David Monteith ViaMedia.News Winded After the Death of LLF
Ruth Harley ViaMedia.News Living in Love and Faith: Where is the Power?
Simon Butler Inclusive Evangelicals Crumbs of Comfort: Standing together for Standalone Services
Colin Coward Unadulterated Love Sunday morning onslaught by the St Michael’s Basingstoke HTB God squad
My prediction is that for a time far fewer LGBT+ people will be called by God to the Church of England. There will be exceptions, of course, but most of those who would fight will be called to different battles elsewhere.
The piece by David Monteith needs to be sent to every bishop in the CofE to start with. And they need to send it every clergy person in their diocese. It should cause us all to hang our head in shame for what the bishops have done. What on earth did the apology in 2023 mean. They wrote this: ‘We want to apologise for the ways in which the Church of England has treated LGBTQI+ people – both those who worship in our churches and those who do not. For the times we have rejected or excluded you, and those… Read more »
I couldn’t agree more. The HoB’s performance – not least the pastoral ineptitude of the announcement itself – has been dismal. They have completely lost sight of the ‘radical new Christian inclusion’ towards which they were meant to be working. Dean David has spoken for all LGBTQIA+ members of the Church of England. He deserves to be heard.
What is so powerful about David’s essay is not so much the description of the lack of pastoral care related to LLF, but the additional descriptions of the many micro-aggressions that he and his partner have suffered, year in, year out, totally unrelated to LLF. The Bishops are not alone in their toxic treatment of LGBT people. The two things together are devastating. But David’s experience is not unique. There are many of us who could tell similar stories. I too have been told that when my husband I were to be introduced to a visiting Sudanese bishop, our relationship… Read more »
You’re right. Female priests, and sexual abuse survivors, can tell similar stories. The C of E is deeply uncaring and unpastoral, apart from at local level and with a few exceptions at higher level.
Survivors and our families do reflect the same dynamic of being treated with deep uncaring unpastoral and downright hostile attitudes. For LGBTIQ+ survivors of abuse who also remain part of the Anglican Church or wanted to reconnect this tragedy is so retraumatising. Dean David’s essay was so powerful and heartbreaking.
As could many disabled priests – the ones who tend to be overlooked in our lists of expressions of discrimination.
Andrew, it meant, it means, absolutely nothing. Points of light in the darkness there are – one or two bishops who treat us as human beings. But the hand-wringing inability of the church as a whole to turn ‘radical new Christian Inclusion’ into a policy is utterly infuriating and pathetic. Some of us kind of knew that it would never work – but we tried our hardest not to let it show, and we played the LLF game. It has failed to bring what it was meant to bring (probably because it wasn’t really designed to do that in the… Read more »
Some thoughts on the Dean’s article. 1. LLF is not dead; it is just following the synodical process required. The use of the prayers is not suppressed. 2. The hurt is on both sides and real for both those who want to change doctrine and those who want no change; both feel hurt and abandoned by this project. 3. LGBT+ people play full roles in the life of their parishes and not all agree on changing the teaching of the Church on the sacrament of marriage. 4. The people who painted the graffiti are not excluded by the church they are actively welcomed and… Read more »
Wow.
Someone writes a cry from the heart, and all you’ve got in reply is several rounds of ‘yes-butting’?
Job’s comforters sat in silence with him for seven days. Some say they’d have been better to maintain their silence a bit longer.
I increasingly wonder whether George Simm and co joined the church because they loved God or because it allowed them the best opportunity to persecute others they see as not like themselves in a way that other organisations would expressly forbid.
I think the expression is ‘Just asking for a friend?’
Dean David this weasel worded rubbish must really hurt.
I’m not going to address the nasty personal attacks for honestly sharing a heartfelt response to how we walk forward following the gospel of Jesus Christ together in our differences, only repeat the danger of “Calling people violent who are not violent is dangerous and reckless” and add to that the use of violent language or language that ridicules and dismisses, from anyone.
George: I’m a former conservative so am familiar with these arguments – I used to make them myself (although our situation was somewhat different in the Anglican Church of Canada). A few thoughts un response: Point 2: To imply that the hurt is equal on both sides is highly insensitive. Your right to a full marital life with a person you love is not in question here. And we change our minds on theological opinions all the time, so our convictions are not impermeable. But very, very few people successfully change their sexual orientation. A little pastoral sensitivity might have… Read more »
Hi Tim, thank you for your honest response, which is based on personal experiences and the feelings of people, not on the apostolic teaching of the Church. 1. It’s not insensitive that people feel just as hurt about the teaching departing from what the Church has always taught, as well as those upset with the teaching. You can talk about the power and the victimhood battle between conservatives and liberals but it’s just not that straightforward. If you are conservative on orders and marriage in the CofE you will be treated as the most problematic minority. A traditional catholic who is… Read more »
You seem to feel threatened. I wonder why?
Well, I’m tempted to try a point by point rebuttal, but we both know it will be a waste of time! Some of your points (especially the last one, which claims that our church’s numerical decline has been caused by our change of position on the ordination of women and acceptance of equal marriage), have already been addressed on this and other threads, but you have closed your ears and repeated your points as if nothing has been said. I’m done now. May God liberate all of us from the assumption that we already know what the scriptures are going… Read more »
Thank you Tim. Some have said the Dean’s reproach should be sent to all CofE bishops. I think your comments should be too.
Thank you!
But you just have addressed them.
It isn’t a cry from the heart, it is emotional manipulation
You’re really not capable of listening to LGBTQ+ folk and their experiences, are you?
You are saying all LGBT people think the same because of one letter from a cathedral dean. This in itself is discriminatory.
I am not sure that is what Jo is saying. These are the views of one person in a particularly high profile position who reflects upon his experiences.
I don’t know how to respond to a comment like that.
It’s one of those irregular verbs: I penned a cry from the heart, you are emotional, he is emotionally manipulative.
In this case I think the accusation very unfair.
I’m probably an insensitive soul, but that was my reaction too. Dean Monteith is not the first gay man to hold his position.
George, I can see honesty in your response, but not much grace. (point 7)
Re point 4, this sounds dangerously like ‘you’re welcome as long as you adapt to our culture and our way of doing things’. Maybe the ‘graffiti people’ are already followers of Jesus, model their lives on his very subversive life, and still feel very unwelcome? So many people do.
The ‘graffiti’ are stuck on, not painted.
Yes, I know. I don’t see what that has to do with the point I made.
Yes, it is nothing to do with graffiti, it is to do with the very large swathes of the population who feel excluded from the church, and hence excluded from Jesus. Or included by Jesus, but excluded from the church. My experience in recent days visiting Gloucester cathedral and Ludlow St Lawrence is that they could both do with a good clean, and some bright art work might make them more engaging. A bit of joy. Meanwhile, anybody between the ages of 12 and 60 would find nothing for them. Nice music played by street musicians around the market in… Read more »
I loved Ludlow St Lawrence when I attended the 8 AM Easter Communion in 2021 ( at the age of 55).
Well said mate. I think you have presented the picture really well. I agree totally with your points. I love and accept same sex attracted people both within and outside the C of E. I do not agree or wish for our doctrine to me changed as I agree with you that we should hold to our historical teaching on this. Beware. You will receive an avalanche of nasty rebuttals, name calling, totally one sided views from contributors on this thread. The balance that you presented in your comment will not be acceptable to this segment in the C of… Read more »
“you represent the majority of C of E members.”
[citation very much needed]
A blocking minority in Synod is not the same as a majority in the pews.
How do you define C of E members? Membership of an established church is nebulous concept.
“The majority of CofE members”? I find that unlikely, but admit that’s really guesswork. Is there any polling evidence either way?
A 2023 YouGov poll amongst “Britons who regarded themselves as belonging to the Church of England” found 48 percent in favour of same sex marriage and 36 percent against.
Thank you
Dear Dean David, Change in the Church of England does not always happen with the consent of the House of Bishops. If the leaders of the Oxford Movement had waited for the approval of bishops we would still be waiting. But because of the bravery of those pioneers, Anglo Catholic parishes flourish throughout England. One thing is now clear.The change that you and I want is not going to happen by consent: we need the bravery and disobedience that we witnessed at the end of the nineteenth century. One obstacle to that change is the peculiarly English view of what… Read more »
But the Prayers of Love and Faith are *not* marrying a same sex couple in church after a civil ceremony; they are for blessing the two people who come to church to seek that affirmation. Even this is clearly too much for conservatives, if it happens in a standalone service. I resist the term ‘bespoke’, which seems to have replaced the original wording of ‘standalone’ and which carries far more sense of a pick ‘n’ mix, make it up as you go along, service. ‘Standalone’ makes it clear that all which Synod asked for was the freedom to use PLF… Read more »
Helen, You are right that the Prayers of Love and Faith within LLF are not a marriage service, they are the blessing of a couple. But within the context that David describes, which is some form of civil disobedience to obtain public support (ecclesiastical disobedience?), then I think a marriage service and not PLF would be the appropriate liturgy to use. The wider public understand what a marriage service is, but would be confused by discussions around PLF. And according to Simon Butler it is not clear that a PLF service is unlawful anyway. I think David Hawkins is right… Read more »
Dear Helen King, I approach this from a different direction to you as I am not trained in theology and not a member of Synod. Even though I am a straight man this is extremely personal for me. I have struggled with my faith all my life and I am only a practicing Christian because of two gay clerics Paul Collier and Cherry Vann. In both cases their sexuality empowers their faith; it is not at all incidental. So I find the suggestion in “Issues in Human Sexuality” that these two holy priests are second best human beings morally repugnant.… Read more »
David, I agree with much of what you say (as a straight ally, lay woman, Synod member – not theologically trained – but mostly just as a Christian). But I wasn’t talking here about my hopes, merely about what is currently on the table. Same-sex couples being able to be married in church – that’s not even included in the discussion at the moment.
And ‘Issues’ is no longer part of the discernment and ordination process, praise God.
I am not sure about ‘Christian‘ marriage. Marriage is what human adults may choose to do. It is per se human…and may or may not be in a religious context. It is pair bonding for life, witnessed by their community, formally or informally. Christians tend to ask the blessing and witnessing of the Church. Muslims ask the blessing of the mosque etc etc. Marriage is pair bonding for life (ideally). Anti-marriage over the saddle of a Harley, committing one to the other, witnessed by fellow Hell’s Angels, is, dare I say it, marriage. It took the Church about 1000 years… Read more »
Exactly! If we count Marriage in the C of E as a sacrament, then we must ask who are the ministers of this sacrament? Unlike the Mass or the other sacraments, the ministers of this sacrament are the two individuals marrying. The priest is there simply to give them the authorised words to say to each other. Only once these vows have been exchanged does the priest proclaim that they are now married, and once she / he has done that does the Blessing of the marriage take place when the priest invites the couple to kneel and receive this… Read more »
If you’re asking how the conducting of an actual marriage of two people of the same sex is currently illegal, you need to look at the legislation that makes such civil marriages possible, and the Marriage Act 1949. Clergy who conduct marriages that they are not entitled to conduct do potentially face non-ecclesiastical penalties…
True but sad!
In a nutshell!!
The Church of England spent years and millions of pounds on LLF but I don’t recall ever seeing that point made, and certainly not put front and centre as it should be. A similar argument can be made that the Eucharist is equally a sacrament performed by those who participate. We are left then with the role of ministers being as guardians of orthodoxy- in the sense of ensuring propriety. I am much more comfortable with that than the claim that ministers are priests. I am clearly at the liberal end of the spectrum but even if we accept my… Read more »
Thankyou for your reply. The tradtional and orthodox view of the Church of England is that the only valid minister of the sacrament of the Eucharist is a Priest or Bishop – the BCP and CW are both very clear on this subject. Of course, a congregation must be present, even if it is only one other person, as the Eucharist is a communal act. The Marriage service is more formally known, by the BCP as “The Solemnisation of Holy Matrimony” ; in other words the act of making ‘solemn’ or ‘holy’ something which is already in existence. I would… Read more »
Nothing wrong with same sex love. It’s the same sex act that is the issue. There are a group of Christians that acknowledge this, being same sex attracted but choosing not to have physical relationships. Is this option not acceptable to LGBT Christians?
An option is acceptable, an obligation most certainly not.
What is “the” same sex act?
And no-one I know of has any objection to people choosing or being called to celibacy, indeed many gay Christians have sacrificed the opportunity of a relationship to serve Christ (John Bell, for example), or restricted their relationship in order to comply with the current rules. The problem is in insisting that the church enforce this as the only possible view and the only possible response to loving someone of the same sex.
So what happens if a same-sex couple marries in an Anglican Church that allows such love/equality *and* is in communion with Canterbury, say the Episcopal Church of Scotland? Is that sacrament recognized as valid by an Anglican Church in England?
I believe the CofE has traditionally punted on the question of whether marriage is a sacrament anyway. Marriage equality has already proved a challenge to the CofE’s previous understanding that there was not a substantive difference (contrary to RC teaching) between a marriage solemnised in church and one solemnised elsewhere. I suspect that whatever answer the anti-gay crowd apply to same-sex civil marriages would apply equally to marriages solemnised in church by other Anglicans.
This all adds to calls for Civil Marriage ceremony to be made the only the legal marriage, with any other ceremony (humanist, church, etc) becoming an optional extra, as is the case in many European countries. Even at the moment if you had married in a civil as opposed to a church ceremony only the most swivel-eyed raving parson would regard you as “living in sin”.
This would have an impact, but it would not in itself improve the situation for C of E clergy . They can marry legally in a civil ceremony but currently they would either lose their licence or PtO immediately, or if they were able to stay in their current role, they would not be given a licence if they moved. The removal of the hope of even a civil marriage is heart breaking.
As Rosalind says, this would not solve the predicament. It might also be complicated to do, since Church of England clergy are all registrars.
As all marriages would be Civil & Secular, clergy would only be able to exercise duties as registrar in a non-priestly role in a purely secular service. Any religious marriage service would as previously stated be separate & extra, as is the practice in countries like Germany.
Back in the day before remarriages of divorcees within the lifetime of their former spouses was permitted by the C of E some clergy would marry such people. I understand they got the full religious services
yes – clergy could legally marry a couple where one or both had ben divorced by banns if the couple lived in the parish for the necessary time. Some churches were known for having a sympathetic vicar. The difference with same sex marriages today is that the legislation was specifically drafted to prevent this happening. The priest would not just be liable to CDM (which did not exist in the same way when marriage of divorcees was the issue) but the marriage itself would be invalid. And if the legislation had not been drafted in this way , for this… Read more »
Yes. My point was that the Church’s vested interest might make the legislation more difficult to enact – given the financial interest in the fees, I’m sure the C of E would fight it tooth and nail. But I didn’t make the point clearly, so thank you.
There is a middle way. Christian marriage services in Nonconformist churches are legal marriages if (a) the building is registered for marriages; (b) a registrar is present and (c) the “contracting words” are said. Such registrar may be the minister, an authorised church member, or one brought in from the local authority. In my current church we have two authorised registrars, I as minister am not one of them – which means I don’t do the paperwork. Having said this, I’d prefer the Continental system where the religious ceremony has no legal significance, even though all concerned treat it as… Read more »
We are not registrars Janet; we can’t register births and deaths. We can solemnise marriages and fulfil some aspects of its registration process. I’ve not officiated at any marriages under the new arrangements but I understand a CofE cleric’s role has reduced.
I don’t think we fulfil any part of the registration process now. We just send in a document signed by the couple and two witnesses as a testimony that the ceremony took place. The whole registration process now takes place at the Registry Office at a later date.
Indeed, following a marriage ceremony at our church last week, the Warden pointed out that the ‘signing of the register’ in the service is in fact a symbolic ‘act’ for just that reason.
I wonder what the nearest LGBT-friendly Scottish Episcopal church is to the border? (It would be quite funny if it was in Gretna Green!)
All Saints Gretna is an option. Whether it’s the closest to the border I couldn’t say:
https://gretna.church.scot/
It is not the closest to the border, which is quite long, but the closest part of Scotland to most of England.
Presumably you are counting Coldstream as the one that is closer? I can’t think of another obvious contender.
Surely the closest church in Scotland depends which part of England you’re starting from?
Yes certainly. The closest bit of Scotland to Berwick is not Gretna. But, as I said, for MOST of England, Gretna is the closest settlement over the Scottish border. It is closer to Liverpool, Manchester, Birmingham and, probably, though not by much, London than Coldstream is
Holy Trinity, Berwick on Tweed is north of the Tweed. Is the Tweed the border there? It would be closer to the northeast of England, Yorkshire a& the Humber, and probably the East Midlands, than Gretna.
Berwick is in England and Holy Trinity is part of the diocese of Newcastle.
I’m sure that someone can do the measurements, but I still guess that from Yorkshire, the Scotch Corner, Carlisle, Gretna journey is shorter than the Newcastle to Coldstream one
Scotch Corner to Coldstream = 106 miles.
Scotch Corner to Gretna Green = 80 miles.
So unless you live in Northumberland, Gretna is closer.
The only parts of England nearer Coldstream than Gretna are Northumberland north of the A696, Newcastle, Sunderland, the Durham Coast, and that part of the North Yorkshire coast from which you drive through Middlesbrough to go north. Janet might just be nearer Coldstream (by a mile or two).
Yes. I wouldn’t go to Scotch Corner to drive north, I’d drive up the A19 through Middlesbrough and the Tyne Tunnel. So, I think, would most people from the Yorkshire coast, and possibly east Yorkshire as well.
But I’m curious – is it really only a choice between Coldstream and Gretna Green? Are there really no other Scottish Episcopal churches anywhere near the border?
If you go further in, you’ll find others. Jedburgh (once John Habgood’s church) would be the first on the middle route, for example.
Coldstream is right on the border on the north bank of the Tweed. The sign for Scotland is on the bridge. Gretna, if I recall, starts at a short distance from the Esk bridge, but is pretty much on the border. Canonbie is about half a mile from the border. Yetholm is also close.
Scotland is a lovely place and the people are friendly. Why not venture much further into the country instead of confining yourself to a brief hop across the border? Queer people could have lovely weddings in the Shetland Islands.
Newcastle to Gretna via Hexham = 66 miles
Newcastle to Coldstream = 62 miles.
Not much in it really – it depends on what you want to see on the way. They are both very scenic journeys but Gretna is not an attractive town in comparison with Coldstream.
David Monteith’s piece is powerful and heartbreaking. It reveals the depth of the betrayal by the HoB in stepping back from the ‘radical Christian inclusion’ which was promised so long ago. Shame on them! A few, here and in other threads, have bravely tried to ‘look on the bright side’ by focussing on the rejection of further ‘delegated episcopal ministry’ and on the possibility that a new ‘inclusive’ ABC might take a different line when she takes the reins. But the reality is that the HoB merely thought that further delegated episcopal ministry was no longer needed because of their… Read more »
I posted on TA a number of years ago that LLF was a kicking the can down the road exercise. Nonetheless it’s difficult to read David Monteith’s article without feeling the pain of his disappointment. Just as there has been no pastoral care in the Canterbury diocese for LGBTQ clergy, there’s been a definite silence here in York too. By their fruits ye shall know them. Apologies for homophobia and promises of radical inclusion were evidently just words. Surprisingly for evangelicals Scripture gets overlooked in their grubby power struggle. In so much as you did not do it to the… Read more »
Fr Dean. I have often heard that image but never agreed. There was no one called ‘LLF’ kicking cans. There were a number of honourable people, including bishops, who were working formidably hard to take this forward. But there were/are formidably, very well financed conservative groups, implacably opposed, who succeeded in continually slowing it down and exhausting the process. The mistake was thinking that if we kept inviting them to the table and ‘including’ them in the processes, they would come on board. The result was we kept conceding ground to them and is now clear now they had no… Read more »
Nobody asked you to “[keep] conceding ground to them”. They made it very clear that they would object to any effort to change the whole church’s doctrine of marriage, but that they would accept a separate province that retained the current doctrine – and in that case would support you in having as big a change as you’d want.
The conservatives/traditionalists/orthodox have been very open and honest about what it would take to legally change the church’s doctrine. This disappointment (for you, and relief for me) has come because the advocates for change were not so honest and open.
” they would accept a separate province that retained the current doctrine – and in that case would support you in having as big a change as you’d want.”
And how long do you think they would be satisfied with that? Wouldn’t they next demand that the archbishop of this new province have equal standing with the ABC and ABY? And that the new province be guaranteed an equal representation in General Synod? Or, even more likely (IMO) an override vote within GS?
Actually it was not at all clear that, even if granted their wee homophobic enclave, conservatives wouldn’t have still impeded any steps towards equal marriage. The demands seemed to be for the “third province” to even get the miserable little compromise of PLF.
No – nobody asked you for ‘the miserable little compromise of PLF’. (Which means it isn’t a compromise – btw)
You’re like a person who makes an amorous suggestion is rebuffed then offers holidays or cars and is still rebuffed and then goes around saying ‘what a gold digger that person is! They wanted more that even holidays and cars!’. No the person isn’t a gold-digger, you’ve been rejected.
We did not want a change in the church’s doctrine of marriage. We rejected a whole church change in the doctrine of marriage. You wouldn’t compromise on that actual disagreement.
If you give someone exactly what you ask for that you think is wrong that’s not compromise, that’s capitulation. A compromise is when you both get less than what you want. Did anyone actually want PLF? No. Marriage, equal before God, is the goal. No proposal for that was made for equal marriage, no proposal was made to change the canons. What was offered was less even than what the Church of Scotland has, which is retaining “traditional” doctrine and allowing congregations and ministers who believe otherwise to follow their conscience. The reference to a “miserable little compromise” is deliberate,… Read more »
Well said. It’s good to hear a little more balance on this one sided TA thread. A separate province would have effectively been schism. We are heading that way now as the revisionist bandwagon will, I fear, not stop rolling just because of this setback. The Genie is out of the bottle (not a theological statement- but true).
Schism is only inevitable if that is the choice you make, to separate yourself from the church. Though I am pleased to see someone admit that the “third province” nonsense was just a way to enact your schism while letting conservatives hang on to stipend, pension and vicarage, and presumably the “resource church” slush fund.
You have turned this completely on its head. The clergy ( not parishioners)who should be prepared to leave are those that have been dishonest in living with same sex partners while not practicing celibacy. These were the conditions that the Bishops, foolishly passed, that enabled acceptance of same sex attracted clergy to live together in relationship. Whatever you may say, the official position of the church was based on some misplaced honesty clause. The broadcaster Richard Coles gave an interview after retiring stating that “ of course I told my Bishop I was celibate because that is what he wanted… Read more »
“Post-Christian”?!
You are bearing false witness.
I certainly don’t agree. I don’t believe that the conservatives would ever have moderated their position. They took down Jeffrey John for goodness sake. The bishops have once again led LGBTQ people up the garden path on a futile exercise and spent a fortune in the process. The voting thresholds at General Synod have surely not come as a surprise to the bishops. David, have you asked your wife about the absence of pastoral care for LGBTQ people following the bishops’ decision?
I have offered my pennyworth. Think I will leave it there – particularly after your final comment to me which I found very inappropriate. If you have a question you want to my wife please contact her yourself.
Much criticism has been made about the group of bishops of which your wife is a member. It seems highly appropriate to know her opinion on these matters. We know yours. It is not inappropriate to ask if you could tell us if she agrees with you.
My apologies to David R if he is replying himself, but I do think the two Frs in this thread need to check their facts about who is and is not a member of the House of Bishops, the status of those who attend the House when they are Acting Diocesans, and the dates of people’s retirements. And then perhaps they may need to make other appropriate communications.
Thank you Paul.
I agree.
Firstly, she is retired. Her views are well known. Until quite recently she was one of leading episcopal voices on LLF for inclusion and marriage.
Thank you
David, I hope I speak on behalf of other users of TA in saying I am truly sorry that you have been asked on this forum for your wife’s views. I consider it deeply rude and wrong
Please don’t be put off from being present here, your own views – all that should be enquired about here – are valued, for your scholarship, for your speaking as an inclusive evangelical but above all for your very Christian humanity and wisdom.
Thank you so much Rob.
I agree.
I second that, Rob. Both David and his wife are articulate, intelligent, individuals well capable of speaking for themselves. To ask either of them to represent the views of the other in a public forum is highly inappropriate and downright rude.
Well said
I wouldn’t have a clue how to contact your wife but as far as I’m aware she doesn’t post on TA. You on the other hand do David. As you so often defend the bishops I didn’t think it unreasonable to ask you what your wife thinks of this, the latest in a long series of pastoral blunders. I’m not so green that I don’t understand why you’re being coy on the subject – but coy you are.
My last comment here. I have always been very, very careful what I post here for this reason. What you call ‘coy’ is what others call ‘professional boundaries’. Most married couples know the need for these, and so – we may hope – do priests, Father.
This line of questioning to David is highly offensive. It’s not his business to speak on behalf of his wife, whether or not you know how to contact her. It’s not about being coy, it’s about preserving appropriate boundaries. How do you think Jackie would feel if she knew that David had been discussing her views with total strangers on an internet website? I would have thought as a priest you would understand how inappropriate that would be.
Tim and Rob above are absolutely right about the questions to David. On sites such as this we speak only for ourselves and have to be wise in choosing our words in a public forum, knowing that even in a Christian context unpleasantness and judgmentalism exist. The LLF process has demonstrated that aplenty. Intrusive questions about a family member or friend’s views are inappropriate and fail to respect boundaries.
It took less than a minute on the Crockford website to find the details you were looking for. Don’t play dumb as a means of point scoring…
Once again Sam Howson’s interview, published yesterday, on YouTube, this time with Paul Martin, seems to speak right into the heart of what is being discussed here – indirectly concerning the latest set back for LLF but also more directly in relation to Colin Coward’s reflections. It’s definitely worth a listen if you have an hour or so.
https://youtu.be/a822rWVD9Rw?si=QmTZWUC-bK1GOroN
I’ve just caught up with Sam Howson’s interview with Paul Martin and really value the connections he makes and information he provides about the elements of charismatic practice that have affected my energy and health over the past two weeks, The proactive presence of people in St Michael’s Basingstoke last Sunday was persistently abusive and disturbing – and I couldn’t quite work out why. I now understand much better than did on Sunday that people repeatedly asking if they could pray for me and the insanely excessive attention I was being given as a newcomer was psychologically intrusive and upsetting.… Read more »
Those who know whereof they speak can also tell of an unhealthy power dynamic behind the scenes in “Basingstoke.Church” [sic]. Within the three years since HTB “landed” [sic], one curate suddenly moved elsewhere mid-curacy and a f-t stipendiary also left abruptly for kinder places.
Are you f-t shaming her/him?
Where do middle stump Anglicans go to church in Basingstoke I wonder? I found the video of the service pretty grim tbh..
Up the hill and up the candle, there is a nominal toleration of a ‘mixed ecology’ in the Parish. But the language of ecology presumes common ground and mutuality (:-/) .
Also, a few of the village benefices in the hinterland have welcomed some refugees.
“Basingstoke Church” – right, so there are no other churches, whatever their denomination, in the town? I’m sure there are, so the name (and resourcing) given to this group of churches will hardly endear it to everyone else.
Quite so. HTB/CRT imperialism.
LOL rather like ‘The Church of England’?
Well, I (an English Baptist!) did think of that, but didn’t dare say it.
The ‘sermon’ that Colin underwent has been published online. The Rector was an accomplished broadcaster before his rapid rise to senior leadership in the CofE [TW: scenes of manipulative preaching follow] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQyr_hJ7AxA
Just seeing the first seconds with the music kit obstructing the view of the altar is enough for me…
A drumkit in a perspex box seems de rigeur in such churches. Why don’t they just use an electronic kit where the volume is adjustable? I’d have thought that would be much less disruptive of the aesthetic. Or maybe the challenge to traditional church beauty is deliberate?
Aren’t the DAC consulted on alterations like this? What do they make of it?
Surely they cannot have received official approval for this installation? It’s patently destructive of the aesthetic (regardless of any arguments that might have been made that it’s what the work of the church needs). I mean, surely??
DACs can give less weight to aesthetic considerations in the face of mission needs. The first version was considerably more destructive, so the result is some small success.
Passed by the DAC, on the grounds of the Statement of Needs. Much of the reordering is reversible.
If you ducked out after the first seconds you will have missed the rector’s teachings to his flock. Never mind, I will summarise: Basingstoke Church is big. Big is good. Big is also expensive. You need to make out a direct debit.
“Big is good”,,,,and therein lies the whole problem.
The clock on the SDF piggy bank is running down: https://winchester.anglican.org/diocese-of-winchester-receives-1-59-million-in-funding-to-support-church-growth/ It’s very possible that an extension may be sought and granted.
I’m afraid Helen that is petty and shows some biases.
You are better than that.
What did you like about it?
Many many organs obstruct the view of the altar and nobody objects.
I was visiting Gloucester Cathedral earlier today, the organ is not obstructing it is being rebuilt!
They may ( depending on where Ur sitting obstruct the view). I haven’t seen one placed in front of the altar completely blocking it). Probably it isn’t used much. I imagine this church doesn’t major on sacramental worship.
I think you have mangled the grammar of your final sentence – but in those places in England where the organ sits on top of a screen (e.g. Carlisle, Hexham, Ripon, York, Beverley, Lincoln, Southwell, Norwich, Kings, St Albans, Westminster, Rochester, Exeter, Wells, Gloucester, Manchester…) it doesn’t obscure the view of the altar because there is an altar in the space in front of it, and another serving the worship space beyond (and often a third in the Lady Chapel beyond that). And the block to the overall view – if one subjectively thinks it’s a block – is the… Read more »
Of course I was not trying to be literal. But I thought Helen’s comment showed an underlying bias. Would she prefer electric guitars being played from the organ loft, so they don;t obstruct? remember too that I understand some evangelicals do not refer to the altar but to the table. They are reluctant to worship ornaments. I might not go so far, but I also am very hesitant to overly regard ornaments and altars. We need to acknowledge this diversity of views. Some may go so far as to say ornaments are sacrilegious. On persons or in buildings. we worship… Read more »
Apologies – Kings should not be in the list in my previous post, because, of course, it’s on a screen that separates ante-chapel from chapel (as is also the case at Trinity, and numerous other places in both the ancient universities).
At King’s an ante-chapel and a nave is a distinction without a difference. This is true of some other college chapels in that city too.
yes, I know, listened to many organ recitals there.
Have you ever been enthusiastic for any form of rock or popular music?
Even a friend, who was organ scholar at Corpus Christi (where I also auditioned for an organ scholarship but he was better than me!) was also enthusiastic for evangelical Christian rock groups, who, to my taste tend to be a bit bland.
I am not sure of the point of your question, Nigel. If you are genuinely curious about my musical tastes, that’s an irrelevance even in this wide-ranging collection of threads. If it’s a rhetorical question that implies and/or expects a negative answer, then you presume too much from a pair of comments that are entirely about building structure (and are not presupposing any particular theology of Eucharistic sacrifice in the deployment of the frequently used term ‘altar’ to refer to the holy table: the word is deployed quite broadly). You also are capable of showing your biases…
Nigel, I’ve yet to see an organ that obstructs a view of an altar. There are plenty of screens between nave and choir and high altar that obstruct the view and that have an organ atop the screen. The drumkit acoustic protective boxes in a number of the churches I’ve visited recently are universally unpleasant visual intrusions destroying the spatial unity of once beautiful churches. I am entirely in tune with Helen’s emotional reaction. Drumkit boxes and suspended screens are anathema to this architect.
Here is the Houston church I go to. I think the organ console (on which I have practised) obscures the altar, were there to be an altar!
https://www.youtube.com/live/eDQ86rLwCG4?si=cS6iS3oModJZh0zu
A service aimed at younger people, so not much meat. But there are plenty of adult services.
One person’s bias is another person’s trigger, Nigel. For me, that obstruction of the altar is taking attention away from the shared table to which Jesus invites us, and instead foregrounding human performance.
yes, I know, we all have different personal triggers. The problem is when personal triggers evolve into general opinions.
I am on a piano forum. One participant thinks Alkan is the best composer ever. I can’t stand Alkan. But we try not to push our personal opinions on each other.
this comment may need confirmation from those who know the current situation in Basingstoke, but my understanding is that the church in the centre of town and passed by hundreds of people, which used to be open all day is now locked much of the time to protect the equipment needed by the band. A theology of mission only happening in services?
Surely many churches have items far more valuable than band equipment laying around? Or there is some side room it could be stored in? I don;t think we can blame band equipment for closing churches, simply stupidity will do it well enough.
They possibly do, but they are not items as easy to dispose of as band equipment.
To be fair, other forms of worship are slowly being permitted. There’s a lot of outreach/indrag with ‘Rising Generations’ [sic]. However much these thing are not to our taste, the (self-reported) statistics suggest that new connections are being made.
i hope TA has a great variety of tastes! i do my best.
Just realised – the Baptist church up my road (where my grandson goes to pre-school nursery) has no altar, and permanently a guitar/drum kit. https://www.streathambaptist.com/ The church I go to in Houston has no altar that I remember. The magnificent organ dominates! Wide range of musical styles. https://gpch.org/ It would be truly a miracle if different traditions could respect and appreciate what each other brings (to the table). I’m not against ornate vestments and altar. I used to dress the altar at college for mid week communion, which was attended by many evangelicals in the college. When visiting Gloucester cathedral… Read more »
The church we attend – CofE evangelistic – has no ‘altar’ and the communion table can be taken down and put away when other events, like the toddler’s group, use the same room. The drum kit sits on its own carpet, and is dragged back to its cupboard after the service, for the same reasons. Ours is a 25 year old building which was created as a ‘multi role’ community church with mission in mind – church architecture, be it historic or contemporary can be both a blessing and a nuisance at the same time.
Sounds a cosmic nightmare!
There is, in fact, very little to identify it as a church at all.
Rather like Priscilla and Aquila’s house, then.
Interesting. There was a certain Dean of Lincoln who was appointed following his time at another Cathedral where he gained a reputation as a broadcaster. Was much admired by Christians of various Evangelical groups in the city (HTB hadn’t been heard of then but had no ability to make or sustain relationships with those who saw things differently. With disastrous and unpleasant consequences!
Actually he gained his reputation as a broadcaster while still in parish ministry, before his appointment as a cathedral provost. And yes, the consequences (in both cathedrals) were disastrous and unpleasant. The case was one of the main prompts for drawing up clergy disciplinary legislation.
Are we talking of Rex Davies, formerly of the WCC?
Brandon Jackson surely?
I think care was being taken not to mention names.
I have a question – is it a particularly evangelical thing to consider sermons part of a preaching ‘series’?
I just heard the language about 1 minute in, and it reminded me so much of my old church, which was evangelical, and where the vicar seemed quite fond of sermons being part of a ‘preaching series’. It’s not something I’ve heard in my current church, which seems to be a bit more Anglo-Catholic.
If I’m attempting to be fair, the use of the lectionary tends to push against a “preaching series” and as evangelicals are less inclined to use the former they have more freedom for the latter.
If I’m letting my prejudices run riot, I suspect that you need a “preaching series” to fully impose your views onto the Biblical text and inoculate the congregation against differing views.
That’s unfair, Jo. I’ve done preaching series’ over the years – for instance, I’ve done the Sermon on the Mount two or three times, I’ve done the Apostles’ Creed, the Lord’s Prayer, a Lent series based on characters from the Narnia stories, and a summer series on less well known biblical characters (Priscilla and Aquila, Naaman’s wife’s servant girl etc.). In none of these was I ‘seeking to impose my views on a biblical text’, any more than I would have if I’d stuck with the lectionary texts (which was my normal practice). One advantage of a preaching series is… Read more »
yes, your prejudices are running riot!
Surely a sermon which is based on the bible but adds tradition and reason is something to be supported?
Preferable, anyway, to a series which tries to tell us what church tradition and authority believes, without a suitable biblical exegesis.
Many evangelical churches seem to have abandoned the authorised Lectionary ….and indeed much of the Christian Year. A friend of mine covered at a Church for a communion service that had one lesson but it wasn’t from the Gospels. Common Prayer? Common Worship? All the effort out into liturgical reform yet liturgy abandoned at one end and many trad catholic parishes using the Roman rite. Ironic really.
Yes, I think the sermon series concept is an evangelical thing, either following a theme or a book of the Bible. Very common in Baptist churches! IME Methodists and URC churches, which tend not to have the same preacher each week, often follow the Lectionary.
Conversely, I notice some churches (and cathedrals) seem to think in terms of “terms”, I’m thinking of “places where they sing” and some more conservative evangelicals.Is this a hangover from public school and college chapels?
A series, such as on the sermon on the mount, or on Romans, was very common in my day. See Lloyd Jones.
I consider them an excellent idea.
Yes sermon series are a feature of evangelical churches in many denominations. It is a very useful procedure if done well and respecting the Christian year. I introduced it to the churches of which I was vicar – including an evangelical one that had seemingly never done it.
Common Worship lectionary includes encouragement to do this for some parts of the year in its ‘open season’ provision – an innovation pioneered by the late and much missed Michael Vasey.
Yes, it can be a very positive approach but CW makes it clear that using that ‘open season ‘ option has to be discussed with the PCC and so the incumbent cannot present the PCC with a decision to agree to.
It’s fairly typical of evangelicals, especially ConEvos. Gives the preacher free range to say pretty much anything and dodge the challenging readings we often find in the lectionary. Of course some of those are inconvenient for evangelicals and their approach to biblical interpretation. As for the sermon on stewardship at Basingstoke, it was crass and not the way to do it. Good communication is required. Set out in a document. Saying 130 donors (households) are giving an average of £130 per month (or whatever it was) is meaningless. The ‘sermon’ is best lay-led and needs sensitive delivery, not manipulative sound… Read more »
I am convinced that series of sermons is an evangelical thing. It is often a book of the Bible or less often, topical. In the conservative evangelical church I attend, ‘topical’ preaching often follows the chapters of a book the vicar has liked. (That is me being unkind: the book may be chosen by other means, for all I know.)
‘I am convinced that series of sermons is an evangelical thing’
Didn’t John Chrysostom do it too?
Amazing how many anti-evangelical comments are here. Not all evangelicals are the same. The ‘church year’ is not core doctrine. The altar is a table, not an altar – we have already had the one true sacrifice. Some of the churches/cathedrals I visited last week had furniture dumped in side chapels. the ceilings is some areas were glorious but looked like they had not been cleaned for centuries.
No, many of these comments are simply prejudice. Expand your minds. Accept diversity.
I am happy to accept a certain amount of diversity. But I am a member of the Church of England and I want to worship in churches that have a recognisable ethos.I am sad that diversity now has become so great that parishes are beginning to lose any shared family likeness. And I am concerned about Anglican identity which in my lifetime has become very ” fuzzy”. The Church Year may not be core doctrine( for who?). but it is something around which Church of England worship has always been based. Evangelicals in the Church of England should surely be… Read more »
This goes beyond the usual suspects. Over the last few weeks I’ve attended a sung Eucharist in what was once a Prayer Book Catholic parish (now Common Worship with vestments) and a said celebration with hymns in what used to be a straight BCP parish (now CW and stoles). In both ‘Do this in remembrance of me’ has become ‘Read this in remembrance of me.’ If you take your nose out of the book, or in the latter, your eyes off the screen, you’re lost – abandoned to the tyranny of ‘what next’. Gone is Anglican identity along with any… Read more »
I’m not sure many brides remember being walked down the aisle to a table .
You should get out more.
You have to distinguish the physical and the logical. In either case the physical object may be a table. But the role it is perceived to have may be different – a role as an altar or a role as a table. Tables can be perfectly well adorned with flowers and even a cross. But many Christians would prefer not to call it an altar because they see no role for the altar. There is no sacrifice at communion. But the term altar may remind of the one and true sacrifice. Indeed, an altar (or a table object with the… Read more »
You should get out more.
“There is no sacrifice at communion.”
Really? I don’t know which communion rite you are thinking of. I am only really familiar with the Tridentine Missal and the Book of Common Prayer, but in the Prayer of Oblation in the latter we have the following:
“this our sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving”
“ourselves, our souls and bodies to be a reasonable, holy and lively sacrifice”
“although we be unworthy to offer unto thee any sacrifice, yet we beseech thee to accept this…”
That’s a different kind of sacrifice!
There’s only ONE sacrifice. It is offered in the mass. How many sacrifices do you think there are?
Worth considering how eucharistic sacrifice is handled in modern works on sacramental theology perhaps, in ecumenical dialogues Anglicans have been involved in and how it is expressed in modern liturgies. Best to move on from the Reformation controversies and to the ecumenical agreements where there have been real gains in understanding. Rather sad much of this has not entered the ecclesial bloodstream in many cases. Useful stuff in the dialogue between Eric Mascall and Michael Green in the older work Growing into Union and I always recommend to students the Mystery of the Eucharist in the Anglican Tradition by H.R… Read more »
Pages 13-14 of ARCIC’s Final Report, 1982: “There can be no repetition of or addition to what was then accomplished once for all by Christ. …Yet God has given the eucharist to his Church as a means through which the atoning work of Christ on the cross is proclaimed and made effective in the life of the Church. …In the eucharistic prayer the church continues to make a perpetual memorial of Christ’s death, and his members, united with God and one another, give thanks for all his mercies, entreat the benefits of his passion on behalf of the whole Church,… Read more »
The thousands of brides who are married in secular settings every year surely remember their wedding days?
Yes. But they don’t usually quibble about a table. Mr Goodwin says there’s no Sacrifice during Communion. That categorical statement is just his wrong opinion. He also states brides just remember “the flowers”. That’s equal nonsense.
That there is no sacrifice during Communion (apart from sacrifice of ourselves) is a view held by many denominations. BTW, it is Dr Goodwin, not Mr. A quick google found this: https://puritanboard.com/threads/eucharist-as-sacrifice.94975/ i have no idea how reputable this is. The issue is more complex than a few words justifies, but note the link talks about Westminster and Romish errors. A link within the link: https://opc.org/BCO/DPW.html#Chapter_III has a clear exposition. It refers to the lord’s table, not an altar. One of the commentators states that there is no altar in a reformed church. Follow the link’s to Calvin’s opinion, where… Read more »
The saccharine cries from the antis that this is all about “process” and “procedure” leaves a sickening taste in the mouth, if only for the duplicity of it all. A rather inadequate fig leaf to hide behind and buy time to rally the troops. The CofE is quietly sinking beneath the waves of indifference as we drift further and further away from the society we are called to serve. We are irrelevant to the majority of people who call England home and we have yet again proven that we’ve earned this. We won’t win anyone for Christ like this.
For those who may be interested in GAFCON news from North America, the New York Times has reported that a presentment has been filed against Archbishop Stephen Wood, the primate of the Anglican Church in North America, a GAFCON member. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/23/us/anglican-church-stephen-wood.html
“The highest-ranking prelate of the Anglican Church in North America, a conservative denomination that broke from the Episcopal Church in 2009, has been formally accused of sexual harassment, plagiarism and bullying by former employees.”
Archbishop Wood has said that he does not believe the allegations in the presentment have any merit.
The original story, and a second one today, are in the Washington Post.
So we have news of a potential bad man in the American church who will have to face the consequences, if guilty, for what he has done.
What glee I detect in your bitterness towards those who oppose your wayward theology.
As this man must face the consequences so must all those who reject Godly direction and especially those who are church leaders as they have a heavy responsibility for not leading the flock astray with false teachings.
I am not gleeful about ACNA’s travails. I was friends with a number of people who joined ACNA, including several priests, two of whom became ACNA bishops. One priests who became a bishop was a member of the staff of a large TEC church I attended 30 years ago — he was a fine preacher and teacher and, apart from a couple of hot-button issues (which he did not preach on), there was little that we disagreed on theologically. He was one of the ACNA bishops that was deposed, as described in the Baptist New article, cited below. His deposition… Read more »
The ACNA have been in a mess for a long time. Numbers falling. Scandals and lawsuits multiplying. It’s the price of self righteousness.
Here is a wonderful letter that is much clearer about the nature of the Gospel than either GAFCON or The ACNA or GSFA or The Alliance in the CofE. What a wonderful testimony
https://anglican.ink/2025/10/24/an-open-letter-on-gafcons-response-to-the-appointment-of-the-archbishop-of-canterbury-designate-sarah-mullally/
Thank you for posting this.
Yes.
When our words are filled with contempt, division, or pride, we grieve the Spirit.
Indeed. We all need to be aware and careful.
You seem to be confusing the ACNA with the CofE. Andrew. In the real world ACNA membership reached an all time high of 130,000 in 2024.
Isn’t that due to other independent churches deciding to join it?
http://archive.today/2025.10.23-205126/https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/23/us/anglican-church-stephen-wood.html here’s an archived, non-paywall link for those of us who can’t read it
The Baptist News reports the presentment is against ACNA’s archbishop and primate is part of ACNA’s alleged systemic failures. https://baptistnews.com/article/acna-archbishop-faces-allegations-of-sexual-misconduct-bullying/ “The accusations against the denomination’s top leader have sent shockwaves through a church already grappling with alleged systemic failures. “Andrew Gross, the ACNA’s former communications director, told the [Washington] Post: ‘Unfortunately, the problems at the highest levels of the ACNA are deeper, wider and more entrenched than many of its own parishioners realize. This is a crisis without precedent.’ “The ACNA is still reeling from a protracted church trial against Stewart Ruch III, a bishop in the Midwest. Ruch was… Read more »
As I write this from across the sea and as an Episcopalian observer, I first say to you, David, how in awe I was (and still am) when you were appointed the Dean of Canterbury. It meant a lot to me as you replaced retired Dean Robert, a Christian leader who so helped me with the Garden Congregation. I visited and stayed at the Cathedral several days about a few months after you had been appointed. I remembered you in my prayers at the different daily services, as I could only imagine the difficulty that an openly gay dean and… Read more »
Thankyou Mary for your support of David. Like you, I admired Dean Robert and it has been surprising how often he has cropped up in churches I have visited in Shropshire and Melbourne let alone Canterbury. Dean Robert’s sexuality was surpassed by his Christian witness and I must say that after watching David on YouTube regularly for a long time I find his witness and personality also exceptional. As a hetero man I hope that David finds consolation and hope in the future, however the process will determine, and that he holds firm to his faith and continues to inspire… Read more »
Thanks to David and Ruth for powerful reflections which shed light on what has happened. I think in recent years the Church of England has become more averse to even modest change, as threats of schism have worsened. If this approach had been taken a century ago, acceptance of couples being guided by conscience on contraceptives rather than absolute prohibition, and brides not being required to promise obedience to grooms, might have been stalled for decades, whatever the human cost and damage to mission.
Indeed. And what about divorce? Now OK even for the clergy, I think?
OK even for bishops
I think this has been rehearsed before, but the analogy between these issues of these issues here is of course contestable.
This is why the C of E has rotted from the inside out. Not that this man’s feelings and thoughts are without pain and anguish. He is clearly very much troubled, angry and bitter. A wolf in sheep’s clothing? Of course he is loved by God. He should be loved and accepted in the church and not made to feel an outcast. The matter arises, not because he is in the church, where all people regardless of sin in their lives, are welcome. The matter arises because he has been elevated in leadership in the church while being openly gay… Read more »
If you genuinely think this, rather than merely venting your spleen about your inability to force people to conform to your prejudices, then surely you are honour bound to leave the CofE?
Of course it’s a problem if one can be accused of sawing off the branch on which one is sitting in the hope of becoming more comfortable. The scriptures are so much our proclaimed guide to life, our link to the tree of life, and the idea that ‘the scriptures just get it wrong’ is very hard for us rationally and emotionally and that is why so many people cleave to beliefs that bring human cost and damage. Whenever I see myself unable to agree with a proposition or attitude embedded in scripture it hurts, though I’m 81 and should… Read more »
Yes, there are indeed many difficulties in the Scripture and everyone has to make a distinction between its essential message and passages which we would struggle to apply today. Even conservatives who endorse the patriarchal or anti LGBT passages will struggle with passages on slavery and genocide. Many conservatives will claim to stand by the clear sense of the whole of Scripture but in reality no-one does that.
The Palmarian Church has ditched scripture altogether and begins the mass with the ‘Suscipe’ of the Offertory.
I believe that the problem lies not so much with Scripture but translation and interpretation by fallible humans; numerous scholars have pointed out the flaws in some readings of Paul, especially when passages are taken out of context.
I think that some scriptures, correctly translated and interpreted, raise serious problems!
The King, our supreme Governor and supreme commander of our armed forces, today dedicated a memorial to gay members of those forces who were so long ill-treated, insulted in respect of their deepest feelings and threatened in respect of their careers, and that, it now seems, without good reason. The Church solidly maintains that there is something deeply wrong spiritually with gay people and wrong morally unless they refrain from things sexual, not offering reasons – commands, even scriptural ones, not being by and in themselves reasons for what is commanded. We don’t seem committed to the Catholic/Scholastic vaguely Aristotelian… Read more »
There is a REASON for commending scriptural COMMANDS – namely the importance of OBEDIENCE to GOD.
You mean obedience to what YOU say scripture means.
You will never concede will you. Over the centuries people have tried to distort scripture so you are not a new phenomenon- just wrong! The good news is we have retained orthodoxy for the time being at least.
Imposing a (nominal) role of ecclesiastical leadership on the head of state of a largely secular and pluralistic nation inevitably leads to institutional inconsistency. Last week, he met the Pope, this week he is present at the unveiling of a monument to LGBTQ members of the armed forces.
The King has tried to square the circle by talking about being a defender of faith rather than the Faith.
The Church of England and its Supreme Governor have long practised a studied ambiguity. The monarch becomes Presbyterian as the Royal train (or car, helicopter etc) passes Carlisle on the way north and becomes Anglican again as Gretna swishes past the other way. They are Governor of a church that claims to be both Catholic and Reformed, that for centuries refused to ordain women but could accommodate a female SG. A church that maintains that marriage is lifelong but will solemnise marriages where a former spouse still lives. One former Supreme Governor is claimed to have prevaricated on the Eucharist… Read more »
Didn’t Queen Victoria enquire whether she should be a Muslim too if she visited India as Empress?
I’m glad to see someone else picked that up on tonight’s news as well, and made a comment. With Charles as king, and armed forces head, honouring gay service people, is he not going to spot the inconsistency with his also being head of an homophobic institution? I read Dean David’s article when it first appeared and, as best I can, followed the debate here – like Helen and others I could feel his pain. To me this issue highlights the immense inconsistencies inherent in some Christian attitudes – yes, we say, God is a loving father, whose son said… Read more »
Thanks for posting this about the LGBT Armed Forces memorial. There is more than one lesson to taken from this. In a couple of weeks I will be proudly wearing my Pride Poppy badge which was issued to me by the Royal British Legion a few years back. https://www.poppyshop.org.uk/products/pride-poppy-badge? The change in the Armed Forces attitude to LGBT people, within only two decades, is remarkable. But that change did not come from the top, but was enforced by lowly campaigners against significant opposition. In about 1995 a small group of about 15 ex armed forces people, who had been sacked… Read more »
We do not have a supreme commander of UK armed forces in the same sense that POTUS is C-in-C in USA. Charles is merely titular head of armed forces, and naval officers – unlike other services – do not even make any oath of allegiance (something that enormously impressed former German officers of WW2 era).
I think yesterday’s sermon from the Dean of Salisbury should be listened to by all with opinions about equal marriage and LGBT+ people in the Anglican communion
A Terminal Uniqueness – Salisbury Cathedral
It’s quite elegant but I don’t really discern the argument. The ‘Publican’ in the Temple recognises his existential sinfulness and goes down to his house justified but does not, as far as we are told, resign from his occupation. Many people would applaud homosexuals who lament their sin but admit that they will always be drawn to it – many have accepted that view of themselves I think. But those who want prayers of acceptance for gay relationships think that those relationships are not sinful at all but valid expressions of human and theological love. It’s also true that we… Read more »
And Christians wonder why they and their intolerant views are increasingly seen as out of place in modern Britain.
I support the conclusion of the argument without so far seeing its validity. It’s important in logic to distinguish these two.
Also important to note, I think, that ‘I ought to obey the command’ does not mean ‘I can see reasons why the command is right’
I would encourage all who are wrestling with Equal Marriage and LGBT+ rights and dignities in the Anglican Communion should ponder the prophetic and courageous words of the Dean of Salisbury in yesterdays sermon.
A Terminal Uniqueness – Salisbury Cathedral
Too old to genuflect, thank you for posting this link. I found it inspirational and his decisive voice and words were meritorious.
I am profoundly thankful to God for David Monteith’s public witness, and for that of Mark Oakley in his sermon at Southwark Cathedral last Sunday. They stand courageously for all that is good and true and lovely in the gospel at great personal cost, and their stories stand for those of so many others who have been silenced, sidelined, and taken for granted by other Christians. Could we have avoided the whole LLF debacle simply by enacting the teaching of the Church of England in Article XXXII: “Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, are not commanded by God’s Law, either to vow… Read more »
Thank you, Peter! Wisdom indeed…
I don’t follow most things here in detail any longer. I skimmed through the comments, not reading everything. The interesting thing was I often couldn’t tell whether a comment was written by someone who is liberal or someone who claims to be orthodox. The gist is “X isn’t how I like it” or “how I remember it” or “how it should be’.
Double century alert! Nearly 200 comments at the time of writing. When was the last time a TA post generated comments that passed that milestone?
Five weeks ago! I should look before I ask…