Thinking Anglicans

MOSAIC coalition launches

A new coalition, named MOSAIC, which is an acronym for Movement Of Supporting Anglicans for An Inclusive Church, has been launched. The website is at https://mosaic-anglicans.org. The press release (copied in full below the fold) explains:

SENIOR CHURCH OF ENGLAND LEADERS UNITE TO CAMPAIGN FOR “A CHURCH FOR ALL ENGLAND”.

Leaders from across the full breadth of inclusive networks have united to create a “Movement of Supporting Anglicans for an Inclusive Church” that will campaign together for a more inclusive church.

The movement aims to have a presence in each diocese of the Church of England, where it will work with local clergy and laity on projects that promote inclusion for all those who are currently marginalised by the Church of England – whether that be due to race, ability, sexuality, gender or gender identity.

Launching just ahead of the February Synod, the co-chair of the initiative Revd Canon Tim Goode, a newly elected clergy member of the Archbishops’ Council said:

“I am delighted that we have been able to bring together such a broad coalition of leaders who represent the full range of marginalised groups within the Church of England. We stand far stronger together – for you cannot be a little bit inclusive!

…The Movement is keen to connect with anyone who is interested to get involved. More details can be found on their website www.mosaic-anglicans.org…

The Church Times has reported this: New coalition seeks greater ‘inclusive’ clout in Church of England dioceses.

A NEW coalition describing itself as a “movement of supporting Anglicans for an inclusive Church” — and to be know by the acronym Mosaic — is to bring together campaigns on issues of race, ability, sexuality, gender, and gender identity.

One of its two co-chairs, Canon Tim Goode, a newly elected member of the Archbishops’ Council, said that Mosaic represented “the full range of marginalised groups within the Church of England. We stand far stronger together — for you cannot be a little bit inclusive.”

The coalition draws together leaders from the Campaign for Equal Marriage, Disability and Jesus, Inclusive Church, Modern Church, One Body One Faith, and the Ozanne Foundation. It hopes to grow to include other organisations.

Each of these bodies will continue to function independently, but the coalition is an attempt to co-ordinate their efforts to eradicate discrimination from church statements, policies, appointments, and actions…

The article also contains a Q and A section, with information that is not to be found at present on the MOSAIC website.


Full text of press release:

SENIOR CHURCH OF ENGLAND LEADERS UNITE TO CAMPAIGN FOR “A CHURCH FOR ALL ENGLAND”.

Leaders from across the full breadth of inclusive networks have united to create a “Movement of Supporting Anglicans for an Inclusive Church” that will campaign together for a more inclusive church.

The movement aims to have a presence in each diocese of the Church of England, where it will work with local clergy and laity on projects that promote inclusion for all those who are currently marginalised by the Church of England – whether that be due to race, ability, sexuality, gender or gender identity.

Launching just ahead of the February Synod, the co-chair of the initiative Revd Canon Tim Goode, a newly elected clergy member of the Archbishops’ Council said:

“I am delighted that we have been able to bring together such a broad coalition of leaders who represent the full range of marginalised groups within the Church of England. We stand far stronger together – for you cannot be a little bit inclusive!”

The Movement has appointed eight Patrons who will act as Ambassadors for the Movement and advise on strategy. These include the Chairs of Inclusive Church (Very Revd Dianna Gwilliams) and One Body One Faith (Ven Peter Leonard) along with Revd Bill Braviner from Disability & Jesus, Very Revd Rogers Govender MBE, one of the most senior BAME leaders in the Church of England, Very Revd Mandy Ford and Very Revd Joe Hawes, both civil partnered senior clerics in the Church of England, and Ven Malcolm Chamberlain, who recently helped set up the Evangelical Forum at General Synod. Jayne Ozanne, a well-known LGBT campaigner is also a patron and has worked alongside the founder – Revd Trevor Wyatt – to help set up a Steering Group, which has appointed 23 diocesan convenors. Speaking about the importance of the initiative, she said:

“Many within the Church of England long for a Church that fully embraces everyone and anyone, giving a warm and sincere welcome to all. At last, we now have a movement that can work together across the dioceses and give voice to the silent majority, so that we can speak about the love of God for all.”

Venerable Alan Jeans, Archdeacon of Sarum, who is part of the Steering Group and a MOSAIC diocesan convenor, explained what MOSAIC’s immediate focus would be:

“There are many clergy and laity who have an interest or need for our campaigning group. MOSAIC offers those who are marginalised or subject to discrimination a listening ear. We also aim to be a point of contact for the Bishop’s staff with regards to inclusivity issues within the Diocese. At the same time, we will be seeking ways to ensure that Living in Love and Faith engages LGBT+ voices safely.”

The Movement is keen to connect with anyone who is interested to get involved. More details can be found on their website www.mosaic-anglicans.org.

Editors Notes

  1. The founder of the movement is the Revd Trevor Wyatt, who is vicar of Christ Church Bexleyheath in the Diocese of Rochester (revtrevorwyatt@outlook.com)
  2. The Patrons are:
    Revd Bill Braviner, Priest in Charge of St Peter’s, Stockton on Tees and Disability adviser in the Diocese of Durham
    Venerable Malcom Chamberlain, Archdeacon of Sheffield & Rotherham
    Very Revd Mandy Ford, Dean of Bristol
    Very Rev’d Rogers Govender MBE, Dean of Manchester
    Very Revd Dianna Gwilliams, Dean of Guilford and Chair of Inclusive Church
    Very Rev’d Joe Hawes, Dean of St Edmundsbury & Ipswich
    Venerable Peter Leonard, Archdeacon of the Isle of Wight and Chair of One Body One Faith
    Jayne Ozanne, Director, Ozanne Foundation
  3. The Steering Group is:
    Rev Trevor Wyatt – Co-Chair and Vicar of Christ Church Bexleyheath
    Rev Canon Tim Goode – Co-Chair, Rector of St Margaret’s Lee
    Revd Sibylle Batten – Assistant Curate in Sheffield Manor Parish
    Revd Andrew Dotchin – Vicar of the Benefice of Felixstowe St John the Baptist with St Edmund
    Revd Jackie Doyle Brett – Priest in Charge of Derwent Ings Benefice
    Venerable Alan Jeans – Archdeacon of Sarum
  4. For more information contact Revd Trevor Wyatt (07860 306 746).
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
51 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Richard Pinch
Richard Pinch
7 months ago

Well, this made me think. I’m sure that the Church, both as an institution and as a body of people, can and should do more to welcome, include and preach the Gospel to marginalised groups. But I’m not sure what gives this coalition the right to declare that they are “leaders who represent the full range of marginalised groups”. Unpacking this there are. three things that deserve attention. Firstly, “leaders”. To what extent do the groups marginalised “due to race, ability, sexuality, gender or gender identity” have leaders? What person or body is the leader for people of a given… Read more »

Last edited 7 months ago by Richard Pinch
Trevor Wyatt
Reply to  Richard Pinch
7 months ago

Richard, Many thanks for your comment. I feel that you are responding to the Church Times article which is not written by MOSAIC. Our Journeying Together document does not mention ‘leaders’ neither does any other part of the website.  
 
Do have a look at our ‘Journeying Together’ and to ‘How We Function’ documents that are on the MOSAIC website.

Your point about ‘the marginalised’ is well made and I believe is covered by us in the Journeying Together document.  Trevor

Trevor Wyatt
Reply to  Simon Sarmiento
6 months ago

We plan to make these documents far more prominent on the website. Many thanks for the feedback.

Richard Pinch
Richard Pinch
Reply to  Trevor Wyatt
7 months ago

Trevor, thanks for that. You’re quite right that the wording “leaders who represent the full range of marginalised groups” is from the Church Times but it is supposedly a quotation from co-chair Revd Canon Tim Goode, and it certainly seems to me a fair reflection of the phrase “Leaders from across the full breadth of inclusive networks” which occurs in the press release. So the word “Leaders” is indeed one chosen by the group to describe itself to the world at large, in two different ways, and I don’t see much difference between the meanings of “full breadth” and “full… Read more »

Last edited 7 months ago by Richard Pinch
Phil Groves
Phil Groves
Reply to  Trevor Wyatt
7 months ago

Trevor, the Press Release – which you are right I can’t find on your website – but I hope would come from you, begins with ‘Leaders from across the full breadth of inclusive networks ..’ which implies the significance of rank and hierarchy as well as representation. As a neurodiverse person I would ask you not to say that you represent me. We do not need ‘leaders’ to speak on our behalf – we need to be heard. Neurodiverse people are subject to shaming in the C of E with only one out person in senior leadership. that contrasts with… Read more »

Philip Groves
Philip Groves
Reply to  Phil Groves
7 months ago

To TA readers, I have just rung Trevor and he has been very helpful – this is a work in progress and a positive contribution to inclusion in the C of E. He really listened to my ranting and was eager to learn. My reflection is that the C of E only takes note from people of status – leaders – and that this is in itself a problem. Where there is discrimination, leadership is limited to those who meet certain criteria. Those who are shamed and ignored by the church (and that definitely includes class as well as any… Read more »

Last edited 7 months ago by Philip Groves
Everard Bone
Everard Bone
Reply to  Phil Groves
7 months ago

I don’t see your problem with the word leaders, particularly as they are specified to be such in relation to inclusive networks. These are groups and associations; some constituted as charities, which do have internal structures and statutes and leaders, spokesperson and executives. Further, there are, in synod and otherwise prominent advocates of these causes that have gained recognition by their work and campaigning. Such people are if somewhat vaguely addressed as leading voices as they are prominent in leading and shaping the conversation around a given subject. Of course there are people outside such organisations, and people who detest… Read more »

Richard Pinch
Richard Pinch
Reply to  Everard Bone
7 months ago

I don’t see your problem with the word leaders, particularly as they are specified to be such in relation to inclusive networks. I don’t speak for the person to whom this comment was specifically addressed, but having raised a very similar question myself, I’ll take the liberty of giving an answer. Firstly, there are many groups which are defined purely by having something in common: people with brown hair, for example, or people who have impaired vision, or people attracted to the same sex. Some of those groups have something else in common, which is that they feel, possibly rightly,… Read more »

Last edited 7 months ago by Richard Pinch
Everard Bone
Everard Bone
Reply to  Richard Pinch
6 months ago

I do not really think I disagree with what you said. My intention was to say that I do not find of consequence if chairman of foundations, charities ex. have attributed vaguely, the vague descriptive of leaders. I am more interested in the substance and think that there should be our attention. I will quote myself again: .Regardless of language, the substantive point is surely whether such groups will manage to further their agenda in the church and whether such an agenda is good, or good only part, or bad. And if bad how such movements may be opposed, if… Read more »

Richard Pinch
Richard Pinch
Reply to  Everard Bone
6 months ago

Indeed, the nature of the agenda is the primary consideration. But I think we are also entitled to know the extent to which the claims made are representative of the social groups or merely of the people making them. Where these claims are factual, as opposed to opinions, that’s an important issue: factual claims call, in general, for evidence. If, for example, someone were to claim, as “leader” and “representative” of the brown-haired community, that brown-haired people are excluded from church activities, and hence ought to have a reserved seat on the synod: the second claim depends on the first.… Read more »

Richard Pinch
Richard Pinch
Reply to  Everard Bone
7 months ago

specified to be such in relation to inclusive networks Just a comment here on a, no doubt unwitting, equivocation. “Inclusive” means two different things in this context. One is its common-or-garden meaning, of a thing that includes, or tends or aims to include, other things or people of a certain sort. The other is a technical one, of promoting the inclusion within social structures of groups that have tended to be excluded in the past. I’m sure that all these groups are inclusive in the latter sense: indeed, that’s their raison d’etre. But it’s an equivocation to suggest that this… Read more »

Last edited 7 months ago by Richard Pinch
Everard Bone
Everard Bone
Reply to  Richard Pinch
6 months ago

I am happy you agree that the matter is the agenda. As for how representative these leaders are, it is not easy to know, and it will differ from case to case how much can be determined. Certainly those leading or being in the leadership teams of charities, foundations and the like, do represent those bodies An example: inclusive church represents a network of churches, some of them very much at the heart of the life of the church, others less, but at any rate it is possible to say that it represents a section of the church. I would… Read more »

Ordinary Vicar
Ordinary Vicar
Reply to  Trevor Wyatt
7 months ago

Is class mentioned? I find it the’ elephant in the room’ at most clergy meetings I attend. As an ordinary vicar I have been patronised and was even asked once if I was one of the cleaning staff!
I also think middle class leadership is very different to those of more ordinary people and that is rarely acknowledged. I hope it is being addressed.

Everard Bone
Everard Bone
Reply to  Ordinary Vicar
7 months ago

I guess it depends what you mean with ordinary. The majority of Britons, according to polling and economic statistics are middle class.

Ordinary vicar
Ordinary vicar
Reply to  Everard Bone
7 months ago

That’s probably true but in the church there is a hierarchy of social class which makes us under represented and often looked down on if we come from more ordinary backgrounds. I could list the comments I have had made about me and my family but wouldn’t dare.

Trevor Wyatt
Reply to  Ordinary Vicar
6 months ago

Our founding document – Journeying Together – does include economic power in the same breath as other areas of discrimination. I fully agree that “class” needs our focus.

Stephen Griffiths
Stephen Griffiths
Reply to  Trevor Wyatt
7 months ago

I assume representatives of those who identify as same sex attracted but who choose a single and celibate life are yet to be invited to join the group or have declined. I’d say they are marginalised by our culture. Or perhaps the presence of the Ozanne Foundation makes them wonder if they really will be treated with the utmost respect.

Father Ron Smith
Reply to  Stephen Griffiths
6 months ago

Stephen, this is an interesting diversion from other comments here, so deserving of special attention. Your situation is one of voluntary celibacy, and you are a ‘special gift’ to the Church and should, therefore, be included in the ‘ALL’ minorities that MOSAIC could, and perhaps should, represent. Blessings!

Trevor Wyatt
Reply to  Stephen Griffiths
6 months ago

We seek to welcome and include everyone.

Dan BD
Reply to  Stephen Griffiths
6 months ago

Not being one of MOSAIC’s steering group, I can’t speak for them; but I am part of their wider network of groups for inclusion. My perspective is this (it may or may not be shared by other people/groups I relate to): the genuine vocation of a person to celibacy is a gift from God. We must be very, very clear about this. It must be valued and respected highly, and certainly much more highly than it tends to be currently. That is why, I say, the forced or coerced celibacy of “SSA” persons by conservative churches must be resisted. It… Read more »

Jon S-D
Jon S-D
Reply to  Richard Pinch
6 months ago

Answers imho: 1st & 2nd: It’s self-selecting. No-one is being compelled to join or stopped from starting their own group. Also, clearly lots of work has already been done to build credibility and get so many existing groups/networks on-board at launch. 3rd: miscellaneous marginalised groups are surely assumed even if not specifically named. MoSAIC specifically remain open to broadening by being “keen to connect with anyone who is interested”. Finally, a gentle wondering: I wonder if by using phrases like “the blind … the lame … the mentally ill” it may imply to readers that you’re not very familiar with… Read more »

Last edited 6 months ago by Jon S-D
Richard Pinch
Richard Pinch
Reply to  Jon S-D
6 months ago

I didn’t suggest that anyone was compelled to join or not join this group — I asked about the basis to its claim to leadership and representativeness of the “full range of marginalised groups”, giving, however clumsily, some examples of groups that I thought were not. I think the assumption that they are included implicitly when they clearly are not (yet) included explicitly is a bold one. Rather than “gently wondering” about whether my use of language is sufficiently up-to-date, I would be more interested in hearing the response to the question I asked. Are the various groups I mentioned,… Read more »

Last edited 6 months ago by Richard Pinch
Jonathan S-D
Jonathan S-D
Reply to  Richard Pinch
6 months ago

(1of2) I didn’t suggest that anyone was compelled… – Exactly. I’m suggesting it’s democratic, anyone’s free to join or not. MoSAIC think they’re worthy but if no one joins, no leadership. I asked about the basis to its claim… – It seems likely their claim is somewhat based on the momentum, work and uptake already secured to build a coalition of existing groups. Regarding “full range” they’re explicitly wanting to centralise campaigning and advocacy nationally to strengthen their voice. giving, however clumsily, some examples of groups that I thought were not… – prostitutes: sex workers would come under the economic… Read more »

Richard Pinch
Richard Pinch
Reply to  Jonathan S-D
6 months ago

When you say “they started somewhere”, I’m not seeing that in their press releases but that, in the present tense, they are “a broad coalition of leaders who represent the full range of marginalised groups within the Church of England”. If they’re building a broad coalition, or aspiring to represent, or hoping to give a lead to … — that’s very different from asserting that they already do. About debt-collectors: I was, of course, attempting to find a modern-day equivalent of tax-collectors (confusingly named “publicans” in the KJV). Tax-collectors in Judaea weren’t civil servants acting in accordance with an impartial… Read more »

Jo B
Jo B
Reply to  Richard Pinch
6 months ago

Just in case the question is genuine: folk own their own self-identification and it’s simply a matter of politeness to listen to them. For example, I’m autistic, and that’s the preferred terminology for most people who share that characteristic, as opposed “person with autism”. “Disabled person” vs “person with disabilities” is similar but has specific connotations around the social model vs medical/deficit model of disability.

Richard Pinch
Richard Pinch
Reply to  Jo B
6 months ago

Of course my question was genuine. But I really do not think that Jonathan S-D self-identifies as a member of all those groups that I mentioned (or if he does, he did not say so). So he is not telling me what he prefers to be called: he’s telling me what he thinks other people ought to be called. I’m calling into question his right to tell me that my use of language about other people is wrong, and more generally, I’m suggesting that the weaponisation of common politeness with such words as “inclusive” and “humanisation” is a way of… Read more »

Jon S-D
Jon S-D
Reply to  Richard Pinch
6 months ago

– I’m afraid I’m not much interested in what’s in their press release. As well as what you quote they also state, “the movement aims to have a presence in each diocese” and “the movement is keen to connect with anyone who is interested”. I choose to interpret the entirety of their communication as a vision statement for what they hope to achieve. That’s why I focus on the fact that, regardless of their words, Mosaic will live or die by whether people choose to join or not. So, I think you’re splitting hairs on words that are a small… Read more »

Richard Pinch
Richard Pinch
Reply to  Jon S-D
6 months ago

I think the press release is misleading, you’re not interested. You agree to disagree. What else is there to say? If you’re not interested in discussing the press release, which is quoted at length at the start of this blog entry, then by all means move on to some other topic. But choosing to discuss the shortcomings of one of the other participants in this discussion, at length, is simply boring. I’m well aware of my own shortcomings and I can’t imagine that anyone else reading this blog cares about them in the slightest. There is no obvious benefit to… Read more »

Jon S-D
Jon S-D
Reply to  Richard Pinch
6 months ago

Yes. I’m feel we’re kind of on the same page now. There certainly is nothing else to say if you’re going to ask some questions, receive a variety of answers/responses from myself and others, and then mock and misrepresent us who’ve taken the time to respond. I get that by saying this you may perceive it as me sidestepping into discussing your shortcomings but, since I haven’t observed you particularly developing your perspective beyond your initial criticism and what I have observed is you belittling dialogue partners, then what else is there to talk about other than the quality of… Read more »

Richard Pinch
Richard Pinch
Reply to  Jon S-D
6 months ago

what else is there to talk about other than the quality of your approach?

Well, the topic of the blog is the Mosaic consortium, and their claims to represent to lead and represent the full range of marginalised groups to the Church. I think those claims are incorrect, and I think that’s quite relevant to the view we should take of them.

my perception has been that your words have been deliberately hurtful

Then I’m happy to tell you that your perception is mistaken.

Last edited 6 months ago by Richard Pinch
Jonathan S-D
Jonathan S-D
Reply to  Richard Pinch
6 months ago

(2of 2) Rather than “gently wondering” about whether my use of language is sufficiently up-to-date… – You seem to think that i think I look down on you with your old-fashioned words. I don’t care about that or think myself superior. I was suggesting your language has been superseded by language that isn’t dehumanising. I realise no matter how much i wasn’t to have been constructive, it was probably always going to be triggering. I get it. But if no one corrects dehumanising language, then how are we going to progress and improve the quality of our discourse? I would… Read more »

Last edited 6 months ago by Jonathan S-D
Richard Pinch
Richard Pinch
Reply to  Jonathan S-D
6 months ago

No need to worry about patronising me — I’ve been patronised by real experts and lived to tell the tale. What I have “beef” with includes people saying things which are not true, and people claiming rights and privileges on spurious grounds.

Jon S-D
Jon S-D
Reply to  Richard Pinch
6 months ago

– I feel that your comment implying that I’m far below any “real expert” and your implied sense of superiority that you’ve comfortably gone toe-to-toe with people better than me is mean and petty. I already attempted humility in acknowledging that I see myself as merely an interested layperson bystander. I’ve conversed with so many like you online before and this is where I tend to bow out. I feel that your questions aren’t genuine because my perception is that you’ve simply held your initial position and defended it hurtfully with sarcasm and put-downs. You don’t have to be that way.… Read more »

Richard Pinch
Richard Pinch
Reply to  Jon S-D
6 months ago

For those wondering what this catalogue of recriminations is all about, the handy one-line summary:

you’ve simply held your initial position and defended it

Says it all really.

Dominic Barrington
Dominic Barrington
7 months ago

It’s an interesting development. But reflecting back on life in the church over a quarter century, I do rather feel that most ‘movements’ / alliances / lobbying groups disappear rather quickly. It is good to see four deans and two archdeacons listed in the names above (and legitimize use of the word ‘senior’), but the obvious question to ask is why there are no bishops. Were any asked, or is MOSAIC deliberately avoiding asking bishops – either way it would be interesting to know. Politically, this movement yokes the controversial (ie sexuality) and areas where the church has been very… Read more »

Simon Dawson
Simon Dawson
Reply to  Dominic Barrington
7 months ago

Campaigning for a contentious issue within the church can be emotionally draining so it is no surprise that individuals or campaigning groups may burn out and fade away after a decade or so. But the issue can remain to be taken up by new groups with new energy, and the new groups will build on the work of the old groups. It is a good sign when the new supporters of any idea are increasingly senior and establishment figures. It shows that the ideas are gaining traction. Eventually the idea will be taken into the mainstream, and after a few… Read more »

Simon Drowley
Simon Drowley
Reply to  Dominic Barrington
7 months ago

The difference between sexuality on the one hand and race and disability on the other is not as straightforward as controversial versus not conflicted, but those areas where overt discrimination is both allowed and enshrined in institutional practice and those where it is still happens but is covert or subconscious. Pushing people to the margins is the same, whether it’s due to deliberate church policy or unconscious bias.

Dominic Barrington
Dominic Barrington
Reply to  Simon Drowley
7 months ago

Oh, I quite accept that. I simply meant that I don’t foresee bishops, clergy and laity fighting each other about whether or not disabled people (to take but one example) have a valid place in the church – whereas they most certainly are when it comes to gay people.

David Keen
David Keen
7 months ago

Great, yet another Anglican lobby group, because there clearly aren’t enough already. Are there elections to General Synod soon, by any chance?

Rascal T Pott
Rascal T Pott
Reply to  David Keen
7 months ago

Not that the overwhelming majority have any say in.

michael keulemans
michael keulemans
7 months ago

Perhaps the most marginalised group in the CofE is those who believe in the Holy Scriptures, say the Nicene Creed every Sunday and believe it. They are also the ones who keep the show going financially.

Simon Bravery
Simon Bravery
Reply to  michael keulemans
7 months ago

In what sense are they marginalised?

Jo B
Jo B
Reply to  michael keulemans
6 months ago

I believe the Nicene Creed, but I wouldn’t claim to “believe in” scripture. That smacks of idolatry. I believe in Jesus Christ, the Word made flesh. To put your belief in Holy Scripture rather than the one who inspired it is a serious error.

Barrie McKenzie
Barrie McKenzie
Reply to  Jo B
6 months ago

How can you know Jesus Christ in order to believe in him unless you also believe in the scriptures that reveal him? Otherwise you create a Jesus of your own imagination, who never challenges or corrects you, but simply affirms what you already believe. That’s the road to making oneself into God. No, we must believe in the authority of scripture.

Jo B
Jo B
Reply to  Barrie McKenzie
6 months ago

No, we can believe what scripture and the church tells us about Christ without believing them to be of value except in so far as they reveal God to us. In any case it is through the church that we come to know Christ. Scripture is simply one of the tools produced by the church.

Marise Hargreaves
Marise Hargreaves
7 months ago

This all looks a little top down and very clergy led – how does this empower anyone and not come off a little bit ‘look what we are doing for you’? I think I’m more used to grass roots coming together and making it happen which builds a base and develops outwards drawing people in. I’m not sure what I think about this but we shall see going forward.

Simon Dawson
Simon Dawson
Reply to  Marise Hargreaves
6 months ago

As far as my experience of working with homosexuality and the church goes, the grass roots coming together and building a base sort of stuff started back in the 80s and 90s with LGCM, Changing Attitude and Peter Tatchell etc. At that time many of the clergy involved felt it necessary to keep their activities secret. The movement has slowly developed and built a base, drawing people in, as you asked for. Now after a few decades, we have people, including many clergy, who are willing to speak publicly and vote at General Synod and at Archbishop’s Council. People who… Read more »

Cameron Martin
Cameron Martin
6 months ago

Having read this groups ( MOSIAC) intentions, I finds it interesting that it seeks to include racial justice but surprisingly or unsurprisingly no BAME person seems to be included in the initial core discussions or leadership group other than Dean Rogers Govender being invited to serve as an ambassador. As well intentioned as your aims are. As a BAME person I find this unacceptable and for far to long we have white middle class clergy/ laity seeking to represent BAME concerns. History within the Church of England has shown it does not work because our lived experience within the church… Read more »

Trevor Wyatt
Reply to  Cameron Martin
6 months ago

Cameron, I do want to see more BAME representation at all levels in MOSAIC. We are working on it. Would be hugely appreciative of anybody interested in helping us on this. If so, please email me.

David Austin
David Austin
6 months ago

I am interested in the reference to appointing 23 Diocesan Convenors – how do they differ from the Diocesan Ambassadors appointed by Inclusive Church (of which I am one) ?

51
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x