the right of parishes to opt out of the ministry of women priests.
“The House of Bishops had a full discussion of the Manchester report [News, 2 May], and agreed that the options in the report should be debated by the Synod in July. The House agreed a motion to act as a starting point for the Synod debate. The wording of this will be issued with the other Synod papers next month,” the spokesman said.
The Archbishops of Canterbury and York would set out in a covering note “the considerations [the House of Bishops] believes that the Synod will need to weigh in coming to a decision”.
In the paper edition this article also says that:
“Two online petitions, one for male clergy (including retired bishops), and the other for laity, have been set up by Thinking Anglicans to support legislation for women bishops that does not give legal protection to objectors.”
This sentence is wrong and has been corrected on the Church Times website. Thinking Anglicans did not set up these petitions. Nor did we set up these petitions opposing such legislation.
Meanwhile, the Telegraph today has a further story, see Church of England closer to appointing women bishops after MPs signal approval by Martin Beckford.
Members of Parliament’s Ecclesiastical Committee had previously said the church was not ready for women priests to become bishops, an historic step which has divided Anglicanism for decades.
But this week MPs on the committee, whose approval would be needed before any legislation is passed, said most are now in favour after bishops voted to go ahead with the reforms without any concessions to opponents…
And here is another parliamentary exchange that occurred recently, well on 8 May, concerning this matter.
Robert Key (Salisbury, Conservative)
There is clearly still some way to go. Does the hon. Gentleman agree with me that it really is time that the Church of England stopped discriminating against 50 per cent. of the human race when it comes to episcopal appointments? Can he imagine this House finding it expedient to agree to any Measure from Synod that sought to discriminate against women, in the hope that it was going to allow women bishops in the Church of England—but not at any price?Stuart Bell (Second Church Estates Commissioner; Middlesbrough, Labour)
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his comments. He will remember that this House voted almost unanimously, but certainly overwhelmingly, for women priests way back in 1992. Given that he is a member of the General Synod, he will know that in July it will look at the options for progressing the ordination of women as bishops, informed by the recently published report of the legislative drafting group, chaired by the Bishop of Manchester. This House—in its majority, I think—supports women bishops and we urge the Church in this case to make haste less slowly.
Update Saturday
Matt Cresswell has a similar report for Religious Intelligence Parliamentary boost for women bishops campaign.
Two such petitions, one for those who are opposed to women as bishops in general, and one for those who are in favour of women as bishops but are opposed to the ‘Single Clause’ option are now also available.
For some background on these petitions, see here.
6 CommentsTwo petitions have been set up: one for Church of England male clergy (other than serving bishops), the other for all lay people of the Church of England.
The petitions can be found at these websites:
The letter of invitation to male clergy is below. A separate letter of invitation to laity will follow.
15 CommentsAN INVITATION TO MALE CLERGY
FROM: The Deans of Bristol, Durham, Manchester, Southwark and St Edmundsbury
TO: Male clergy and retired bishops of the Church of EnglandGreetings! You are invited to read the statement below (and also attached) and to add your signature to the on-line petition.
This petition is for male clergy and retired bishops to sign. It is not for serving bishops. The website for the petition for male clergy is
http://www.gopetition.co.uk/online/19569.htmlThere is a separate website for lay people to sign and show their support for the letter from the women clergy to the House of Bishops. The website for the petition for lay people is http://www.gopetition.co.uk/online/19571.html
Please send these website links to any of your friends and colleagues whom you believe should be made aware of their existence. If they are not equipped with a computer please enable them to sign by offering them the facility of doing so via your computer.
If you feel you are unable to sign, thank you for reading this and for considering doing so.
Jonathan Wynne-Jones reports in the Sunday Telegraph that:
…At a confidential meeting, bishops narrowly voted to proceed with the historic reforms and to resist pressure to create separate dioceses free of women clergy.
The decision will dismay hundreds of priests who could defect to the Roman Catholic Church, which refuses to ordain women. It was taken at a meeting of about 50 members of the House of Bishops, at a hotel in Market Bosworth, Leicestershire, last week, and has set the stage for a showdown with traditionalists when the General Synod, the Church’s parliament, is next convened, in July.
During the meeting, the bishops were deeply divided over ways of solving the issue, which has engulfed the Church in bitter debate for decades. Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, argued that making women bishops could exclude from the Church those opposed to the idea, unless proper provisions were made for them.
He acknowledged that creating new dioceses which were only for men could create further division within the Church, but said that the move would honour promises made to traditionalists when women were first made priests, in the early 1990s.
Following the debate, the bishops decided to endorse legislation – which will now be voted on at the Synod – that would end special arrangements for clergy who are not prepared to accept female priests, including “flying” bishops, senior clergy who operate across different dioceses, ministering to those opposed to women priests.
Instead, the bishops opted for a Synod motion that asks for respect for opponents of women bishops, but does not make provisions for them.
The motion makes clear that a significant minority disagrees with this approach.
The move means that it is now highly unlikely that new dioceses will be created for opponents of women bishops…
Read the whole article headlined Church of England faces exodus over women bishop reforms.
To remind you of what the options offered by the Manchester Report are, see this summary by Dave Walker or alternatively, read the earlier article here:
Report on Women as Bishops to which links to html copies of several more annexes have been added today.
The full text of the main body of the report is available here.
In light of the above report, the following annexes of the report may be of interest:
Annex D – Illustration of ‘Statutory Code of Practice’ option
Annex D, Measure 2 – Draft Bishops (Consecration of Women) Measure (No 2) or here is the PDF original.
90 Comments