Ruth Gledhill has a report in today’s Times Bishop is abandoned in deepest Africa
and now also this blog article: Kenya cancels guest programme for Chelmsford.
A further article has appeared in the Nairobi press:
Nation Anglicans disown bishop over gay claims
The Chelmsford Anglican Mainstream website is here. Their first press release announcement complaining about their bishop’s association with Changing Attitude is here: Bishop of Chelmsford new patron of ‘Changing Attitude’
Further reports are now published:
BBC Gay support bishop’s Kenya snub
Telegraph Gay-friendly bishop marooned in Africa
See also Dave Walker’s cartoon blog entry
Can I just make a correction? The web article at http://freespace.virgin.net/j.p.richardson/patron.html about John Gladwin becoming a patron of Changing Attitude was NOT a “press release” as stated above. It was simply an article which I wrote (I suppose it is a ‘blog’) for the CAM website, and the only notice drawn to it was the regular update e-mail that goes to members of the CAM website list (about 140).
Dave Walker gets it precisely right, as usual… ;-/
Dear John, you also stated that “Archbishop Rowan Williams is listed amongst the Trustees”. Do you know it is him ? Simon says it is another Rowan Williams..
Andrew Goddard drew my attention to the Chelmsford Anglican Mainstream web site, where it was confidently stated that Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury, had been a trustee of Changing Attitude. Andrew thought I should put the record straight before the misinformation created more problems for anyone – Rowan especially. It is another example of the way in which totally false information finds its way into the public realm and then becomes accepted as truth. It may not be solely conservative evangelicals hostile to the inclusion of LGBT people in the Anglican Church who do this, but I know we repeatedly… Read more »
I’ve noted the comment about “Archbishop Rowan Williams”. Not being absolutely sure it is he, I’ve deleted that reference from the page. Thanks for the observation.
PS I can’t see how the news that the Archbishop of Canterbury is a patron of Changing Attitude would qualify as ‘hostile information’ against that organization. I would have thought that, were it true, it would be something of a coup! It just might be construed as hostile against the Arhcbishop of Canterbury by some people (eg me), but surely the whole point is to have as big a list of ‘big name’ trustees and patrons as possible. Anyway, it was a mistake, and so Changing Attitude must sadly admit it is not ‘the Rowan Williams’ just as my namesake… Read more »
PPS There’s a mistake on this page which was only corrected when I pointed out that the article referred to was not a “press release”. Not sure what this means about how much else you can trust on this website. 😉
Colin, I suspect that many people have drawn the natural assumption from your listing of trustees that the Rowan Williams listed is the same as the Archbishop. Given that it is a relatively unusual name you might have avoided any confusion (and trouble for the Archbishop) by finding some way to indicate that the two Rowan Williams are not one and the same. Given John Richardson’s prompt response I hope you will withdraw your accusations of misinformation and admit that it is a pretty natural, honest mistake to make.
Andrew and John, I get things wrong along with everyone else, but I have learnt in the 10 years of Changing Attitude to attend as carefully as possible to what I read and listen as carefully as I can to what people really say. First, Andrew, you refer to the elusive Rowan Williams as a patron, compounding the error. The Rowan Williams involved with Changing Attitude was a trustee. The said person’s name changed during the time they were a patron, and we listed the name as recorded for the Charity Commissioners. We could indeed have made it clear that… Read more »
Hmmmm …. John Richardson’s failure to check if this Rowan Williams was the Archbishop of Canterbury was, considering the mischief that is being wrought at this time, “either naive or perfidious in the extreme” …..
Colin, he is not Right, just Most of the time …..
‘The said person’s name changed during the time they were a patron.’
Colin, is this Rowan Williams male or female? (I knew a girl called Rowan once.)You could have indicated that with a ‘Mr’ or ‘Ms’, or maybe used his/her middle initials, the way things are done stateside (‘Michael J. Fox’, ‘George W. Bush’) to distinguish otherwise same names.
What did you seriously expect people to think if you listed a ‘Rowan Williams’ on your Anglican website? I understand there is an Anglican priest over in London called George Bush, but I don’t think confusion would arise over that!
Can I opt for perfidious? It sounds better than naive in the extreme.
Probably my final thought on the matter, but … supposing in my article about +John Gladwin’s patronage of CA I’d just put at the end “Rowan Williams is listed as a Trustee”? I wonder what conclusion readers would have drawn. It would have been completely accurate – indeed, it would have been simply what is says on the CA website. In the total context, however, might it not have been just a tad confusing on my part? A small amendment on the CA website (eg to Mr if appropriate) might actually be helpful to others who might make the same… Read more »
But given that neither John or Andrew believe that people who hold views similar to those of Changing Attitude should be part of the church anyway, why should they be seen as anything other than hostile?
Colin Coward wrote: “First, Andrew, you refer to the elusive Rowan Williams as a patron, compounding the error.”
I’m not denying that I may have done so, but I can’t recall doing so. Could you let me know where and when I’ve referred to Rowan Williams as a patron of Changing Attitude? If not I’ll assume it was an honest mistake.
I would have thought Changing Attitude having the Most Revd Dr Rowan Williams as a trustee was as unlikely as the George Bush, priest in London, also being President of the USA. It didn’t occur to me that the Archbishop of Canterbury, who is a very busy man, would be confused with someone who is a trustee of Changing Attitude. The Archbishop of Canterbury has been very clear about his commitment to the teaching of the church as expressed in ‘Issues’, 1.10 and Windsor and if he were really a trustee of Changing Attitude, this would have become a major… Read more »
I think the important thing is to be “above reproach” and CA have been correct to clarify there are two people sharing the same name; so that ABC is not unknowingly co-opted by propagandists. Two articles have raised in my mind is when is one a “conscientious objector” or a “sinful heretic”? http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/content/news_syndication/article_060525kenya.shtml gives a summary of the issues and how GLBT tolerant John Gladwin has been deprived the chance to even talk to in Kenya. This raises questions about the viability of the “Covenant for Unity” as alluded to the in the latest Church Newspaper: http://www.churchnewspaper.com/news.php?read=on&number_key=5821&title=Covenant%20hope%20for%20unity One thing that… Read more »
‘The difficulty for the Rowan Williams who lives in Lambeth Palace (for whom I have a lot of sympathy) and the problem for members of Anglican Mainstream, is that the CofE has some mainstream diocesan bishops who are as gay-friendly as many in ECUSA – and why not, my friends?’ I know the English are obessed with class, but what does ‘mainstream diocesan’ mean in England? Are some dioceses (or bishops) ‘mainstream’ and others ‘tributaries’? And what is wrong with it? Nothing – if you want to see the same kind of schisms that have rent ECUSA and ACC. Sadly,… Read more »
Peter, I was just trying to reclaim the word mainstream from a fringe group in the Church – Anglican Mainstream. That’s a naughty statement, but members of Anglican Mainstream are no more mainstream than supporters of Changing Attitude, and certainly not more mainstream than ALL the members of our House of Bishops. There is no such thing as a mainstream Anglican who is closer to the centre than everyone else. Anglicanism isn’t like that, is it, and I want to rescue the Church from its lurch towards partisan extremism as much as I want to advocate the full inclusion of… Read more »
Colin Coward wrote: “We have bishops who are prepared to be visibly supportive of the dignity of LGBT people and recognise that our place in the Church is not simply to be the object of Church reports and a ‘listening process’ but to be granted equal dignity and equality with heterosexuals.” Dear Colin, EVERYONE is entitled to be treated with respect, even conservatives. But that doesn’t mean that everything people desire to do is worthy of “inclusion” – especially in a religion or religious organisation. Christianity as received by the Church is a “revealed” religion – with a historical Founder,… Read more »