This letter with 31 signatures on it has been posted at the website of the former Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin.
The list includes a number of Church of England bishops:
The Most Rev. Peter Jensen, Archbishop of Sydney
The Rt. Rev. Matthias Medadues-Badohu, Bishop of Ho
The Rt. Rev. Michael Nazir-Ali, Bishop of Rochester
The Rt. Rev. Gerard Mpango, Bishop of Western Tanganyika
The Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan, Bishop of Pittsburgh
The Rt. Rev. Ross Davies, Bishop of The Murray
The Rt. Rev. Keith L Ackerman, Bishop of Quincy
The Rt. Rev. Peter Beckwith, Bishop of Springfield
The Rt. Rev. A. Ewin Ratteray, Bishop of Bermuda
The Rt. Rev. Michael Hough, Bishop of Ballarat
The Rt. Rev. John Broadhurst, Bishop of Fulham
The Rt. Rev. Martyn Jarrett, Bishop of Beverley*
The Rt. Rev. John Goddard, Bishop of Burnley
The Rt. Rev. Keith Newton, Bishop of Richborough*
The Rt. Rev. Robert Forsyth, Bishop of South Sydney
The Rt. Rev. Andrew Burnham, Bishop of Ebbsfleet*
The Rt. Rev. Lindsay Urwin, Bishop of Horsham
The Rt. Rev. Wallace Benn, Bishop of Lewes
The Rt. Rev. Henry Scriven, Assistant Bishop, Diocese of Pittsburgh
The Rt. Rev. Bill Atwood, Province of Kenya
The Rt. Rev. Martyn Minns, Convocation of Anglicans in North America
The Rt. Rev. David Anderson, Convocation of Anglicans in North America
The Rt. Rev. John Gaisford, lately Bishop of Beverley RETIRED*
The Rt. Rev. Edward MacBurney, lately Bishop of Quincy
The Rt. Rev. Roger Jupp, lately Bishop of Popondota
The Rt. Rev. David Silk, lately Bishop of Ballarat
The Rt. Rev. Nöel Jones, lately Bishop of Sodor and Man RETIRED
The Rt. Rev. Edwin Barnes, lately Bishop of Richborough RETIRED*
The Rt. Rev. William Wantland, lately Bishop of Eau Claire
The Rt. Rev. Donald Parsons, lately Bishop of Quincy
Among the Church of England bishops, one is a diocesan bishop, the others are either suffragans, or retired bishops, and several are current or former Provincial Episcopal Visitors.
These English bishops have behaved scandalously, and should all be suspended. Can’t General Synod or somebody censure them in some way?
The presence of current and former flying bishops makes one wonder whether this is all part of a cunning plan to get a third province by the back door. Its hardly ‘Catholic’ is it? But then Anglo Catholics aren’t known for their catholicity. And what a curious mixture. Does the present Bishop of Ebbsfleet or any of the other other PEVs share anything but the title of Bishop with Peter Jensen. It’s a completely different religion. And even curiouser. What stange bed-fellows they make with the misogynistic and (probably?) closet gay-anti-women tendency of the C of E cuddling up to… Read more »
This introductory statement contains an unintended – but rather significant – error: “This letter with 31 signatures on it has been posted at the website of the former Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin.” There is no “former Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin” because the Episcopal Church makes no canonical provision for a parish – let alone a diocese – to leave the Church and retain property or assets held in trust for the larger Church. Quite the opposite, in fact. Thus, because the Diocesan Bishop of San Joaquin and many (perhaps most) local clergy and laypeople have announced that they… Read more »
They don’t come in any sort of order, do they?
Ballarat I know is in Australia (Thanks to S. Holmes Esq.), but what of the others? Any Americans?
To Goran:
Pittsburgh, Quincy, Springfield
Christopher, thanks. Of course I know that and so do most who read this. The point I was intending to make was that the website is operated by those who have announced their departure, rather than by those who have announced their staying put.
I’ll think of some clearer way to express this…
Richard Ashby wrote:
“What stange bed-fellows they make with the misogynistic and (probably?) closet gay-anti-women tendency of the C of E cuddling up to the gay haters.”
Not probably, Richard. There is certainly at least one gay bishop in the list.
Strange bed-fellow indeed, to be cuddling up with the gay haters.
…and how many WOMEN signed this?
Colin Coward – “There is certainly at least one gay bishop in the list”.
Is that based on the 1 in 10 people are gay statistic, or is one of the signatories known to be gay but closeted?
Stephen, it’s based on the knowledge that one of the signatories is gay and, apparently to those in many parts of the CofE, closeted. Well known in other parts, however.
The active TEC bishops noted are no surprise: all would like to take the same step (although one was stalled in diocesan convention). It’s also interesting that the CANA bishops so style themselves, and not as bishops of the Church of Nigeria – Anglican. They seem to presume that a new province, and their leadership of it, is a foregone conclusion.
How bishops who believe in the real presence, the eucharistic sacrifice, baptismal regeneration , prayers for the dead and to the saints can join with evengelicals who repudiate those as un-Anglican and a betrayal of the 39 articles, and then pretend they are all orthodox…shows the holes in the bottom of the good ship Gafcon.
Saddened to see my diocesan bishop in this list. But also brought up short. + Michael Nazir-Ali of Rochester is no fellow traveller with the flying bishops, for example. I’m left wondering what the purpose of this declaration is. Who is being addressed? It’s not really San Joaquin, that’s for sure. Is this meant to put pressure on ++ Canterbury, e.g. around Lambeth Conference invites?
“How bishops who believe in the real presence, the eucharistic sacrifice, baptismal regeneration , prayers for the dead and to the saints can join with evengelicals who repudiate those as un-Anglican and a betrayal of the 39 articles, and then pretend they are all orthodox…shows the holes in the bottom of the good ship Gafcon.”— Robert Ian Williams
You can say that again! It boggles the mind!
It may seem puzzling that a non-celibate gay bishop would sign the letter. The contrast between the open, transparent Bishop of New Hampshire and the more subdued gays of the Anglo-Catholic wing of the C of E shows the rich diversity of expression amongst gay Anglicans. The main difference between TEC and the C of E seems to be that the former values transparency, the latter favours discretion. But the UK has undergone a huge social revolution since the last Lambeth: openly gay partnered people are to be found in prominent roles in most areas of public life. Why not… Read more »
There are four Australians in the list: Archbishop Jensen and his assistant, Robert Forsyth (South Sydney), and two diocesan bishops (Ross Davies of the Murray and Michael Hough of Ballarat). There are two others associated with this part of the world: David Silk, the retired bishop of Ballarat who has returned to the UK, and Roger Jupp who is a retired bishop of the church in Papua New Guinea. The first two are, of course, radical conservative evangelicals. The others are all, I think, of the ‘Forward in Faith integrity’ (as they would no doubt put it). The dioceses of… Read more »
Like Philip French I’m saddened, but not surprised, to see my Diocesan’s name among the signatories of this letter. At a recent visitation I challenged him regarding his support of Bp Robert Duncan’s flirtation with the Southern Cone.
However, it irks me that he is constantly asserting that the local Church is focused in the person of the Bishop, while making these forays into other lands. My concern is that his intervention is interpreted as having the support of his diocese. I for one disagree with him fundamentally. And I’m sure that *I* am not alone!
For those who wonder how far an English bishop can go in supporting border crossing, let’s recall the General Synod question and answer linked by Thinking Anglicans a couple of years ago: 22. Mr Gerry O’Brien (Rochester) asked the Secretary General: Is the Secretary General aware of any legal or other constraints which might inhibit a diocesan bishop in the Church of England from offering episcopal care to those outside the area of his territorial jurisdiction? The Secretary General: Canon C 18 provides for every bishop to be ‘the chief pastor of all that are within his diocese’. The effect… Read more »
Thank you for the clarification Colin. How any one of the signatories in support of literalist “bible based orthodoxy” can be gay when his cohorts denounce homosexuality as a sin is disingenuous at best and hypocritical at worst. Rather reminds me of the case of Ted Haggard last year.
Like Nicholas and Philip, I’m very saddened to see my diocesan on the list.
Hugh of Lincoln wrote:
“It may seem puzzling that a non-celibate gay bishop would sign the letter…”
Granted; but it might be that a celibate gay bishop might have felt they were able to sign it?
Referring back to Hugh of Lincoln’s comment about “gay Anglo-Catholics … sheltering in the safety of the closet”. The closet isn’t a safe place. The closet is a place of fear. It’s where you are when you think your sexual identity is something other people will react against and reject you for. It’s the place you hide when you have yet to come to terms with yourself and love the whole of yourself as created and loved unconditionally by God. It’s a place where you live, terrified that someone will guess you are gay, dare to ask the question, or… Read more »
Wasn’t there some kind of movement afoot in the
Diocese of the Murray to have +Davies removed?
Something Anglicans Online linked to from the Advertiser…
Has anything come of that?
“Granted; but it might be that a celibate gay bishop might have felt they were able to sign it?”
Because the church was so kind to Jeffrey John?
Let’s not forget that this particular bishop is clearly not out, so he does not feel confident at all.
Oriscus I don’t know of any move to have Bishop Davies removed (but I’m not really in a postion to know or find out these days). The diocesan website has some reference to what seems to have been an issue about one of the clergy in the diocese, but it does not seem to have anything to do with the bishop. Bishop Davies is, however, a bit of an outsider in the Australian church. He has close ties with the Traditional Anglican Communion, having given at least one of their Australian bishops (David Chislett) canonical residence in his diocese. I… Read more »
“The main difference between TEC and the C of E seems to be that the former values transparency, the latter favours discretion . . . the existence of discreet non-celibate gay bishops”
Oh come now, Hugh: “discretion” is marching in the Pride parade in your street clothes, not leather harness and feather boa.
What you’re talking about (at least w/ the signer of this statement) is HYPOCRISY.
Old Testament or New, hypocrisy is a SIN (and so is looking the other way at it, as do the straight signers of the statement, who welcome the signature of the closet case!)
Oriscus – yes, there have been some *issues* in the diocese of the Murray, and +Davies has not been very willing to participate in any process to resolve them. Check this out:
http://www.voiceofthelaity.com/
By the way the good ship Gafcon has a time bomb hidden in the hold. Its called lay presidency…but its being cleverly hidden and will not be set off until after Lambeth 2008.
If people want to scupper the good ship GAFCON, the best way is to expose the time bomb threat, and demand that an assurance is given that no province or diocese will move on this
Then you have checkmate with the gay blessers.
Apparently there is already de facto lay presidency in Sydney…which is incredible when you consider how the orthodox bemoan non sanctioned gay blessings.
I am surprised that the publicised count of gay signatories amongst the bishops is set at one. Is this simply because we are not meant to count those who are not employed as bishops in their present posts? It does seem that opposition to the ordination of women trumps all else in some circles. That Bishop Benn was chosen by the former Bishop of Chichester was due solely to that. Theologically they had and have nothing in common. I pray that Dr. Kemp will have the opportunity of repenting the power he has given to those who wish to ‘complete… Read more »
Robert Ian Williams
Are you suggesting that those coming together in Gafcon are unaware of this “time bomb”?
Or is it a case of “don’t ask don’t tell”?
Yes Erika you are absolutelty right…thats what makes it so sickening. One can respect an opponent for a sincerely held view, but they are
dressing theirs up as Orthodox and BIblical…it is self deception (willingly entered into).
The Good ship Gafcon may have the lay presidency time-bomb ticking…but it will also hit an iceberg called self-deception
“it will also hit an iceberg called self-deception”
It already has. Let’s give them the point for the sake of this post: homosexuality is sinful. They believe this to be a part of the Gospel. They believe this so strongly, that they have convinced themselves that lies, half truths, hyperbole, reviling of those who disagreee, construction of elaborate persecution myths to manipulate the weak, propaganda, all these things are also part of the Gospel, or at least part of how one spreads the Gospel. This is profound self-deception, don’t you think?