Georgia Ashwell Women and the Church The Theology of Taint and other misogyny in the Church of England
Stephen Parsons Surviving Church George Carey and the Safeguarding CDM. Time for a Fresh Look?
Duncan Dormor USPG The Church at a Crossroads
Bosco Peters Liturgy A Common Easter
I seem to remember Justin Welby in the early days of being archbishop saying that a common date for Easter would be sorted out soon. It would surely cheer up the Pope in hospital if this could be done. However I feel the chances of doing so before the Last Judgement trumpet sounds are minimal.
We are all entertained by the very notion of an ‘Ecclesiastical Moon’. Pure lunacy some would doubtless say, but Parliament had a different take entirely in 1928: The Easter Act 1928 is still in force and merely requires a process of consultation and an Order in Council to come into effect. It states: “Easter-day shall, in the calendar year next but one after the commencement of this Act and in all subsequent years, be the first Sunday after the second Saturday in April.” It is surprising to think that Parliament thought it should have any wisdom to bring to the… Read more »
There is no ”theology of taint” among traditionalists on the issue of Holy Orders. The reason why alternative episcopal provision was sought at the point where the CofE began ordaining women to the presbyterate is simple. Once ordained to the presbyterate, women would sooner or later be ordained to the episcopate. Such bishops would and do ordain women and men to the presbyterate and diaconate – they are more than mere managers. But to those who although accepting that women bishops do exercise lawful jurisdiction, cannot accept their sacramental ministry, such ordinations are invalid. This is neither to deny the… Read more »
Not sure if I understand. Women can be lawful bishops with authority to be bishops. Women can be lawfully ordained and exercise a fruitful ministry. Yet a small number think that women cannot have a sacremental ministry – communion, marriage, baptism, confession, holy orders?
Let me go and read something less confusing I was looking up the apologist John Lennox earlier today, and came on this review of his book.
https://www.ams.org/journals/bull/1989-21-02/S0273-0979-1989-15855-2/S0273-0979-1989-15855-2.pdf
Yes, that is much clearer.
Real substance? Really?
When I was in Manchester Diocese in the 1990s, a hospital chapel had two sets of consecrated bread and wine in the aumbry. One, consecrated by the female chaplain, had a pink ribbon tied round it. The other, consecrated by a male priest, had a blue ribbon. At a united service for the multi-parish benefice I was attached to, the women in the team weren’t allowed to robe or sit on the platform with the men. In Chester Diocese in the 2000s, at the diocesan clergy conferences there were separate services of Holy Communion for those who didn’t want to… Read more »
I see no reason why traditionalist people in the Society are not allowed to work and worship amongst themselves and exist in a women-clergy-free zone. It’s when they emerge from quarantine that problems can arise. The incidents you cite are certainly preposterous and unacceptable. Having ‘flying’ bishops seems quite sensible. But surely the time when such men become Diocesan bishops (like Blackburn) has passed. Traditionalists should remain in their own corner.
So here is a vision of a church in which any group that disagrees with the rest – over, say, issues of doctrine, gender, sexuality, holy orders, race/colour – can demand and expect legal protection in employment practice, personal bishops (of unblemished pedigree), buildings, stipends and pensions all paid for from central funds – and the freedom to never have to mix with the rest – but let’s call it ‘mutual flourishing’.
Traditionalists against women’s ordination were accepted under a scheme suggested by Archbishop John Habgood to help them remain under the CofE umbrella. He did not suggest having separate sectors for racists, people of different colours, those with different views on doctrine etc. These are figments of your imagination and have no bearing on this discussion.
Habgood saw this as transitional, not permanent. But if one group can have special treatment over their consciences why can’t any other? This is exactly what conservatives are now asking for over sexuality. It has everything to do with this discussion actually. It is called a ‘precedent’.
I am in favour of same-sex marriage but believe provision should be made for those who are not. To deprive conservative people of their homes and stipends paid from central funds because they hold a different view is intolerant. The Church has taught a male-only priesthood and opposite-sex marriage for most of its history. You seem to be suggesting they shouldn’t be paid, have no separate provision and should leave because times have changed.
So you are now arguing that another group should be allowed their separate corner to avoid those they disagree with – precisely what you called a ‘figment of my imagination’ in your last post. What I am missing in any of these discussions is a coherent ecclesiology. ‘That they may be one’
You seem to be arguing that everyone in the CofE should believe exactly the same things. It was never thus. Obviously there would be total unity if everyone’s beliefs coincided with yours. That would only happen if those who dissented from you left the church, had central funding withdrawn or were sacked.
I am arguing no such thing (trying to debate with you is like trying to pin jelly to wall at times). The issue – as we both know – is what to do when a significant change in ministry or doctrine happens – after due process – which leaves some feeling unable to agree or be part what the church has agreed.
Or perhaps another way forward is for everybody in the Church of England be happy to believe different things whilst remaining within the same church, in Christian fellowship. Back in 2006 my same-sex partner David and I moved to a village near Salisbury and started to worship in the village church near our new home. This turned out to be the church chosen by Bishop Timothy Dudley Smith, who had retired to Salisbury after a long and active church career. Bishop Timothy was not just a famous hymn writer, but a prominent evangelical churchman, and John Stott’s biographer and friend.… Read more »
Thank you for your moving and constructive account. This is in direct contrast to what Mr Runcorn says should take place. Blessing same-sex marriage need not involve a radical change in doctrine in the same way as women being ordained didn’t. It’s about respecting one another. There’s nothing wrong with allowing those who differ to have a place in the church where mutual flourishing is allowed. Why should people against women clergy be penalised? Or people against same-sex marriage?
This was more than blessing. I had gone through a formal legal marriage with David, and I was serving as a Licenced Lay Minister, formally authorised by my Bishop to preach, teach and Lead worship within his Diocese, whilst being a legally married homosexual man. Yet it seemed to me that Bishop Timothy did not feel himself excluded by this, nor did we. We all made the choice to be included, despite our fundamental differences, for the sake of the wider church community. The same choice of differing in fellowship is available to those against women clergy, or same sex… Read more »
They shouldn’t be penalised. I was alluding to Mr Runcorn’s objections to the provisions made for those against women’s ordination. He seems to suggest those against women’s ordination shouldn’t be funded from central funds or have legal protection.
So it’s all about mammon? Can conservatives be cashiered out? To those of us who want to see to the Building of the Kingdom, it might be worth it!
O Lord, HOW LONG shall we have to listen to this canard???
De facto patriarchy and heterosexism is NOT the same as a teaching against that which was never properly considered!
A blessed Lent to all…
And it is transitional. The Lord is taking the traditionalists in his own good time. The society parishes are, slowly but inevitably, reversing their resolutions. Patience is all it takes. Forward in Faith, understandably, are very slow to report this when it happens – but I know of 8 former Society parishes who have reversed their resolutions, mainly when they can’t find a priest, but who FiF claim are still FiF. I suspect the ~400 or so original society parishes are now nearer ~300. Give it 20 years and they’ll all be gone as the last vestiges die off. I’m… Read more »
When the legislation to ordain female priests was passed, MOW (Movement for the Ordination of Women) was wound up. Its successor, WATCH, was founded a few years later when it became clear that women were still being subjected to serious discrimination in the C of E. I’m sure that, in the unlikely event such discrimination ceases, WATCH would also be disbanded.
I do not agree with you there Janet. I know several female priests who decline to be members of WATCH, as they find to not speak for them and, in their opinion, do more damage that good. Articles such as the one posted are a good example of how a minority interest can take things too far as project an image of a world beset by misogyny when this is not an accurate reflection of the world. In our deanery our bishop, archdeacon and area dean are all female. Statistically there are still more male than female priests, but this… Read more »
Who was it who, when asked to advise about a problem, said ‘attend more funerals’ ?
It is true that there is a steady pattern of parishes reversing the resolutions – most commonly after their traditionalist priest retires or moves. This is not publicly talked about. But the number of bishops to care for this shrinking constituency has actually increased – including their presence in the House of Bishops. At an institutional level the investment is now more not less. So I think your time scale could be optimistic. 20 years was what was predicted when the provisions were first put in place. We are past 30 and no sign of an end yet. Meanwhile conservative… Read more »
I am not sure I would say that – but the hectoring tone of this article, amongst other releases by WATCH, do not reflect the reality as I have experienced it, nor many other women in the church. Are there still people who think women should not be ordained? Yes, of course there are. Will there always be some who think this? Yes, of course there will be. But I will uphold to my dying breath the right for those who genuinely believe there to be a theological argument (even if I disagree with it) that women cannot be validly… Read more »
I have picked up this thread after a weekend away, and it is an amazing mix of topics. Louisa I wonder why you feel so strongly about the ‘hectoring tone’ of Watch and why you think it portrays a world you do not recognise- and you consider it may have adverse consequences? I’m only a person sometimes in a pew, but I have known a number of female clergy who have had a very different experience to the one you describe . I googled number of female diocesan bishops before writing this and according to the Church Times late last… Read more »
It’s just been given a new name, interculturalism.
So what are you suggesting David? That traditional catholics and conservative evangelicals should leave the church? How very tolerant of you!
I don’t think conservative evangelicals would be too worried about sacramental divergence? Maybe more worried about same-sex marriage, but they are two different issues (with maybe some underlying confounding).
I have been perfectly happy to share communion in US baptist and episcopalian churches. Only time refused communion was in a very small RC service in Salamanca. I was explicitly asked whether I was RC or not.
“What you have in the CofE is Ecumenism in practice ” – this is how Tom Kitten ended the comment near the start of this thread. Although it continues to be a tragedy that denominational differences mean that not al Christians can share fully in the worship, and particularly the eucharist(communion/Lord’s Supper/Mass) , most of us are glad to be thankful for the ways we can share, even if hurt at times by occasions when we cannot. But this is why we ae still different denominations – we recognize that the denominations we are part of we do not all fully… Read more »
I’ve never thought of the sacrament of Holy Communion primarily in horizontal terms. Probably given the fact that the Body of Christ is not unified, but has been divided in the West in extreme ways after the Reformation. Your remarks — unless I mishear you — seem to make Holy Communion less a matter of our Communion with Christ and more a matter in the realm of “joining each other around the Lord’s Table.” If this is to be the governing category for Holy Communion, it is in forfeit already, looking at the big picture. The Church of England at… Read more »
I think that would be a pretty standard position — that the Eucharist is a communal act, something we do together, breaking bread together and recognising the presence of Christ together. Not something we each do as individuals. This is something that has been one of the great recoveries of the 20th century, with the Liturgial Movement, and the Parish Communion Movement, and the reforms in the Roman Catholic Church of the Second Vatican Council, and similar liturgical reforms in most main denominations, including the liturgical reform in the Church of England. Everything about it is corporate.
A pretty standard position for those who hold it to be a pretty standard position. My wife and I received communion for four years at the RCC in France with permission of the priest. That did not make us Roman Catholics. It meant we were receiving the Body and Blood of Christ in accordance with his command. The ecumenical hopefulness of the Liturgical Movement — now 50 years in the rear view mirror — did not create an ecumenical convergence. Far from it. The “communal act” aspect is communal only among those who have common ecclesial fellowship. That is what… Read more »
I find this reply rather amusing. Whenever there is a discussion about something where you claim expertise then you insist on academic rigour. As soon as there is a discussion on a topic which is not your particular expertise you treat academic rigour with disdain and go for your personal feeling. I appreciate that this is perhaps a rather ad hominem comment.
Please read more carefully. I have said nothing of the sort – nor is it what I believe.
You did say it
Should any group which disagrees with the rest have “legal protection, stipends, pensions”? I think your answer is “No”.
I think what David Runcorn actually criticised was: “a vision of a church in which any group that disagrees with the rest – over, say, issues of doctrine, gender, sexuality, holy orders, race/colour – can demand and expect legal protection in employment practice, personal bishops (of unblemished pedigree), buildings, stipends and pensions all paid for from central funds – and the freedom to never have to mix with the rest” In my opinion the key phrase was. “and the freedom never to have to mix with the rest” This was in response to your original post: “I see no reason why traditionalist… Read more »
Thank you for an accurate summary of what I was trying to say Simon.
The language of taint should be offensive to every Christian, and I think the article is designed to offend whatever your point of view, or should do. It certainly isn’t theology. Maybe sacramental theology is at the heart of the problem as I can understand why women priests would be offended. Some C of E members don’t accept Baptist ministers officiating at communion and I find this equally offensive.
Our (supposedly) evangelical – at least that was what the parish profile said – CofE church suddenly acquired a rather basic plywood box in the communion area; told it was an aumbry, a term with which I was unfamiliar, I had to ask what it was. I was told that the Rural Dean had been shocked and appalled that we did not have an aumbry.
My reply was very simple – if that was all it took to shock and appall him, he must have led an extremely sheltered life!
The sacraments are made for man, not man for the sacraments.
Indeed and Manchester too operated a two eucharist system at clergy conferences. When some of us (men as well as women) protested we were publicly rebuked by the diocesan.
In military survival training there was a point when very hungry trainees were given live rabbits to be killed by the said trainees for their next meal. It was pointed out to them that the boy rabbits had blue bows tied round their necks and the girl rabbits had pink bows around their necks.
Perhaps that was an inspiration for those chaplains in Manchester?
I recall hearing about this practice in the 1980s from a TA friend (I mean Territorial Army). I knew then I was too squeamish for the forces. But why the coloured ribbons?
Labelling for the purpose of gender discrimination? It seems very binary.
That was my thought too.
Modern research has found that over 1500 animal species display homosexual behaviour. Even Captain Scott’s scientists in the Antarctic noticed gay penguins, but they failed to put this in the published report because they did not want to cause scandal.
So it would not surprise me to find forms of gender variance in animal species, alongside homosexuality, although telling the difference simply from observed behaviour might be quite difficult.
Perhaps labels are unhelpful!
In the days when church unity was a hot topic of conversation, i remember Monsignor Bruce Kent (as he then was) telling of an aumbry with an Anglican reserved sacrament and a Roman Catholic one, separated by a pane of glass. To which a Methodist places a notice ‘In case of unity, break glass’. A joke, of course ….
The Roman Catholic chaplain in the hospital ship UGANDA during the Falklands campaign asked his Royal Navy Anglican colleague, with whom he shared a split tabernacle, ‘Do you think your Jesus talks to my Jesus?’
The RC padre ought to have been aware of the Vatican’s teaching that Anglican Orders are utterly null and void. Jesus would have been talking to himself if that doctrine held sway. However, I like the idea of the two Jesus’ gossiping away, rolling their eyes at the idiosyncrasies of human beings. Nowadays we might have a crowded aumbry and they would have to take it in turns to speak, following the rules of polite society. I wonder how female padres approach the problem of a busy tabernacle. We should be told!
The Roman Catholic chaplain was ,of course, obediently aware of the Vatican’s devotion to exclusivity but was somewhat adult about such things and had a sense of humour. Laus Deo
Does that mean that you are happy with treatment of Anglican priests by the RC Church? “You are nice, good people, who have a call from God to minister and encourage people in the faith. But your call to sacramental ministry sacramental ministry is invalid, so all the sacraments you have administered during your past and future ministry are invalid. If you wish for a sacramental ministry in the future, you must leave the C of E, be indoctrinated and reordained.” Unfortunately the women can’t do this because they would need to change sex, and that would be unacceptable in… Read more »
Good to see a mention of Trevor Huddleston. It sounds as if you were ‘admitted to the C of E’ by him when he was Bishop of Stepney.
Like I said in other comments we need to be so careful about painting a rose colored glasses view of historical Bishops.
https://religionnews.com/2013/06/25/child-abuse-allegations-mar-anniversary-of-celebrated-anglican-bishop/
No comment beyond that I have read both biographies of +Trevor.
It may be an inadvertent non sequitar, the historical record is important to acknowledge. Although unlikely , references to clerical offenders (alleged) when praising or supporting their historical record especially when a different topic is mentioned can cause upset to those reading who are directly or vicariously affected by child hood trauma. It is more than possible that other people may find mention of this historical Bishop problematic. Certainly those ordained by him can mention him but responding not to Rev Thomas point on misogyny but instead digressing to praise a historical Bishop with a complex history that could link… Read more »
Richi (whoever you are)
I simply responded to a previous mention of TH in this thread. A bust and a plaque of Huddleston are on display in Bedford, where he comes from. If he can be feted there, why not in TA?
My contributions to TA have always been concerned with facts and personal recollections. I do not want to be involved with issues such as those you raise.
Thank you Clifford, you obviously have positive memories or knowledge of a broad range of important figures within the CofE. I admire the work that Huddleston did in SA, and although history can show up the shadow side of much admired figures an acknowledgement sometimes of the complexities is appropriate. Thanks for your response Pax.
Thank you.
As I understand it, behaviour based on a belief that a woman’s orders are invalid is a breach of the Five Guiding Principles.
It surely depends what you mean by Orders. If you mean qualification to officiate and to hold office in the CofE, then to deny that qualification would be a breach of the FGP. The vicar of Dibley really is the vicar of Dibley. What traditionalists obviously believe to be invalid is her sacramental ministry. Is that a total denial of her ministry? No. Any more than traditionalists would seek to deny the ministry of the Baptist minister in Dibley. To make the point again – the FGP exist to enable mutual flourishing – and this commitment to mutual flourishing is… Read more »
Except that the flourishing is rather one-sided.
They used to speak of ”plum livings”. All equivalent posts in the modern Church of England are open to women, but hardly to traditionalists. Perhaps it’s the traditionalists who might complain of one-sided flourishing. But to the best of my knowledge they don’t. Nobody has become a priest of the Society to further his own personal ambition, any more than their grandfathers-in-faith, the Victorian Ritualist clergy.
There are still many parishes not open to women. And women whose bishop does not consider their orders valid are not offered oversight from a more sympathetic bishop. Nor are there any members of vacancy in see committees who don’t believe a man can be a bishop.
The association that has been developed in the CofE with “flourishing” troubles me. “Sacrificial service” would be better. This is because I don’t associate Christ on the cross with “flourishing”. I don’t like “legacy” either, a word which is now everywhere. Any legacy we may leave (except perhaps financial in a will)is God’s business, not ours.
The term ‘flourishing’ is not mine, the C of E adopted it to describe to a situation in which it is deemed acceptable to discriminate against women.
Yes, I agree Janet. Not your word, but CofE’s tedious word. I hear it used over and over again. Let’s drop it.
Is it possible that you are sidestepping the issue of “taint”? You seem to be defending the provision to seek alternative episcopal oversight from a man instead of a woman. “Taint” surely describes seeking a male bishop who has never ordained a woman instead of a man who has ordained a woman.
We do not provide alternative episcopal oversight in the Church of England – we provide extended oversight. The difference is very significant. I know perfectly well that some who oppose the ordination of women behave as if it is alternative oversight but at the moment it is not.
Mea culpa. My only excuse is that I am commenting from outside the CofE.
I think that is true. We began with extended sacramental care but over the years it has increasingly be seen as alternate Episcopal oversight and talk of the See of Richborough rather reinforces this idea. However the number of parishes has declined significantly, clergy are having to look after more parishes and there appears to be a fair number of vacancies. I wonder how many ordinands identify as traditional Catholics now? However we have a significant and possibly growing number of complementarians with their own bishop with a protestant understanding of holy order who for headship reasons are against women… Read more »
I have certainly heard of ‘headship’ incumbents who do not allow their women Reader colleagues (?) to preach – and who cite the FGP as support. We have in fact never made any provision for such banning of ministers from ministry.
I knew one female Reader who was banned from preaching by her new con evo incumbent. She moved parishes, and was eventually ordained.
Ive preached a long time ago, never ordained nor a reader nor anything. Maybe I wasn;t giving a ‘sermon’, just a talk at the sermon time.
I’m not sure how that relates to trained and licensed women being banned from the pulpit?
Let me try to help. Anybody who is competent and has something useful to say should be allowed to preach. If there is a group of Christians and no priest, they should go ahead and celebrate communion together, maybe using some words from the liturgy. Marriage is a legal ceremony, so only officials should be able to marry, although in USA some groups take this with some leniency (and end up with multiple partners!). So if laity can lead these activities, is it not ridiculous that ordained women (or women readers) cannot? I was taking a reductio ad absurdum approach.… Read more »
Let me try another tack. A woman has led a large organisation (a government minister, an NHS trust, a large commercial corporation, an education trust, a police commissioner, a successful entrepreneur), has lived a rich and varied life, and has diligently worshipped and studied the bible for 40 years. They have given talks at conferences to hundreds of people regularly.
Yet they are not allowed to preach in church?
What kind of malarkey is that?
Nothing in this impressive CV is evidence the person has a gift for preaching and teaching the faith. (Anymore than being the CEO of a national business is evidence someone should be a bishop). It is a particular calling and requires training. Now if they, or their church leader, wanted to test such a call my approach would be to invite them to preach a few times and seek feedback and share the work of discernment from experienced members of the congregation (people like her actually) – and then arrange some training for them.
I realise I am being provocative, but that can be useful. I was building on the idea that ordained women might not be allowed to preach, and considered the bigger implications on restricting rights to preach. I am pushing against the idea of a closed shop. Examples of secular people who would be good preachers: John Dancy, my old headmaster and greek scholar, he gave excellent sermons. John Lennox, mathematician, lectures at Wycliffe Hall My old senior tutor, used to give short sermons during said midweek communion services. Marshs Decordova, I don’t she is ordained, she would be an excellent… Read more »
I am puzzled. The CofE does not exclude non-ordained people from preaching. But yes, as you yourself say, the pre-requisite is ‘suitable qualifications and experience’. I do not understand why you think that does not include training of some sort? And who decides if someone is competent to preach?
It was just that this thread started with women being excluded from preaching. Of course, the person inviting would decide if somebody was competent or not.
I had possibly wrongly assumed there was some rule to say that non-ordained people cannot preach. I was wrong! But it makes it even more inexplicable that there have been occasions when women were excluded, unless somebody deemed them incompetent for reasons other than their sex or gender alone.
I think this train/thread has come to a wimpering halt!
In the case I cited – and in other similar ones – the trained, qualified, and licensed woman was banned from preaching by a male incumbent simply because he didn’t believe women should preach. It was not on the basis of competence. In the C of E lay people can be trained and licensed to preach and take services. They are called Readers. I believe Clive Billeness, who you referred to above, was a Reader. There is also provision for lay people who are not Readers to preach on a one-off or occasional basis. This allows for e.g. representatives of… Read more »
Thank you. You confirm what I thought, I had feared that a lay person, who had spoken at international conferences and taught and worked with colleagues over a period of decades, won awards for their contribution to their industry, and who had maintained an active Christian faithfulness and reading/study, was somehow excluded from preaching because they had not undergone ‘theological training’. It sounded very demeaning. Much worse if, as you say, not a result of competence criteria. Even worse if you did have the stamp/license of ‘theological training’. I would much rather have listened to a sermon by Clive Billeness… Read more »
because she’s Paula Vennels?
I recognise this is an expression of sentiment and not a rational argument, but fixing a date for Easter would feel like another triumph for the grey bureaucratic attitude that delights in ironing out diversity, historical quirks, and ecclesiastical uniqueness. As such, I’m against it. It would also allow the global capitalist system to have an easier time of things in regard to workers’ holidays, which is another reason to oppose such a change.
I entirely agree, though I don’t think your view is mere sentiment. If the 1928 Act were to come into effect it would destroy the integrity of the Christian liturgical year with its two distinct cycles: the Incarnation (solar) one and the Resurrection (lunar) one. Besides, the 1928 Act doesn’t actually fix the date of Easter; it merely narrows the range of possible dates on which Easter Day can fall.
The word ‘taint’ is, of course, both provocative and inaccurate. It suggests men can be tainted, by women. The fact that Georgia Ashwell includes the unspeakable Tait brothers to make a ‘theological’ point about women clergy is demeaning and undermines her argument. To compare traditionalist Anglicans with men who have been accused of rape, sex trafficking and horrible misogyny is profoundly offensive.,
Behaviour by traditionalists has all too often been deeply offensive to women, but they get away with it. When our diocesan ordained all deacons as they gathered before the service one of the males spat at one of the women, as it was so public the bishop had to tell him off, but he was still made deacon, and in due course priested. 5 guiding principles – Ho Ho Ho.
The male person could have been charged with a criminal offense. One would hope that the female deacon can still take out a CDM. Violence against others has no place in society. This behavior is also a red flag for other types of behavior . A CDM should automatically result in this individual being stood down from ministry. The behavior you walk past is the behavior you allow to continue.
A problem I perceive is that the offence was committed before ordination so it could not amount to misconduct within the CDM. Happy, as always, to be corrected by others. If we are going to be judgmental, the remedy was in the bishop’s hands but, whilst we may disagree, he evidently thought that a rebuke was sufficient!
Of course in any normal world his progress would have been placed on hold immediately & he would not even have made deacon. In CofE world the women were supposed to be really really impressed & grateful that he even got told off. Cynical me suspects that the telling off was only done because he was stupid enough to do it in front of witnesses who did not share his views.
That man should never have been ordained. But was he a traditionalist? Or just one of those clergy who cause trouble wherever they go?
“Spat”…
with deep apology, I feel the need to ask if this us true or hearsay? It’s shocking beyond words. If true it was simply unacceptable. At the very least (and too little for me) his deaconing should have been put on hold immediately.
Sadly all too True.
I don’t know whether the above account is true, but I do know that a female priest colleague was once spat at in the streets of Manchester, by a male priest.
That kind of behaviour should not be tolerated by any brand of theology. It’s disgraceful irrespective of any religious viewpoint
It certainly is. There are some opponents of women’s ordination who make it clear that their objection is not personal, and treat us with courtesy and friendliness. We can work with that. With others, it’s a visceral dislike.
Although widely practiced, spitting in the streets is a criminal offence and in this context probably a hate crime. Getting the Police and the CPS to pursue the matter might be tricky, given the burden of proof in criminal cases. She ought to have brought a complaint under the auspices of the CDM for ‘behaviour unbecoming of a cleric’ where the matter would have been decided on the balance of probability. However, CCTV is ubiquitous nowadays so if the incident had been captured it would have been easier to get this odious man in front of the magistrates. A wise… Read more »
In a diocese where life was deliberately being made difficult for ordained women, I think bringing a complaint against the offender would have damaged her more than it would have affected him. A complaint would not have got very far, and she would have been branded a troublemaker.
In a diocese historically so unfriendly to women, & a diocesan bishop who had already ‘closed’ the issue, for the woman to have pushed for CDM action would have been to make her life a nightmare, both personally & professionally. The bishop was there, as were other male priests senior in the diocese, & no further action was the name of their 5 guiding principles game.
Where are all these theologically rebellious Bishops who don’t agree with the Church’s doctrines as set forth in the Catholic creeds? And is there by any happy chance the possibility that one of them becomes the Archbishop of Canterbury?
The Greek Island of Syros is half Roman Catholic half Greek Orthodox.
Catholics on the island have special permission from the Pope to celebrate Easter on the Orthodox day. In Greece, unlike much of the Orthodox World, Christmas is celebrated on December 25th. This means the inhabitants of Syros can celebrate Christmas and Easter together.
Why not adopt this compromise Worldwide ? The Orthodox celebrate Christmas on 25th and we in the West adopt the Orthodox Easter.?
Or we could keep the Sunday after the first full moon on or after the [northern] spring equinox. That was what was ecumenically agreed 1700 years ago this very year. The difference between the date of the eastern and western Pasch is a difference in the way that the date is calculated.
So if we celebrated Easter on the Orthodox day we would be sticking to what was agreed 1700 years ago ?
You illustrate the difference between theological purity and everyday life. The important thing for Syros is that everyone celebrates Easter together. But since the discussions will be ruled by theological purity and not everyday life, Christianity will remain divided.
The west does stick to what was agreed at Nicaea, arguably more closely than the Churches of the east do. Nicaea did not specify how the date was to be determined, and neither east nor west use direct astronomical observation, but a calculated moon and a fixed date of 21 March for the equinox. The eastern calculation, adopted by the Church in about the 7th century, assumes the Julian calendar and the Metonic cycle (of moons) are accurate forever. The Julian calendar, and hence the equinox, is now 13 days out; and the lunar cycle used is now also 5… Read more »
From the mediaeval bunker I recommend reading Bede’s History of the English Church and people about the Synod of Whitby AD 664 (Book3 c25) It was held at Streanaeshalch , Abbess Hild’s monastery . It should be noted that she was on the Scottish side of the argument as was King Oswy himself. The argument was won by a youthful Wilfrid , not yet elected as the murderous bishop he became. King Oswy accepted the argument that the calculation from Nicea was based on the teaching of St Peter, who had been given the keys to the Kingdom of heaven… Read more »
I’m surprised your Russian visitor thought the Synod of Whitby had got it wrong! Again the arguments in 7th-century England were not about the definition (the Sunday after the full moon on or after the equinox) but about which tables to use to know in advance when the full moon would fall — essential for determining the date of Ash Wednesday. Rome, just like the Greeks, was by the 7th century using the tables prepared by Dionysius Exiguus about 150 years earlier, but the Celtic church used an older, even less accurate, set of tables. Several hundred years later it… Read more »
Certainly when I was staying at St Mattew’s Addis Ababa in 1985 – an Anglican chaplaincy with an international congregation – the chaplaincy simply kept Easter on the same date as the Ethiopian Orthodox Church to avoid confusion. Closer to home, the Russian Orthodox priest in Derby, who has pastoral oversight of a range of congregations, simply celebrates Christmas and Easter when his diary makes it possible. Something helpful in the Orthodox understanding of “economy”!
Duncan Dormor’s piece, challenging C of E ‘myopia’, is spot on. But will anyone with influence or authority listen and be willing to learn from the Anglican family beyond these shores and propose change ? I’d be surprised.
The only thing we’d ‘learn’ if we adopted a more ‘democratic’ system is that the squeakiest (ie richest) wheel gets the grease. We’d have a conservative Archbishop and minorities would continue to be sidelined. No thanks.
Evan, do you have first hand experience of that from another Anglican province or is it just your hunch?
I was confirmed in TEC where money talks, so one could say I have experience of it, yes. There the result was a liberal presiding bishop, but the reasoning holds. Whoever pays gets what they pay for.
Thanks Evan. So I’m interested to know, do you think there’s anything that the C of E might learn from other Anglican provinces in terms of ‘organisational culture’ as Duncan argues? And if not, why not?
I’m probably not the right person to ask, as I tend to think there’s far too much ‘democracy’ about in general. I use quotes because, as we all know, the reality is that ‘democracy’ is limited to those who have the time (and therefore usually the money) to engage with the processes of government. It’s why there are so few younger people on diocesan synods- they meet when anyone who’s not retired or has flexible hours can’t be there. It’s a particular view of ‘representation’, but not one that I think is at all representational. Better just to be honest,… Read more »
In support of Georgia Ashwell, I’m reminded of Jesus’ words to the Pharisees and Sadducees; You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in favour of the traditions of men. A young friend, working among university students tells me there is an amazing hunger to learn about the Christian faith among his peers, a thirst that neither he nor his colleagues in the Christian Union have seen before. Their Events Week saw a tremendous response in terms of inquiries, attendance and material distributed. These are intelligent young people who’ve grown up in a world in which… Read more »
That quote sounds like a win/win situation. If the Church grows it’s God’s will. If it declines it’s God’s will. Since it suggests human activity has nothing to do with it perhaps we should just do nothing.
Do theology professors still think in terms of a “hands on” transactional deity who gives an encouraging tweak here, or a discouraging slap on the wrist there, to “his” churches? I’m astonished.
BTW, coming back to CoE is like a time warp. I attended the exec meeting of my athletics club last night, we had a short talk from a member who works for Sports London and is responsible for encouraging all sports clubs in London to improve their safeguarding. She is not herself involved in active case management, although she is a trained mental health social worker. She confirmed that safeguarding refers to adults and children, although some adults may be more ‘at risk’ than others. The term ‘vulnerable’ is not used. The CoE is how many years behind the curve?… Read more »
One thing she (Helena Keenan) said was that safeguarding is ever evolving – for example digital media abuse.
https://londonsport.org/our-work/sport-welfare/
She ran a recent event
https://londonsport.org/london-sports-first-safeguarding-in-sport-week-a-powerful-step-forward/
It seems obvious that faith communities should take benefit of these specialised expert resources, or something similar.
And meanwhile there has been total silence over Stephen Parsons’ article…. This is safeguarding long delayed but I had wondered what it was that made George Carey, not mentioned by the survivors as far as I am aware, merit a CDM. I read Stephen’s piece very carefully and am still wondering. There are two very serious issues- the behaviour of the ‘core group’ , which from an outside perspective seem to have found it convenient to believe him guilty and the fact that none of them followed up with the admissions team to try and corroborate the story. I am… Read more »
As to the two points in your final paragraph, (1) yes; (2) with its track record, also arguably yes.
Several TA regulars have commented, some at length, on Stephen Parsons’ web blog and have not felt the need to repeat it here. I also was waiting until someone else had opened the batting on TA, which you have now done!
Nigel- ‘evolving’? Apparently, it’s just 100 years ago that the US state of Tennessee legislated to ban the teaching of Darwin’s theory of evolution. ‘Specialised expert resources’ to inform CofE safeguarding?- maybe in the fullness of time/ some time hence/ when the time is right/ opportune … when the can can be found in the long grass/ weeds. 2000 years on is Jesus (who he?- Ed) being heard, nor Jeremiah and prophets going back. (Ref today’s OT Lectionary reading for Morning Prayer). Safeguarding experts were not heard by General Synod; Model 4 was not even debated. No need even for… Read more »