Civil Partnerships: CofE statement
Updated Friday 10 June
According to the Church of England Newspaper a spokesman for the CofE said this week:
“The Church of England’s position on same-sex relationships has not changed and is not about to change in the light of the Civil Partnerships (sic) Act, that comes into effect in December. It is set out in the General Synod motion of 1987 and the House of Bishops’ statement, Issues in Human Sexuality.
“The Church’s approach to civil partnerships will reflect the fact that they will not be marriages, nor based on the presumption of sexual relations between the two people making the legal agreement.
“A working party of the House of Bishops has been drafting a Pastoral Statement in response to the Act. This was discussed at the House of Bishops meetings in January and May. The House has agreed its broad approach and the statement is being amended to take account of those discussions. It will be published in the course of the summer.”
The report is headlined Bishops decide clergy can register gay partnerships
(Graham James is the bishop of Norwich not Norfolk).
The Norwich Evening News carries this further report: Bishop’s role in new gay guidelines
The Living Church carries a version of this story at Civil Partnerships for British Clergy Clarified
Update The Church Times carried Same same-sex policy
21 CommentsResourcing Mission Group
Hidden away at the bottom of the Church of England’s papers webpage is this item.
Resourcing Mission Group
The Resourcing Mission Group was one of the groups created by the Archbishops in 2004 following the adjournment by General Synod of the consultation document GS1529: “Future use of the Church Commissioners Funds”. This is the Group’s interim report, on which the Church’s views are being invited. Its final report will be prepared in the autumn after the consultation process has finished.
Main report 179kb
Annex A 26kb
Annex B 72kb
Annex C 27kb
Annex D 36kb (Excel document)
Additional Annex 49kb
The terms of reference of the group were “to identify achievable ways in which the financial and other resources of the Church of England might be best deployed (a) to secure their equitable distribution across the Church and (b) to facilitate local mission objectives and plans”.
Nothing about the consultation process has appeared on the CofE news page or on the rather obscure Church Commissioners’ own news page so it is unclear where comments should be sent. I suggest “Resourcing Mission Group Secretariat” at Church House Westminster.
0 CommentsCivil Partnerships and the CofE
In view of the forthcoming Pastoral Statement on Civil Partnerships it may be of interest to read what the Church of England said formally to the UK Government back in 2003 when the government was holding a public consultation on this matter.
The document is on the CofE website in Word format though its location here is not very obvious. An accessible copy of it is available here.
The government document to which this was responding is this one (very large – 1.5 Mb – pdf file). The report on this consultation is another similar sized document. One item from it is this:
2.13 Of those representing nationally-based religious groups:
- For example, the Church of England, the Catholic Bishops Conference, the Salvation Army, the Methodist Church and others
- 53% (9 responses) supported the principle of a civil partnership scheme
- 47% (8 responses) opposed, or did not offer an opinion on, the principle of a civil partnership scheme
2.14 Of those representing individual religious groups and congregations:
- These were largely Baptist, Evangelical, Free and Congregational churches
- 85% (17 responses) opposed the principle of a civil partnership scheme
- 15% (3 responses) supported the principle of a civil partnership scheme
The legislation that was then drafted and subsequently passed differs from what was in the consultation document in various ways, so the CofE comments should not be interpreted as applying to the legislation as it now stands.
9 CommentsCivil partnerships and the clergy
Update Tuesday
Here is a good critique of this newspaper report: Get a Clue
According to Christopher Morgan of the Sunday Times the Church of England will respond to the issue of clergy who wish to enter into a Civil Partnership in the following manner:
Church to let gay clergy ‘marry’ but they must stay celibate
HOMOSEXUAL priests in the Church of England will be allowed to “marry” their boyfriends under a proposal drawn up by senior bishops, led by Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury.
The decision ensures that gay and lesbian clergy who wish to register relationships under the new “civil partnerships” law — giving them many of the tax and inheritance advantages of married couples — will not lose their licences to be priests.
They will, however, have to give an assurance to their diocesan bishop that they will abstain from sex. The bishops are trying to uphold the church doctrine of forbidding clergy from sex except in a full marriage. They accept, however, that the new law leaves them little choice but to accept the right of gay clergy to have civil partners.
The decision is likely to reopen the row over homosexuality that has split the worldwide Anglican communion. It may also overshadow an international meeting of senior bishops next month designed to heal rifts between liberals and conservatives over the issue.
The Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement estimates that within five years 1,500 homosexual Anglican clergy will have registered under the new law, which comes into force on December 5.
The Church of England proposal is contained in a draft Pastoral Statement on Civil Partnerships, drawn up by Graham James, the Bishop of Norwich. It was discussed at length and provisionally agreed at a meeting last week at a hotel in Market Bosworth, Leicestershire.
A final draft with some amendments will be produced for approval by the House of Bishops, the upper house of the church’s General Synod.
Under the proposal, a priest intending to register a civil partnership would inform his or her bishop in a face-to-face meeting. The priest would then give an undertaking to uphold the teaching of the Church of England, outlined in the 1991 document Issues in Human Sexuality. This paper prohibits sex for gay clergy.
Although no sanctions are included in the new proposal, it is expected that a breach of the rules may lead to disciplinary action or the possible suspension of clergy.
Some bishops, however, are uncomfortable about subjecting their priests to the proposed interviews.
One said this weekend: “We all have clergy in gay partnerships in our dioceses and there is a genuine reluctance on the part of a number of us to make their lives more difficult.”
…The bishops have also agreed to a government request to change ecclesiastical law to favour civil partners. A change to the Pluralities Act of 1838, for example, will enable gay partners to occupy vicarages for up to two months after the death of a priest.
This matter was the subject of questions at the General Synod in February, and the answers were published exclusively on TA here. The Civil Partnership Act can be read in full here.
The government is also proposing to amend the Employment Equality (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2003. Clause 3 (defines the meaning of discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation) and Clause 25 (benefits dependent on marital status) are the sections affected. The purpose of the first of these amendments, which would add a new sub-clause 3.3, is explained thus:
Purpose and effect
1. The purpose of this new provision is to make it clear that, for the purposes of the Employment Equality (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2003, the status of a civil partner is comparable to the status of a spouse. The effect is to enable a civil partner who is treated less favourably than a married person in similar circumstances to bring a claim for sexual orientation discrimination under the Sexual Orientation Regulations. New paragraph 3(3) prevents the discriminator from being able to say, by way of defence, that being married is a material difference to being a civil partner. The discriminator would have to show that the married person and the civil partner were not in a comparable position for some other reason, for example, that they were doing different jobs.
2. An employer etc would not be able to justify less favourable treatment of a civil partner as compared to a spouse in similar circumstances unless he could show that being heterosexual was a genuine occupational requirement (GOR) of the job within the meaning of reg 7(2). The additional GOR exception in reg 7(3) for employment for purposes of an organised religion permits an employer to apply a requirement “related to sexual orientation” (rather than to be a particular sexual orientation). It may therefore permit a narrow range of employers, such as religious organisations, to require that an employee be married (rather than a civil partner) but only where such a requirement is necessary to comply with the doctrines of the religion, or because of the nature and context of the job, to avoid conflicting with the strongly held religious convictions of a significant number of the religion’s followers. It is likely that these defences will only be available in a very limited number of circumstances.
The proposed wording of the clause is as follows (the consultation is now closed and this might change when the proposal is formally published for parliamentary approval):
15 CommentsNew regulation 3(3)
3. Discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation
“(3) For the purposes of paragraph (2), in a comparison of B’s case with that of another person the fact that one of the persons (whether or not B) is a civil partner while the other is married shall not be treated as a material difference between their respective circumstances.”
recent Church Times features
Last week, David Edwards explained why The Church of England should not break communion with any Anglicans, in It was never meant to be perfect:
SO WHAT are the lessons for 2005? One is that the Church of England should not be ashamed to be as comprehensive as it has been and is, and ought not to break off communion with any Anglicans anywhere. If any Anglican group is defeated, the Church is impoverished.
And if any group triumphs, the victory is short-lived because, in reaction, another group grows in conviction, as the Evangelicals are currently taking advantage of the radicals’ self-inflicted disaster and the Anglo-Catholics’ disarray.
If a mission to England is really wanted, it has to be acknowledged that the ordinary English are never going to become completely what popes or Puritans, Evangelicals or Anglo-Catholics, liberals or radicals want.
One reason for this reluctance is that some 70 per cent of the English believe that they are already Christians — and also believe that what they know about Jesus Christ (which may not be much) does not fit neatly into the picture painted by any of the ecclesiastical parties.
Yet the vision of a complete Anglican consensus is utopian. This is partly because the English do not like to be told what to think or do by any dictatorship, whether personal or corporate. But a more edifying reason is that Anglicanism at its best has always tried to be not a theological or denominational system, but merely Christian.
The back page interview was of Mark Russell youth worker, lay preacher, and youngest member of the Archbishops’ Council. I particularly liked his comment on Leviticus.
Keith Ward argues that Christians must join the most important debate — about the universe in How science supports faith:
2 CommentsMANY of us are still afraid of science and of what it might do to faith. We would rather close our minds to discoveries, and stay with the old “certainties”. The best example of this is American creation science, which still tries to defend the first chapters of Genesis as scientific fact, in defiance of virtually all informed scientific opinion. That is why many physicists say that their God, their intelligent cosmic mind, is not the biblical God, the God who made the universe 6000 years ago, and who deprived snakes of their legs.
Here is the point. That is not really the biblical God. Christians should not be tied to primitive myths for ever, while much of modern science longs to open up a vision of a beautiful 15-billion-year-old universe, with billions of stars and galaxies, singing the glory of a Creator beyond all spaces and times.
This is the real debate for the Churches. There are many prominent Christians engaged in it. Pope John Paul II was a leading figure in opening up conversations between theology and science. John Polkinghorne and Arthur Peacocke are just two of the best-known Anglicans who lead the field, and their books are a good place to start.
But Anglicans must be trained and ready to take on board the best of modern science; to separate ancient myth from scientifically informed knowledge; and to tackle head-on the problem of whether the universe is cruel, terrifying, and pointless.
The modern scientific view of the universe will set this problem in a different light — one, perhaps, for which the laws of the universe have to operate as they do in order for life-forms like us to exist at all. Perhaps the universe can be seen to be both beautiful and dangerous — but never pointless. Perhaps it can be seen as the basis for a transformation into new and greater forms of life, as Romans 8 implies.
Whatever the upshot, it is probably true that all our thinking about God will have to be done in a new way. That is because all our traditional thinking was done before modern science told us the truth about the physical universe, when people had a different (and largely mistaken) idea of what the universe was like.
recent Church Times features
Several items that appeared in last week’s Church Times are now available:
The Road to Bishopthorpe by Adrian Leak. In May the Crown Nominations Commission meets to choose the next Archbishop of York. This article examines the history of the office.
Not married to the monarchy by Sam Wells who says that the establishment of the Church of England should be provisional.
Back page interview with John Flack director of the Anglican Centre in Rome by Rachel Harden and see also Red shoes, 21 to lunch.
0 CommentsRipon controversy ends
The problems reported earlier (Dean of Ripon suspended and more on Ripon) have been resolved without going to a public ecclesiastical trial.
The Church Times has: Charges dropped as Dean agrees to quit Ripon.
The diocesan press release is here.
The Yorkshire Post carried two stories by Michael Brown
‘Autocratic’ Dean quits over wine and women
Wine, women and evensong: Claims that rocked cathedral
The picture from the Yorkshire Post is captioned:
Requiem: Dean Methuen pictured at the High Altar at Ripon Cathedral, reading from the mid-13th century Latin Bible during a requiem Mass similar to the funeral service of Richard III in 1485 – part of a Richard III symposium held at the cathedral in 2002.
0 CommentsRowan Williams preaches for Christian Aid
Rowan Williams preached today at St Paul’s Cathedral. The service was to mark the sixtieth anniversary of Christian Aid.
The full text of the sermon is here.
The Lambeth Palace press release is here: Archbishop condemns lack of trust in fight against poverty.
The Christian Aid press release is here: Archbishop backs trade campaign at Christian Aid anniversary service.
archbishop writes to British political leaders
A Lambeth Palace press release says:
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has issued a pre-election open letter, urging party leaders to avoid political campaigns based on the exploitation of fear.
Dr Williams argues that although negative campaign strategies may make headlines they do not determine the outcome of elections and that politicians should focus instead on offering long-term solutions to deep-rooted challenges.
Dr Williams goes on to identify four such issues: the environment, international development and the arms trade, youth and family policy, and criminal justice reform.
The letter can be read in full here.
Update The BBC has a report which includes a link to a video clip including an interview with RW.
The Church Times has a report on its website, not in the paper edition: Campaign fairly, Archbishop tells party leaders
Stephen Bates in the Guardian has Fear must not be a campaign tool, says Williams
and there is also Attacks on Tory politics of fear
Jonathan Petre interprets the letter a different way in the Telegraph Archbishop says make marriage election issue
The Independent had Archbishop warns party leaders not to exploit voters’ fears.
women bishops – study programme
The Church of England has published a Study Programme, see this press release:
Women Bishops in the Church of England? Study Programme published on the web..
The downloadable material mentioned is in fact an MS Word file. An accessible copy of the same material is now available here.
The material includes a chart which shows the process that is likely to be followed to achieve the objective:
0 CommentsThe timing of the various stages outlined in this table is necessarily contingent on the outcome of Synod motions etc. At the time of writing in March 2005 stages A & B have passed and stage C is likely to be reached in July 2005. The House of Bishops expects that moving from D to P would take at least four years (not least because 18 months would need to be allowed for the referral to dioceses outlined in J & K).
Rowan Williams: Good Friday and Easter
The Archbishop of Canterbury delivered the Good Friday Thought for the Day on BBC Radio 4
Audio recording (3 minutes – Real Audio required) and Transcript is now available.
The archbishop’s Easter Message to the Anglican Communion
The full text of his Easter sermon is below the fold. And is now available on his own website.
This report from the BBC links to a video clip of part of the sermon (Real Player required)
0 CommentsUgley Puritans – update
A correspondent reports from the Chelmsford diocesan synod meeting held last Saturday:
15 CommentsAnswering questions at the Diocesan Synod, John Gladwin told the dissidents who have declared themselves to be “out of communion with him”, that theirs was the only letter of complaint that he had received, but that he had also received 130 letters and messages of appreciation and support.
In reply to their complaint that he had signed the letter as Bishop of Chelmsford without any synodical support for doing so, he answered to the effect that he is the Bishop of Chelmsford and people really have to come to terms with that – to loud and prolonged applause from the synod, thereby signifying that he did have the synod’s support should he have needed it. He also said that the Six Bishops’ letter was entirely in accord with the Dromantine Communiqué and that had been checked at the highest level.
After the spontaneous applause following his robust defence of his position as Bishop of the Diocese, a synod member even cheekily asked in a supplementary – would it be appropriate for this synod to further demonstrate its support for the Bishop with another round of applause – to more applause.
The dissidents had a rather poor time of it, the more so as the Bishop kept saying that he welcomed dialogue with the group, would be replying to their letter and would continue to meet with them.
more on the Ugley Puritans
Several stories relating to this protest against writing letters to The Times:
Gladwin faces Ugley scenes over gays is the headline over the story in the Church Times (not on the public website yet), which says in part:
One of the clergy’s number, the Revd John Richardson, Assistant Curate of Henham, and Elsenham with Ugley, said on Tuesday: “He cannot be in sacramental fellowship with us and Churches in North America at the same time.”
…The Chelmsford group insists that, by opting for sacramental fellowship with those “who have gone against mainstream Anglicanism”, Bishop Gladwin has opted out of sacramental fellowship with others in his diocese.
…The group’s concern was not to add numbers to its list, but to make a point, he said.
Meanwhile Andrew Brown writes in the weekly Church Times Press column (also not on the public website) that:
ANOTHER EXAMPLE of a story that was made by its timing came in Saturday’s Telegraph, where the parish of Elsenham, Henham and Ugley in Essex announced that it was out of communion with the Bishop of Chelmsford because he had signed a letter to The Times in support of the North American Churches.
Again, this should have been a non-story. The benefice has made the papers before for throwing a yoga class out of the parish hall for a while (the class finally settled in Ugley village hall, which is controlled by a churchwarden of the neighbouring benefice); and for witholding its quota for a while in protest against the diocese’s interfaith policy. This stirring announcement, then, shouldn’t have been aroused too much excitement.
But, to journalists who are coming to believe that the Church of England as we have known it is doomed, and that a fractious congregationalism is the inevitable future, these gestures matter.
The CEN has Bishop rebukes opponents over Communion debate
The Guardian has Bishop hits back over gay row
And the GetReligion blog has Broken Communion story rolls on — in England.
while Fr Jake has Table Fellowship; the New Weapon
Ugley Puritans
The Telegraph reports today in Clergymen refuse communion with bishop in row over gays that
…at least eight conservative clerics have told the Bishop of Chelmsford, the Rt Rev John Gladwin, that they will refuse to share Holy Communion with him. They are furious that the bishop and five of his colleagues sent a letter to a national newspaper earlier this week announcing their determined support for liberal Anglicans in North America…
That would be a reference to this letter in The Times in which the bishops merely said:
…We remain in full sacramental fellowship with all the churches of the Anglican Communion, including those of Canada and the US, and we seek to remain in full communion with all of them…
which is of course a simple statement of fact that applies to every single member of the Church of England at the present time, whether they like it or not, including those objectors in Chelmsford. Clearly that favourite term of conservative evangelicals the plain meaning of the words has escaped them. Individual members of Anglican Communion churches do not have the luxury of deciding for themselves who they are in communion with.
The newspaper list among the eight people the clergy of the Henham, Elsenham, & Ugley benefice, John Richardson and Richard Farr. Mr Farr is best known for his refusal to allow the use of his church hall for a yoga class. His own account of this event can be read here.
Update
The extent to which conservatives are upset by the bishops’ letter is quite remarkable:see this Mainstream – Letter to London Times so far not published by the paper, and see also this Statement on Sacramental Fellowship with the Bishop of Chelmsford by Messrs Farr and Richardson.
The Church and Europe
The Bishop of St Albans, the Rt Revd Christopher Herbert, who chairs the House of Bishops’ Europe Panel has written today to all senior Anglican clergy encouraging them to contribute to a more informed debate on Europe.
See this CofE press release Bishop calls for informed debate on Europe.
The text of the bishop’s letter is also below the fold here.
The Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s Guide to the EU can be found here.
The House of Bishops’ Europe Panel is a sub-committee of the House of Bishops. The Panel acts as a point of reference for items affecting the Church of England’s relations with Europe and the European Union institutions which arise in the House of Bishops and General Synod. The Panel is committed both to promoting and shaping an open and transparent Europe close to its citizens and to monitoring the EU institutions in so far as they affect Church life and practice.
2 CommentsEnglish bishops speak up
Update
related news story by Ruth Gledhill Break-away bishops could undermine truce on gays
One of the signatories, the Bishop of Ripon and Leeds, the Right Rev John Packer, said: “This is a strong statement of support for listening to the experience of lesbian and gay Christians.
“Many lesbian and gay Christians, rightly or wrongly, feel that the primates’ statement did not emphasise the need to emphasise them in the same way that the bishops of the Church of England did at our recent General Synod. We wanted to make it clear that we had in no way reneged on that promise. Sometimes I feel that people are saying they want to listen, when in fact they have already made their minds up.”
The following letter appears in Monday’s edition of The Times, signed by the bishops of Salisbury, Chelmsford, Leicester, Ripon & Leeds, St Albans and Truro.
10 CommentsSir, We are encouraged by the commitment of the primates of the Anglican Communion to “the underlying reality of our communion in God the Holy Trinity” whilst engaging in dialogue and listening, in relation to the issues which have “obscured” that communion. The communiqué issued at the end of their week-long meeting in Newry (report and leading article, February 26) recommends actions which will allow that dialogue to continue and articulates the deep bonds of affection which continue to unite us.
We do not believe that the different responses of our sister churches to lesbian and gay people are of such significance that we should break the bonds of communion. We welcome the positive steps which will now be taken to engage in dialogue with lesbian and gay people. This call has been repeated by successive Lambeth conferences and we will do all that we can to facilitate that mutual listening throughout the Communion. We assure lesbian and gay Christians of our commitment to the principle of the Lambeth conference that all baptised, believing and faithful persons, regardless of sexual orientation, are full members of the Body of Christ.
We remain in full sacramental fellowship with all the churches of the Anglican Communion, including those of Canada and the US, and we seek to remain in full communion with all of them. We also clearly state our continuing solidarity with our sisters and brothers in the global south.In a world ravaged by the effects of poverty, war and disease our communion must seek to serve the whole human family.
We assure the Archbishop of Canterbury of our support for him in the ministry with which he has been entrusted and we offer him our love, our fellowship and prayers.
other weekend news
Bishop David Sheppard has died. Many newspaper stories on this:
Observer Former bishop of Liverpool dies and Appreciation: David Sheppard, 1929-2005
Sunday Times Sheppard the cricketing bishop dies after cancer battle, aged 75
BBC Online Cricketing bishop dies of cancer and Obituary: Lord Sheppard
Telegraph Former Bishop of Liverpool David Sheppard dies
David Hope has started his new job as a parish priest at St Margaret’s Ilkley
Sunday Times From palace to bin duty: an archbishop downsizes
This follows an earlier story in The Times Former Archbishop starts new life at grass roots
Yesterday, The Times editorialised that Richard Chartres was the best person to become Archbishop of York: Balanced ticket and there was an accompanying news story New favourite emerges for York archbishopric. As no sources are cited in the latter, it is unclear whether the editorial came first or the other way around.
Nor were any sources at all cited in this article: Liberal and weak clergy blamed for empty pews but for those who want to know where this comes from the answer is http://www.churchsurvey.co.uk/. Readers can judge the validity of the survey for themselves.
Addition a helpful comment about the survey by Dale Rye is here on titusonenine.
And the Church Times reports that Clerics second happiest at work but they do provide a clue as to the source of this claim which is to be found at Hairdressers are cutting it in the league table happiest jobs
1 Commentecclesiastical autonomy
A very interesting legal paper has been published by Dr Augur Pearce concerning the ecclesiastial autonomy of the Church of England.
There is a summary of the key points (and a biographical note) on this page: English Ecclesiastical Autonomy and the Windsor Report by Dr Augur Pearce.
and the full 12 page article can be downloaded in PDF format from here.
The last two summary points read as follows:
- Reflecting that the Windsor Report’s proposed ‘communion law’ (subordinating national ecclesiastical autonomy for the future to an international agreement and arbiters) could only be effected in England by primary legislation, the paper mentions two existing approaches to self-obligation in the legislative field (in the European Communities Act and Human Rights Act). Given that either approach would affect radically the tradition of independence that formed the English Church as now known, and that a possible consequence could be to narrow the national church’s broad popular appeal, Parliament may think very carefully before approving such legislation while leaving the Church of England its national status and associated endowment.
- Being no expert in the history of the North American churches’ involvement with the Lambeth Conference, the writer does not seek to apply his conclusions directly to their situation. It is recognised that as voluntary rather than national churches, the conceptual basis for their autonomy is quite different. However it is suggested that if the Church of England is indeed presently not bound by Lambeth Conference majorities, the North American churches should consider whether it can be right for them either to own such an obligation.
Clergy Discipline Measure – consultation on Rules and Code of Practice
The Clergy Discipline Measure 2003 received Royal Assent in July 2003. It is likely to come into effect towards the end of this year. There is a very good summary of both the current and new arrangements here on the Oxford diocesan website. Note however that the new measure does not apply to “matters involving doctrine, ritual or ceremonial”. These will continue to be governed by the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction Measure 1963.
Before the new arrangements can come into effect, Rules (to carry into effect the provisions of the Measure) and a Code of Practice (providing guidance, explanation and best practice) need to be finalised by the Rule Committee and the Clergy Discipline Commission respectively, approved by Synod and, in the case of the Rules, laid before Parliament in the form of a Statutory Instrument under the ‘negative resolution’ procedure.
The Rule Committee and the Commission have drafted the Rules and the Code of Practice and they are now seeking comments. Full details of the consultation and how to make comments are here.
The measure and the drafts are online here:
Clergy Discipline Measure 2003
draft Rules
draft Code of Practice
The drafts are each about 3.5 MB and contain a total of 139 pages.
The intention is that the Rules and Code of Practice will be brought to General Synod for approval in July 2005. As a result the closing date for the consultation is midday on Tuesday 5 April 2005 and this deadline will be strictly observed.
The members of the Clergy Discipline Commission are listed here.
1 Commentnews on Sunday
First on the Sunday programme:
Meeting of the Anglican Primates
The meeting of the 38 provincial Primates of the Anglican Communion begins in Newry on Monday. It is a showdown between the majority, who are opposed to the ordination of actively gay bishops and clergy, and ECUSA, the Episcopal Church of the United States, and its supporters in Canada, who actively support and carry out such ordinations. Such is the impasse that the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams asked the Communion’s chief fixer, Archbishop Robin Eames, to chair a commission to try and resolve the issue, which threatens to tear the Communion apart. It is that commission’s so called Windsor Report that is being discussed in Newry.
Listen (7m 04s)with Real Audio to interviews with Frank Griswold and Gregory Venables.
Lots of other items in today’s issue of Sunday are also of interest to Anglicans.
A piece from the Management pages of the Business section of the Observer by Simon Caulkin:
When the devil is in the details
How would you appraise a vicar’s performance? By the number, length and quality of sermons? Attendance at church? Out of wedlock births? Ratio of marriages to divorce? Doctrinal purity?
This intriguing question was raised by proposals put forward last week by the Church of England’s General Synod to make incompetent vicars easier to sack, and to subject them to the kind of performance measures that apply to other workers.
Don’t laugh: even our box may be less satirical than you think. In one study, a Norwegian hospital chaplain had performance measures that counted not only bedside visits, but also the number of last rites he performed. In fact, the church’s measurement problem illustrates with blinding clarity the tensions inherent in all performance management.
Read it all. But don’t take it too literally. The sidebar or “box” mentioned above is at the foot of the webpage. More about the real CofE proposals for ministerial review in a while.
The Sunday Times has a report by Christopher Morgan that says: Churchgoers ordered to pray for Camilla.
This refers to the wording of the BCP prayer for the Royal Family, which can be (and periodically is) altered by Royal Warrant (not by Parliament or the General Synod) to reflect births, marriages and deaths. According to Morgan the new wording will be:
0 Comments“Almighty God, the fountain of all goodness, we humbly beseech thee to bless Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, Charles, Prince of Wales, and the Duchess of Cornwall.”