Update
Parts of the Guardian interview have also been published in Uganda, see New Vision under the headline Dr. Sentamu prepared to ordain women bishops.
The routine formal Church of England confirmation ceremony for its diocesan bishops got more attention than usual yesterday when the new Archbishop of York, John Sentamu underwent the process.
Stephen Bates in the Guardian actually got to talk to him beforehand and has an interview with him in From Uganda with love … Church of England’s new No 2 spells out his creed. Some sample quotes:
Dr Sentamu said: “Some of our disagreements are not Christian really … It seems to suggest that all the great evils of the world are being perpetrated by gay and lesbian people, which I cannot believe to be the case. What is wrong in the world is that people are sinful and alienate themselves from God and you do not have to be gay to do that. To suggest that to be gay equals evil, I find that quite unbelievable.
“Is somebody saying a gay and lesbian can’t live in Christ? What matters in the end to me is to do what my mother said to me as a little child: John, never point a finger at anybody because when you do three other fingers are pointing back at you. All of us are sinners, all of us have baggage. Why should my baggage as a heterosexual be more acceptable than the baggage of a gay person?”
Other newspaper reports:
Telegraph Jonathan Petre Black archbishop vows to speak out
Independent Ian Herbert Refugee who fled Amin is confirmed as archbishop
Other web reports:
Times Online Simon Freeman Church welcomes its first black archbishop
BBC First black Archbishop confirmed
Pictures and an explanation for those not familiar with the process, at ACNS here.
The new archbishop has also been appointed to the Privy Council. Further explanation here.
14 CommentsWe haven’t reported on this topic since July.
Jonathan Petre in the Telegraph had a story today about one possible compromise, Williams may give up consecration role over women.
This suggests that traditionalists might accept something less than a “third province solution” if the archbishop did not himself consecrate women bishops (something like the custom in London whereby the diocesan bishop hasn’t for some years now ordained any women (or men) priests personally).
The story doesn’t explain how this would work in the Northern Province: presumably the Archbishop of York would have to take some similar action there. And it would seem unlikely that this solution would work if either archbishop was herself female.
The September issue of New Directions had an article by the Bishop of Guildford, who is chairing the working group producing specific recommendations for the synod to consider: Going forward:
What provision should be made for those who cannot recognize women bishops? The Rt Rev. Christopher Hill, the Bishop of Guildford, bears the responsibility for discerning the possible answer, and here gives a personal view of the issues involved.
The reactions of the flying bishops to the synod vote in July can be found on the Forward in Faith website: Beverley, Ebbsfleet, Richborough, and also Fulham.
30 CommentsAnglican Mainstream has today issued a further response, Letter to English House of Bishops.
Members of the public – apparently without restriction – are invited to sign it too. Although addressed “Dear Bishops”, the AM front page says:
Anglican Mainstream has issued a letter to all Bishops, Archdeacons and Deans of the Church of England, calling on them to rethink their statement on and response to UK Civil Partnerships. The letter calls on the Bishops to “publicly, courageously and consistently hold out to society the teaching of the Bible and the Church and the implications of it for holiness of life”.
(It will not escape the bishops’ notice that, of the original signatories, one has resigned his high office in the Church of England and is shortly to join a presbyterian body in the USA, and one of them is a clergy member of another Anglican province.)
This new statement of 19 September should not be confused with the previous statement of 6 August, here, or the one of 13 June, here.
21 Comments
0 CommentsIt’s election time within the Church of England. The members of the General Synod, the church’s legislative assembly, are up for re-election. Bishops have guaranteed seats but for other clergy and lay people hoping to sit in the new Synod, now is the time to write election speeches and canvas for votes. Over its next five year term, the Synod faces crucial decisions – not least on whether to allow women to become bishops. This issue above all others has led to fierce campaigning across the Church, as Christopher Landau reports.
Church Society has issued a press release.
A recent meeting of the Council of Church Society unanimously condemned the Pastoral Statement on Civil Partnerships issued by the House of Bishops over the summer.
To read the full text follow this link
To get more background on the CS view of CPs, read this page.
0 CommentsA working group of the House of Bishops has published a 100-page report under the title Countering Terrorism: Power, Violence and Democracy Post 9/11.
The working group, set up in October 2004, consisted of: The Rt Revd Richard Harries, Bishop of Oxford (Chair); The Rt Revd Colin Bennetts, Bishop of Coventry; The Rt Revd Peter Selby, Bishop of Worcester; The Rt Revd Peter Price, Bishop of Bath and Wells.
This report is available only as a PDF file and can be found here.
No doubt a link to this will eventually appear here.
Update it now is included on that page: scroll down to “Terrorism”; the page also includes an email address to which comments can be sent, and details of how to obtain a paper copy of the full report.
A press release has been issued about it, see here
Preview comment:
Observer Richard Harries How the Church can tackle terrorism
Press reports about it:
Telegraph Jonathan Petre Bishops suggest apologising to Muslim leaders for Iraq war
Guardian Stephen Bates CofE bishops criticise US over foreign policy and war on terror
The Times Ruth Gledhill Bishops want to apologise for Iraq war
BBC Bishops suggest apology for war
The evangelical Centre Group Fulcrum has published a very measured response to the bishops’ Pastoral Statement:
Fulcrum Response to the Bishops’ Statement on the Civil Partnership Act.
Andrew Goddard’s earlier paper, a response to the Act itself, published before the bishops document was available, is here.
1 CommentUpdated Saturday
Another item added to the CofE website can be found here. It’s a comment by Grace Davie on the recently-published predictions (from others) of church attendance in the future.
See for example Churches ‘on road to doom if trends continue’. Or Bleak future predicted for declining churches.
Steven Croft also commented about this in the CEN.
—
A huge volume of new statistics has been published on the Church of England website.
Press Release: New statistics show the costs of church repairs.
Don’t be put off by this weird title, the statistics cover much more than building costs, as the following strap shows:
Parochial church attendance, membership and finance statistics together with statistics of licensed ministers for the Church of England
Warning: some of the pages contain graphical images which may not load in all browsers. If you encounter this problem, try using Internet Explorer instead.
1 CommentI have previously linked to earlier articles on Civil Partnerships in New Directions by Nicholas Turner. Now here is the latest, from the September 2005 issue: Blessings of silence.
The same issue also has What did they mean? by Gerry O’Brien who:
3 Commentswas not happy with the House of Bishops’ statement on Civil Partnerships, viewing it as too subtle and convoluted by half. He preferred the more forthright response of Archbishop Akinola
Where is the Church’s doctrine to be found? As far as the Church of England is concerned, the answer is at first glance simple. Canon A5 states that:
The doctrine of the Church of England is grounded in the Holy Scriptures, and in such teachings of the ancient Fathers and Councils of the Church as are agreeable to the said Scriptures.
In particular such doctrine is to be found in the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, The Book of Common Prayer, and the Ordinal.
Furthermore the Worship and Doctrine Measure 1974 notes that “references in the Measure to the doctrine of the Church of England shall be construed in accordance with the statement concerning that doctrine contained in the Canons of the Church of England.”
But it’s not as simple as that, and there is a good section on “Doctrine in the Church of England in an Historical Perspective” in GS 1554. This document contains the proposals for updating the procedures for clergy discipline in matters of doctrine, ritual and ceremonial that were defeated at General Synod in July 2004. I think that one of the reasons for this defeat was the difficulty of saying just what the CofE’s doctrine is.
Article 7 of the General Synod’s constitution requires any “provision touching doctrinal formulae or the services or ceremonies of the Church of England or the administration of the sacraments or sacred rites thereof” to be voted on at final approval in a form submitted by the House of Bishops. Voting must be by houses so bishops, clergy and laity must each approve. As GS 1554 puts it:
All doctrinal and liturgical matters are brought to the General Synod by the House of Bishops in virtue of their role as guardians of the Church’s faith and teaching. The Synod as a whole determines whether or not to give assent. This reflects the relationship between bishops and laity which was clearly set out by Richard Hooker four hundred years ago.
In particular this means that, unless the Article 7 procedure has been followed, a motion passed by General Synod supporting, for example, a resolution of a Lambeth Conference, is no more that a statement of opinion by those present.
9 CommentsFirst, some responses from readers of the Church Times in recent weeks:
5 August Bishops’ pastoral statement on civil partnerships
19 August Civil partnerships: the Bishops’ statement and Archbishop Akinola
26 August The Bishop of Worcester on the Bishops and the Civil Partnership Act
2 September Evolving morality and the nature of the perceived threat to marriage
Second, another extract from the 1991 document Issues in Human Sexuality, this time from the summary section at the end. The bishops insist that their more recent statement does not change their policy. So this summary shows what has been the de facto position in the Church of England since 1991.
9 CommentsUpdates to three stories:
Lake Malawi
CEN Jonathan Wynne-Jones Bishop-elect gives reassurances over his “lodger” and liberal views
Church Times Pat Ashworth Bishop-elect quizzed
and from last week Bishop-elect in Malawi faces opposition
CofE Racism
Church Times Rachel Harden Colour still C of E issue – Sentamu
and leader comment Stepping into one another’s shoes
CEN Church still racist, says bishop
Connecticut
CEN George Conger US clergy charge Bishop
And two new stories:
Harare
Church Times Pat Ashworth Kunonga trial halted as judge resigns
and from last week Kunonga: no testimony by phone
CEN Harare bishop trial collapses
Living Church Trial of Zimbabwe Bishop Collapses
Update
Some further reports on this from African papers:
Kunonga Trial: Judge Storms Out in Protest
Kunonga: On Trial for His Country
both originally in The Herald (Harare)
Drama at Kunonga trial in The Zimbabwe Independent
Anglican Church puts Mugabe bishop on trial on ZWNEWS.com
Recife
CEN George Conger and Johanna Thomas-Corr Archbishop deposes 35 clergy to oust evangelicals
TLC Mass Depositions in Recife
First a couple of links:
I should have included this article by Simon Barrow earlier, but here it is: Civil Partnerships are a Blessing which links to a number of relevant earlier articles by him.
And the issue of Civil Partnerships and the CofE has now reached the Isle of Man.
The following CofE press office summary of the Pastoral Statement by the House of Bishops may be helpful in analysing the reactions of overseas primates and others, including those of Peter Akinola and also Bernard Malango and Drexel Gomez.
1. The House of Bishops’ Pastoral Statement on Civil Partnerships, issued in July, does not change the Church of England’s position on same sex relationships.
2. It upholds the historic teaching of the Church that marriage is the union of one man and one woman for life and is the proper context for sexual activity. Hence, sexual relationships outside marriage, whether heterosexual or same-sex, fall short of God’s purposes for human beings.
3. It remains the view of the House of Bishops that clergy are expected to live according to the Church’s teaching.
4. The Pastoral Statement was issued by the bishops to offer guidance to the Church of England in response to legislation passed by the British Government and coming into force in December.
5. The Church’s approach to civil partnerships reflects the fact that they will not be marriages, nor based on the presumption of sexual relations between the two people making the legal agreement.
There have been a number of comments about how a policy in this matter can be enforced. What is important to remember is that, because there has been no change in policy the following paragraph from Issues (1991) also still applies:
5.18 In the light of this judgement some may propose that bishops should be more rigorous in searching out and exposing clergy who may be in sexually active homophile relationships. We reject this approach for two reasons. First, there is a growing tendency today to regard any two people of the same sex who choose to make their home together as being in some form of erotic relationship. This is a grossly unfair assumption, which can give rise to much unhappiness, and the Church should do nothing that might seem to countenance or promote it. Secondly, it has always been the practice of the Church of England to trust its members, and not to carry out intrusive interrogations in order to make sure that they are behaving themselves. Any general inquisition into the conduct of the clergy would not only infringe their right to privacy but would manifest a distrust not consonant with the commission entrusted to them, and likely to undermine their confidence and morale. Although we must take steps to avoid public scandal and to protect the Church’s teaching, we shall continue, as we have done hitherto, to treat all clergy who give no occasion for scandal with trust and respect, and we expect all our fellow Christians to do the same.
(Thanks to a letter writer in last week’s Church Times for drawing attention to this point.)
25 CommentsThe Telegraph has a report today by Jonathan Petre that Dr John Sentamu, the Archbishop-designate of York, has used the foreword of a new book implicitly to criticise fellow Church leaders for failing to deal properly with discrimination in the organisation. See Black bishop attacks Church racism. An excerpt:
The book to which Dr Sentamu has contributed, Rejection, Resistance and Resurrection, Speaking out on racism in the Church, is a hard-hitting account of the rejection felt by many black Anglicans.
Written by Mukti Barton, the adviser on black and Asian ministries to the Bishop of Birmingham, Dr Sentamu’s present post, it describes racism as a “deadly poison” often unconsciously spread by white Christians.
It also claims that black people are significantly under represented in the clergy, even in the diocese of Birmingham.
Dr Sentamu, who is to launch the book in Birmingham cathedral next month, said in the foreword: “The stories in this book speak of the pain of what it is to undergo institutional racism.
“The cost is in terms of the lives of people who are hampered in their growth into the image of God created in them.”
However, the editors of the Telegraph know better than the bishop, and have published this leader The way to empty pews in which they say Dr Sentamu is wrong:
8 CommentsA useful litmus test can be applied to distinguish vibrant, fast-growing denominations from struggling or moribund ones. Those that are obsessed with accusing themselves of racism tend to be in a worse state of health than those that – while vigorously opposing racial prejudice, as the Gospel demands – have resisted the breast-beating and grievance-mongering of secular multiculturalists.
For the past 20 years, the race relations industry has exerted a formidable grip on the mainstream churches in Britain: Anglicans, Roman Catholics and Methodists have been falling over each other in their eagerness to send themselves on “racism awareness courses”.
Tim Jones, who is English although working in the USA, has written this comment about the bishops’ statement, Strangers in a Strange Land:
…To many outside the UK it seems bizarre that Christian bishops could vote for something that seems to them so, well, un-Christian. The powerful Anglican archbishop of Nigeria is furious, and reports are circulating that he is contemplating proposals for the Anglican Communion to discipline the Church of England, its historical ‘mother-church’. It is part of a wider debate about sexuality and church order that the Anglican Communion, the world’s third largest Christian denomination, may not survive intact…
And Pete Broadbent who is an English suffragan bishop, wrote about the statement in the Usenet newsgroup uk.religion.christian. His remarks are copied in full below the fold.
70 CommentsIn his recent New Directions article Michael Scott-Joynt referred to the previous articles of Nicholas Turner in that magazine. Here are the links to those articles which have reported on the progress of this legislation. It is clear that Mr Turner doesn’t like it:
June 2004 An Unholy Alliance
July 2004 Strange bedfellows
September2004 The confusion deepens
December 2004 Marital discord
February 2005 Deliberate confusion?
And yet, the official Forward in Faith response to the Bishops’ Pastoral Statement was less critical than most.
10 CommentsUPDATE The article is available on the Diocese of Worcester’s website.
The Church Times today carries an article by Peter Selby Bishop of Worcester. There is a report in the paper about the article by Rachel Boulding headlined Selby breaks bishops’ ranks which summarises the article well.
Sadly, the article itself is at present available only to paid subscribers. Update now available and linked. Meanwhile it has been quoted in part on titusonenine. That does not include the following excerpt:
30 CommentsIt should be a source not of fear, but of delight, that many who do not aspire to matrimony, or to whose circumstances it is inappropriate, wish none the less to order their lives by means of as many of the aspects of the married state as are made available to them.
Is it not a vindication of all that has been revealed to us about the contribution of marriage to human flourishing that, often in the face of sustained public and ecclesiastical disapproval, and the presence of some very destructive lifestyles within the “gay scene”, many gay and lesbian people have aspired to order their lives in the kind of faithfulness and responsibility that civil partnerships involve.
Pat Ashworth in the Church Times reports No Church can ignore the Bible – Akinola and his statement is reprinted in full.
The Church of England Newspaper has New Act will establish gay marriage critics warn (in the newspaper “marriage” is in quotes) which reports on what the Bishop of Winchester and Anglican Mainstream have said, while also clarifying the effect of some of the legal changes being made.
Earlier, I quoted a fragment from the Church Times press column, about the spiked Sunday Times report on Akinola. You can now read the whole of last week’s column.
0 CommentsMichael Scott-Joynt, Bishop of Winchester, has written this article about the Civil Partnership Act in the August issue of New Directions.
He refers to the Pastoral Statement, of which he is a signatory, thus:
The House of Bishops is on the point of publishing (I write in mid-July) a carefully considered, orthodox Pastoral Statement on Civil Partnerships; but on 29 May a substantially inaccurate preview of a draft of this Statement appeared in the Sunday Times – and caused consternation as it was circulated around the Anglican Communion among people many of whom can have no understanding of the cultural and legislative world through which we in the UK are now living. (But many of our own people have not woken up to its character either!)
In fact, the article covers several other pieces of legislation, and says only the following about the CPA:
34 CommentsThe Civil Partnerships [sic] Act 2004 was designed to meet the needs of ‘same-sex couples in supportive relationships (who) cannot marry but deserve the opportunity of legal recognition.’ It provides for such couples who are not within the ‘prohibited degrees of relationship’ to register their relationship in a Register Office as a Civil Partnership (CP). The Act closely and exhaustively replicates for CPs virtually every provision in law that relates to marriage.
In June 2004, members of the House of Lords, myself among them, sought by amendment to extend the provisions of the (then) Bill to couples (whether of the same sex or of opposite sexes) who are within the ‘prohibited degrees’ (e.g. two sisters, or a father and daughter) and who have lived under the same roof for twelve years. The amendment was carried in the face of government and Liberal Democrat opposition; but the government announced the same day that the amendment so radically altered the Bill’s concept of a CP that it could not proceed with the Bill while the amendment stood part of it – effectively admitting that after all the Bill was drawn up only in the interest of those in same-sex, and sexual, relationships. In due course the Commons removed our amendment and the Lords refused to allow its return.
I recognize that people in same-sex relationships can face some significant disadvantages and injustices which it is right that the government should seek to legislate to rectify – but not by replicating virtually every provision that relates to marriage. To me the CP Act undermines the distinctiveness and fundamental importance to society of marriage by effectively equating same-sex relationships with it, notwithstanding the government’s repeated assertions that this was not its intention.
It is, I judge, this dishonesty at the heart of the CP Act 2004 which will render the Church of England so wide open to mischievous misrepresentation when the Act comes into force in December.
The Church of England Evangelical Council has issued a statement. It is not yet on the CEEC website but can be found at Anglican Mainstream: Civil Partnerships – CEEC Response to Bishops and also on titusonenine.
Update, it is now on the CEEC website as an RTF file, here.
4 Comments