Thinking Anglicans

Opinion – 7 November 2018

Jeremy Pemberton From the Choir Stalls Fake Participation: what is wrong with Living in Love and Faith?

Martin Sewell Archbishop Cranmer Iwerne: what did David Conner (now Dean of Windsor) and others know about John Smyth’s regime of abuse?

Stephen Parsons Surviving Church Safeguarding and the Church’s future

David Mitchell The Guardian Trust the Church of England to miss the point of Halloween

Ben Ryan LSE Religion and Global Society blog Christianism: A crude political ideology and the triumph of empty symbolism

Michael Sadgrove Woolgathering in North East England The Centenary of the Great War: Thoughts on Good Remembrance

Jeremy Morris ViaMedia.News We Will Remember Them…..All!

30
Leave a Reply

avatar
3000
6 Comment threads
24 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
16 Comment authors
Richard W. SymondsRowland WateridgeNickFather Ron SmithKate Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify of
Simon Reynolds
Guest
Simon Reynolds

David Mitchell’s piece struck a chord, not least because I was in France for Halloween and All Saints’ Day this year. The problem with the Church’s initiatives to ‘reclaim’ Halloween is that they come across as a desperately contrived attempt to do ‘something good’, that is so at odds with the prevailing cultural expectations, that they will never make much of an impact beyond those churches that are hung-up about ghouls and ghosts. The benign cultural Protestantism that the British favour, which has made us all-too-susceptible to the artful anti-Catholic agenda of American media interests that flourished in the early… Read more »

David Emmott
Guest
David Emmott

The roots of Brexit run deep.

Bill Broadhead
Guest
Bill Broadhead

Yes, and where there is antipathy towards public religious ritual, there is a similar diffidence about public religious language and discourse, e.g. ‘We don’t do God.’ But we are only too happy to ‘do’ Fr Christmas, Easter bunnies, pumpkins, skeletons, the Kardashians and all the rest of it.

Charles Clapham
Guest

Jeremy Pemberton is right to be sceptical about Living in Love and Faith, but I fear the reality is worse than he suggests. Living in Love and Faith was not, as Jeremy implies, a project hurriedly thrown together in the wake of the General Synod’s rejection of the House of Bishops 2017 report as part of a ‘new radical inclusion’. It was actually an intended project laid out, in black and white, in the very report that was rejected by the Synod. This rejected report (GS2055) suggested that the way forward was to: ‘interpret the existing law and guidance to… Read more »

Interested Observer
Guest
Interested Observer

Martin Sewell’s piece is well worth reading. It spends rather longer than is needed musing on “who knew, and when did they know?”, but it’s musing that needs to be mused. It’s worth reading. Skim down to “After his testimony about Peter Ball at IICSA, Lord Carey came under criticism”, and stop when it mentions GAFCON, that will get you the heart of it.

The comments, as is usual on Cranmer, are a cesspit.

Richard W. Symonds
Guest

I would not call the Comments on Cranmer a “cesspit” (especially as contributions have been made by someone I’ve known well all my life;) – more a ‘Curate’s Egg’. But, of course, there is a way of raising the standard of debate here: just make it a single item to discuss on TA (not 1 of 7)

John Roch
Guest
John Roch

But a ‘curate’s egg’ IS a cesspit. That’s the whole point of the cartoon: it was a bad egg.
Mutatis mutandis with ‘bad apples’.

Richard W. Symonds
Guest

Dictionary definition: ‘A Curate’s Egg’:

“A thing that is partly good and partly bad”

Origin
Early 20th century: from a cartoon in Punch (1895) depicting a meek curate who, given a stale egg at the bishop’s table, assures his host that ‘parts of it are excellent’.

Interested Observer
Guest
Interested Observer

Yes, but it’s a rather slippery metaphor and hence idiom. As OED points out, concurring with John, “Originating in a story of a meek curate who, having been given a stale egg by his episcopal host, stated that ‘parts of it’ were ‘excellent’ “. He _says_ parts of it are excellent, but in fact it’s all stale. I’m always careful about using that phrase for precisely this reason: it’s a multi-layered trope, about the unwillingness of the curate to actually tell the truth, and therefore finding a way to try to mute his disappointment. There’s a lesson for us all… Read more »

Janet Fife
Guest
Janet Fife

I thought the point was not the curate’s unwillingness to face the truth, but his fear of causing offence? He was junior, socially ‘inferior’, and expected to show deference. In some ways the Church hasn’t changed all that much!

Interested Observer
Guest
Interested Observer

Indeed. Note I said “tell the truth”, not “face the truth”.

Rowland Wateridge
Guest
Rowland Wateridge

I think the second half of your final sentence is a very valid point.
This whole subject has been debated in great detail and at great length with chapter and verse in earlier TA threads, but some people are still talking about a spurious power of lawful punishment ‘in loco parentis’ which simply does not exist, and are equally missing the point that a victim, irrespective of the victim’s age, cannot give consent to the crimes of common assault or causing actual or grievous bodily harm.

Grumpy High Churchwoman
Guest
Grumpy High Churchwoman

When was the piece Martin Sewell refers to published in Private Eye?

Richard W. Symonds
Guest

“Church News – Judge not…” – Private Eye No 1480 5 October-18 October 2018

Richard W. Symonds
Guest

“I have little doubt that the truth will be revealed, and those responsible for the cover-up will be identified. Private Eye [”Church News – Judge not…” – No.1480 5 Oct-18 Oct 2018] has already published some names behind their paywall. The sooner this is faced, the healthier it will be for everyone. I would urge all those closely associated with the Iwerne and Titus trusts and their associated projects to be asked by their followers: ‘What did you know, when did you know it, and with whom did you share the information?’”

~ Martin Sewell

Richard W. Symonds
Guest

The Private Eye article (Oct 5) relates to Revd Canon John Rees of Winckworth Sherwood, Chaplain to Her Majesty The Queen, Legal Adviser to the worldwide Anglican Consultative Council, and Provincial Registrar to the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby

Richard W. Symonds
Guest
Interested Observer
Guest
Interested Observer

It’s not the crime, it’s the cover up. It’s beyond belief that Welby didn’t know. It’s possible that amongst the credulous and uncritical HTB crowd the “John Smythe was an honourable man and I didn’t know any better and anyway I didn’t see anything untoward happen” defence is workable, but to anyone outside it looks silly. One might also think that post-Ball, Welby, having seen one ABC’s unconvincing protestations of innocence torch a reputation, a little humility might be in order. But no. Deny. Deflect. The Church of England is led by people with a lot of letters after their… Read more »

Kate
Guest
Kate

Can one bear false witness, contrary to the Commandment, by staying silent?

Nick
Guest
Nick

I’m interested by the statement about the “uncritical HTB crowd”. Welby worshipped at HTB for a few years, before the start of his calling to be a priest, over 30 years ago. Since then, he has been curate, vicar, canon, dean, bishop and archbishop. I think you over-credit HTB if you think it could have so defined an individual who has had so many other defining episodes in his life. So, is he part of the “uncritical HTB crowd”? Gumbel had some early interaction with the Iwerne Camps, but there is no evidence that he knew anything, unless you have… Read more »

Richard W. Symonds
Guest

There are at least 7 reasons why Archbishop Welby has a case to answer: 1. ++Welby has besmirched former ++George Carey by essentially ‘de-frocking’ him over the Peter Ball case. No apology is forthcoming. 2. ++Welby has besmirched wartime +George Bell by his “significant cloud” remark. No apology is forthcoming. 3. ++Welby passed the complaint of ‘Carol’ to police in 2013 – alleging sexual abuse by Bishop Bell. In 1995, her complaint had already been made to the then Bishop of Chichester, Eric Kemp, who investigated and dismissed it. 4. ++Welby has at least one senior serving bishop [Peter Forster, Bishop of Chester]… Read more »

Richard W. Symonds
Guest

“What does the Archbishop think he is doing?” ~ Peter Hitchens

https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2018/01/what-does-the-archbishop-think-he-is-doing-.html

Richard W. Symonds
Guest

“Justin Welby has asked a former Archbishop of Canterbury to step down from his current role after a report found that he and other senior figures in the Church of England ‘colluded’ with a disgraced paedophile bishop to prevent him facing criminal charges. George Carey, currently an honorary Assistant Bishop in the diocese of Oxford, has been urged to “carefully consider his position” by Justin Welby, the current Archbishop of Canterbury” ‘Lord Carey criticised by damning report which finds Church ‘colluded’ with disgraced Peter Ball to cover up sex offences’ – Daily Telegraph – June 22 2017 – Olivia Rudgard… Read more »

Richard W. Symonds
Guest

Dec 22 2017 – “Bishop Bell’s niece: Welby should resign” – Daily Telegraph – Dec 22 2017 – Olivia Rudgard]

https://richardwsymonds.wordpress.com/2017/12/22/december-22-2017-bishop-bells-niece-welby-should-resign-daily-telegraph-olivia-rudgard/

I don’t think Archbishop Welby should “consider his position” and do the honourable thing by resigning [although others have resigned for less], but I do think the Archbishop should consider doing the honourable thing by apologising – fast – especially for his monstrous “significant cloud” remark against Bishop Bell.

Rowland Wateridge
Guest
Rowland Wateridge

The victims (or perhaps we should call them survivors as recommended in Lord Carlile’s report) have instructed solicitors and there is also a pending police investigation.
A propos the two archbishops, the Dean of Windsor and others, perhaps, to quote Martin Sewell, “We should at this point remind ourselves that none of those under discussion was a direct abuser; nor is it the case that any are alleged to have know[n] of Smyth’s abuse as it was happening.”

Michael Mulhern
Guest
Michael Mulhern

I was grateful for Jeremy Morris’s consideration of the Armistice and the culture of remembrance under the banner of the Union Jack. As an Irishman, I find the beginning of November in Britain strangely amnesic. It is very telling who we are willing to remember, and who (and what) we has been erased from the collective memory. I won’t buy – or wear – a poppy (and look at the vitriol that’s been unleashed by the insecure English on the Serbian and Irish footballers, Nemanja Matic and James McClean for refusing to do so). My reason is simple. Many of… Read more »

Stanley Monkhouseo
Guest

Yes indeed, Mr Mulhern. I’m a UK citizen who lived and worked in Dublin and Portlaoise for 19 years. Portlaoise, where I was Rector, has a great republican heritage, but Remembrance Sunday ceremonies were done with propriety at the War Memorial where the fallen of Ireland in WW1 were remembered, along with those from many other nations in continuing conflicts, together with the Irish members of UN forces. There was some tub thumping, but the Irish state is still young so that’s not surprising. It was all less distasteful than the false patriotism merging with xenophobia that we see in… Read more »

John Wallace
Guest
John Wallace

I never wear a poppy, nor any other symbol, badge or icon. I do not parade my beliefs but witness to them by my discipleship. Likewise I have never joined a pressure group / clique either political as a Labour supporter or ecclesiastical as a liberal catholic although I might support their views. I need to be seen as someone without bias whom anyone can approach and receive a non-judgemental welcome in the spirit of the Gospel.

Kate
Guest
Kate

A good model, I think

Father Ron Smith
Guest

Jeremy’s thoughtful assessment of the L.L.F. initiative begs the question of how it differs from the H.o.B.’s original venture. It would appear that, in the new presentation of the H. of B.s’ original intention, there has still been no attempt to seriously involve people whose personal lives are intimately connected with the subject of its workings. If the Bishops are not prepared to openly involve people with actual experience of being intrinsically gay (or LGBT+) in their deliberations, then what real purpose will be served by the exercise of trying to understand their situation in the current promotion of ‘Living… Read more »