UPDATE The article is available on the Diocese of Worcester’s website.
The Church Times today carries an article by Peter Selby Bishop of Worcester. There is a report in the paper about the article by Rachel Boulding headlined Selby breaks bishops’ ranks which summarises the article well.
Sadly, the article itself is at present available only to paid subscribers. Update now available and linked. Meanwhile it has been quoted in part on titusonenine. That does not include the following excerpt:
30 CommentsIt should be a source not of fear, but of delight, that many who do not aspire to matrimony, or to whose circumstances it is inappropriate, wish none the less to order their lives by means of as many of the aspects of the married state as are made available to them.
Is it not a vindication of all that has been revealed to us about the contribution of marriage to human flourishing that, often in the face of sustained public and ecclesiastical disapproval, and the presence of some very destructive lifestyles within the “gay scene”, many gay and lesbian people have aspired to order their lives in the kind of faithfulness and responsibility that civil partnerships involve.
Here are two additional documents:
First, the statement issued by the Diocese in Europe, and then – below the fold – the document from Latvia to which, it appears, Bishop Geoffrey Rowell was responding.
STATEMENT FROM THE DIOCESE IN EUROPE RE. GAY PRIDE MARCH AND SERVICE IN RIGA
The Bishop in Europe returned from a visit to the United States to find the Latvian Church leaders’ Common Statement relating to the gay, lesbian and bisexual parade ‘Riga Pride 2005’, but because of his absence abroad that statement did not reach him until after the parade and the service had taken place.
St Saviour’s Riga had not requested any permission for such a service to take place and the bishop was concerned at reports of such a service occurring. He confirms that the Common Statement states the official position of the Anglican Church, which does not recommend the blessing and legitimising of same sex unions and teaches clearly that the proper context of sexual intercourse is within marriage as a lifelong commitment of a man and a woman. The Church of England honours close and celibate same sex friendships and has also committed itself of listening to the experience of gay and lesbian people.
Bishop Geoffrey believes it is inappropriate that, as churches wrestle with the proper pastoral care for those of homosexual orientation, a church service to be used in what would seem to be a lobbying and confrontational way and has made this clear to the Chaplain and Church Council. He will discuss the events with the Chaplain of St Saviour’s and the Church Council in due course.
12 CommentsLast week the Church of England Newspaper reported on an event that happened in Latvia, at the Anglican Chaplaincy of St Saviour’s Riga where the Chaplain is The Reverend Dr. Juris Cālītis who also is Dean of Theology at the University of Latvia.
The article as originally written appears below. (The version published by CEN was slightly shorter.) The author George Conger writes:
This isn’t a story about the issues that divide: blessings or ordinations, but about simple human decency on the part of a small Church of England parish in Riga, Latvia.
The Bishop in Europe, the Rt. Rev. Geoffrey Rowell, has rebuked the chaplain and parish council of the Church of England parish in Riga for hosting a gay pride service following a violent street march through the old city of the Latvian capital.
Approximately 100 marchers celebrating “Riga Pride 2005” on July 23 were pelted with eggs and tomatoes and threatened with violence during the country’s first ‘gay pride’ march by several thousand onlookers. While neo-Nazi skinheads and Russian nationalists played a prominent role in peppering the marchers with abuse, the majority of the mob were Christians from Latvia’s mainline churches: Lutheran, Roman Catholic and Orthodox the Rev. Juris Calitas, Riga’s Anglican chaplain stated.
Controversy over the march began shortly after Riga’s city council granted permission for the march on July 8. MP’s from the Green and conservative parties as well as the heads of Latvia’s Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Baptist and Orthodox Churches protested. Prime Minister Aigars Kalvitis stated on July 20 a gay pride parade was “not acceptable” as “Latvia is a state based on Christian values”, prompting Riga’s mayor to cancel the parade.
An emergency appeal to an administrative court restored the permit and the parade took place under the protective police shield. The hour-long paradebegan and ended at St. Savior’s [Church of England] and was followed by an ecumenical Anglican-Lutheran worship service.
Parade participant, Maris Sants reports that to enter St Savior’s the marchers had to pass through a hostile jeering crowd, including one woman standing at the Church door holding an icon and crucifix. “While trying topress people to kiss” the relics, Mr. Sants stated, she “eventually gave slaps to some participants”.
A spokesman for the Bishop in Europe told The Church of England Newspaper, “St Saviour’s Riga had not requested any permission for such a service to take place and the bishop was concerned at reports of such a service occurring”.
“Bishop Geoffrey believes it is inappropriate that, as churches wrestle with the proper pastoral care for those of homosexual orientation, a church service to be used in what would seem to be a lobbying and confrontational way and has made this clear to the Chaplain and Church Council.”
Martin Reynolds of the Gay and Lesbian Christian Movement stated he was “amazed” at these remarks, writing to Bishop Rowell on Aug 8 “Your chaplain and congregation exhibited bravery and compassion”.
Dean of Theology at the University of Latvia, Dr. Calitis—-a priest of the Church of England and pastor of the Latvian Lutheran Church—-noted the mobs reminded him of the anti-Jewish pogroms of the war years. “It was scapegoating,” he stated. “It’s hard to understand how Christian people with the least understanding of their mandate can be involved in mobs like this.”
39 CommentsI’m writing this piece some four weeks into a stay in the Diocese of Peru. It’s my first lengthy opportunity to spend time in a part of the Anglican Communion in the global south.
Part of coming here has been not only to see what a sister diocese is doing but also to gain some perspective on my own ministry and priorities, and to see the life of the Church of England from a different viewpoint. The reflections are obviously my own, and equally obviously carry all the naivety that goes with only a month’s exposure.
Being Anglican in this country that is neither English speaking nor a former part of the British Empire is about having a faith that has both the liveliness of some of the more recent Pentecostal missions (usually imported from North America) and the sacramental underpinning and liturgy of Catholicism. There is evidence that this wasn’t always the case. At some points in the past British missionaries have used South America as a place to export both very partial styles of churchmanship that were marginal positions at home and their personal disgruntlement with British Anglicanism too. Mercifully this is no longer prevalent.
To what feels now a very healthy mixture is added a real imperative to work among the poor in both the expanding metropolitan areas and the remote, highly underdeveloped, rural regions. A generation ago, in the time of Gustavo Guttierez, there was much impressive work done by the Roman Catholic Church in taking up the concerns of the marginalised in the urban “pueblos jovenes” or shanties. Sadly, this seems to have been lost through the consistent policy of the previous pope in imposing conservative bishops on the dioceses. Several of the Anglican clergy are themselves former RC priests.
After very difficult times in the period of the Shining Path guerrilla movement Peru has enjoyed more settled years of late. There is evidence all around of the economy growing. The Lima shanties that Henri Nouwen described twenty years ago are now graced by solid houses and tarmac roads. Further out onto the slopes of the mountains new developments of basic shacks repeat what he then described, but the evidence is of communities over time becoming established and gradually edging from grinding poverty to relative poverty. The pattern is similar elsewhere in the country.
This mixture of civil stability and growth is providing a solid foundation on which the church can expand. What a small body such as the Anglican diocese, with no more than a dozen or so churches and a handful of missions in development, can achieve is necessarily limited, but it is being done with real passion in schools, churches, children’s homes, medical clinics, employment training projects and canteens. New church missions are being planted in the most recent and poorest areas, whilst in more established ones existing work is being expanded. Priests and lay workers are being trained in the diocese, and a new seminary to open shortly in Lima (there is already a part time one in Arequipa) will at last allow potential clergy to be trained in a fully Anglican environment. Parish mission teams come from North America and beyond. They experience a week or so in the life of the church here, and help with the practical work of the missions. In many cases when they return home they continue to offer support to the ongoing work.
The church here knows how important it is to be a member of a wider communion. A very significant proportion of time and energy goes into welcoming visitors from other parts of the world. As a small and relatively recently established church it knows how much it benefits from being part of a communion that has many millions of adherents across the globe, and from the insights and experiences of Anglicanism that they bring. I’m sure that many Anglicans here are scarcely aware of what they have to offer in return, not least as a church that is discovering and delighting in an identity and pattern of mission that many of us elsewhere simply take for granted. Moreover, if being deeply, loyally Anglican mattered less then decisions taken by provinces in the global north could be more easily shrugged off.
To be human is to prioritise. There are only so many battles that can be fought at once and only so many areas in which the church can deepen its life. The priorities hare are pretty hard to argue with. They are to build the church, especially in the poorer areas, through good liturgy, lively worship, social action and Christian teaching. And to build it in ways that are coherent with indigenous culture and sustainable into the long term; avoiding overdependence on the particular gifts and preferences of the small number of overseas personnel that might be working here at any particular time. In Peru at least, the increasing role of women as sole providers for their families, and the presence of a small number of women deacons, suggests that the ground is being prepared for future debate about gender inequalities in the church and beyond. However any idea that the church here either could or should get itself into a position to open up a wider debate on sexuality issues is pretty far fetched.
Earlier this week I stood overlooking the Colca Canyon as a Peruvian Anglican priest pointed out the remote villages, with neither electricity nor roads, on the opposite side. It takes him several days to complete a circuit of them on foot. It took the pair of us six hours and one breakdown on a rickety bus to even reach this point. It took as long with two breakdowns to get back again. It’s a long way geographically from a diocese in Central England where I can be in any of 280 church buildings in less than an hour from home. And some of the pressing issues may seem very different too. But what I am experiencing here is both prayerfully thoughtful and essentially Anglican.
3 CommentsChristopher Howse writes in the Telegraph on the Foundations of fundamentalism
… ‘Without saying as much in so many words, fundamentalism actually invites people to a kind of intellectual suicide.” Such a judgment would be unremarkable in the letters page of the Independent, perhaps. It is more surprising in a document for which Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was responsible before he was elected as Pope Benedict XVI…
In The Times Roderick Strange writes that Our understanding of Mary no longer need divide the Christian creeds
Ian Bradley writes in the Guardian about the British TV programme Songs of Praise, Praise, my soul, the king of heaven
The Independent may no longer have a godslot, but Andrew Buncombe reports on a visit to Lakewood Church in Houston: Jesus Inc. Welcome to the world’s biggest church
Philip Crispin writes in the Tablet about Faith’s French revolution which will sound rather familiar to English Anglicans
With the number of priests in steep decline, the laity is keeping the Catholic church alive in rural France. It’s a dramatic transformation borne of necessity…
A week ago, the Church Times carried this article by Kenneth Leech, Beware the bureaucrats. Here’s how it starts:
NEARLY ten years ago, an article by the then Bishop of Chichester, Dr Eric Kemp, “Following the example of Mammon”, appeared in the Church Times (17 November 1995). It warned about the centralisation of power in the Church of England, and the danger that archbishops would come to be seen as managing directors.
The following day, Professor Richard Roberts, writing in The Independent, described Archbishop Carey as “the John Birt of the Church of England”, and the Church as a managed, product-driven organisation.
These words still haunt me. They seem to confirm my worst fears about the Church. I am not attacking central institutions, or even bureaucrats as such, but questioning where our priorities should lie.
And an earlier article in Christianity Today by Doug LeBlanc about Peter Akinola, entitled Out of Africa
0 CommentsPat Ashworth in the Church Times reports No Church can ignore the Bible – Akinola and his statement is reprinted in full.
The Church of England Newspaper has New Act will establish gay marriage critics warn (in the newspaper “marriage” is in quotes) which reports on what the Bishop of Winchester and Anglican Mainstream have said, while also clarifying the effect of some of the legal changes being made.
Earlier, I quoted a fragment from the Church Times press column, about the spiked Sunday Times report on Akinola. You can now read the whole of last week’s column.
0 CommentsWe apologise to our users, and particularly those who comment, for the recent service disruption here. The articles posted since last Saturday have had to be restored manually. We regret however that it will not be possible to restore the comments made from last Saturday until this morning, including any made during that period to older articles.
4 CommentsMichael Scott-Joynt, Bishop of Winchester, has written this article about the Civil Partnership Act in the August issue of New Directions.
He refers to the Pastoral Statement, of which he is a signatory, thus:
The House of Bishops is on the point of publishing (I write in mid-July) a carefully considered, orthodox Pastoral Statement on Civil Partnerships; but on 29 May a substantially inaccurate preview of a draft of this Statement appeared in the Sunday Times – and caused consternation as it was circulated around the Anglican Communion among people many of whom can have no understanding of the cultural and legislative world through which we in the UK are now living. (But many of our own people have not woken up to its character either!)
In fact, the article covers several other pieces of legislation, and says only the following about the CPA:
34 CommentsThe Civil Partnerships [sic] Act 2004 was designed to meet the needs of ‘same-sex couples in supportive relationships (who) cannot marry but deserve the opportunity of legal recognition.’ It provides for such couples who are not within the ‘prohibited degrees of relationship’ to register their relationship in a Register Office as a Civil Partnership (CP). The Act closely and exhaustively replicates for CPs virtually every provision in law that relates to marriage.
In June 2004, members of the House of Lords, myself among them, sought by amendment to extend the provisions of the (then) Bill to couples (whether of the same sex or of opposite sexes) who are within the ‘prohibited degrees’ (e.g. two sisters, or a father and daughter) and who have lived under the same roof for twelve years. The amendment was carried in the face of government and Liberal Democrat opposition; but the government announced the same day that the amendment so radically altered the Bill’s concept of a CP that it could not proceed with the Bill while the amendment stood part of it – effectively admitting that after all the Bill was drawn up only in the interest of those in same-sex, and sexual, relationships. In due course the Commons removed our amendment and the Lords refused to allow its return.
I recognize that people in same-sex relationships can face some significant disadvantages and injustices which it is right that the government should seek to legislate to rectify – but not by replicating virtually every provision that relates to marriage. To me the CP Act undermines the distinctiveness and fundamental importance to society of marriage by effectively equating same-sex relationships with it, notwithstanding the government’s repeated assertions that this was not its intention.
It is, I judge, this dishonesty at the heart of the CP Act 2004 which will render the Church of England so wide open to mischievous misrepresentation when the Act comes into force in December.
The Church of England website now includes the answers to questions and transcripts of some of the debates from last month’s meeting of General Synod.
Links to the transcripts can be found here.
0 CommentsThe Church of England Evangelical Council has issued a statement. It is not yet on the CEEC website but can be found at Anglican Mainstream: Civil Partnerships – CEEC Response to Bishops and also on titusonenine.
Update, it is now on the CEEC website as an RTF file, here.
4 CommentsAnglican Mainstream has a note about the changes to ecclesiastical law that are being made by the government in connection with the Civil Partnership Act. The item can be read in full here. The hyperlinks in the following extract may prove useful.
This is because the Civil Partnership Act 2004 contains provisions (sections 255 and 259) enabling the Government to amend and even repeal other legislation in order to give full effect to the purposes of the Act. This includes even amending and repealing church law. The power in relation to church law is exercised by statutory instrument approved by both Houses of Parliament.
At the time of writing there is one draft statutory instrument which deals with church law awaiting such approval, and one statutory instrument still being drafted by parliamentary draftsmen. The Civil Partnership Act 2004 (Overseas Relationships and Consequential, etc. Amendments) Order 2005 proposes to amend four pieces of church legislation: the Pluralities Act 1838, the Parsonages Measure 1938, the Patronage (Benefices) Measure 1986, and the Church of England (Legal Aid) Measure 1994. The Civil Partnership Act (Judicial Pensions and Church Pensions, etc.) Order 2005 will, as its name suggests, amend the church’s pensions legislation to give protection to civil partners. It is intended that both these provisions will come into force on the same day as the Act itself, namely 5 December 2005.
The relevant portion of The Civil Partnership Act 2004 (Overseas Relationships and Consequential, etc. Amendments) Order 2005 is reproduced below the fold.
The following Hansard extract shows what the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Trade and Industry (Lord Sainsbury of Turville) said in the House of Lords about this, on 19 July:
4 CommentsSchedule 3 to the order amends Church legislation to insert references to “civil partner” and “surviving civil partner” where there are existing references to “spouse” and “widow or widower”. Section 259 enables a Minister of the Crown to make amendments to Church legislation although, as the Committee will be aware, by convention the government do not legislate for the Church of England without its consent. I stress that the provisions in the order amending Church legislation have been drafted by Church lawyers, consulted on internally within the Church, and finally have been approved by the Archbishops’ Council and the House of Bishops. The Church has asked that we include the amendments in the order, which we are content to do. The amendments in Schedule 3 do not cover Church pensions, as those will be dealt with in a separate instrument to be made under Section 255 of the Act.
Paul Perkin who is Vicar of St.Mark’s, St.Peter’s & St.Paul’s Battersea in the Diocese of Southwark, has written An Open Letter to English Bishops. Mr Perkin is on the council of Reform.
He raises two issues, one about blessings of such partnerships and one about baptism of children. The key questions:
Blessings
The bishops said:
18. It will be important, however, to bear in mind that registered partnerships do allow for a range of different situations- including those where the relationship is simply one of friendship. Hence, clergy need to have regard to the teaching of the church on sexual morality, celibacy, and the positive value of committed friendships in the Christian tradition. Where clergy are approached by people asking for prayer in relation to entering into a civil partnership they should respond pastorally and sensitively in the light of the circumstances of each case.
Paul Perkin asks:
…I intend always pastorally and sensitively to decline politely any request for such a prayer affirming a same-sex union. Can you clarify for me ‘the light of the circumstances’ in which you would feel it necessary to discipline me for such a refusal, before I go any further? You might well receive complaints from my parishioners, and it is only fair that the House of Bishops spell out now on what grounds you would be sympathetic to such a complaint.
Baptism
The bishops said about baptism:
23. The House considers that lay people who have registered civil partnerships ought not to be asked to give assurances about the nature of their relationship before being admitted to baptism, confirmation and communion. Issues in Human Sexuality made it clear that, while the same standards apply to all, the Church did not want to exclude from its fellowship those lay people of gay or lesbian orientation who, in conscience, were unable to accept that a life of sexual abstinence was required of them and instead chose to enter into a faithful, committed relationship….
Paul Perkin asks:
1 Comment…It is our practice [at St Mark’s] to delay the baptism of heterosexual adults known to be cohabiting outside marriage, giving time for progress in discipleship. Is the House suggesting that this practice is wrong? If I intend pastorally and sensitively to decline politely any request for such a baptism, can you clarify for me the light of the circumstances in which you would feel it necessary to discipline me for such a refusal, before I go any further? Or is the House suggesting that clergy may enquire of heterosexual relationships outside marriage, but may not enquire of homosexual relationships? Or perhaps neither – is the House suggesting that relationships in general fall outside the scope of enquiry of candidates’ genuine repenting and turning to Christ? You might well receive complaints from my parishioners, and it is only fair that the House of Bishops spell out now on what grounds they would be sympathetic to such a complaint.
The other London newspaper correspondents are on holiday, but according to Jonathan Petre in the Telegraph
Gay clergy to defy bishops over no-sex ‘marriages’
and
‘I am not prepared to give assurances to anybody about my relationship’
This is the first UK newspaper report on the matter to name an overseas bishop, since the Sunday Times squib of 8 days ago.
The website for the petition mentioned in the article is here.
The Living Church has also reported this story:
Nigerian Primate Dismayed by British HOB Response to Civil Partnership Act.
For the weekend:
Giles Fraser writes in the Church Times about the CofE bishops and civil partnerships, Why you need love and more
Paul Oestreicher writes in the Guardian about The message of Hiroshima
George Coyne the Vatican’s chief astronomer writes in the Tablet about evolution in God’s chance creation
In The Times Jonathan Sacks has a column entitled ‘A clock seems to tick in the history of religions, sending crisis’
Damian Thompson writes in the Telegraph about Ancient fantasies that infect the internet and inspire suicide bombers and Christopher Howse has Christianity’s top 10 ideas
4 CommentsA statement by Archbishop Peter Akinola has been published here on THE CHURCH OF NIGERIA (Anglican Communion) website: A STATEMENT ON THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND’S RESPONSE TO CIVIL PARTNERSHIPS BY THE PRIMATE OF ALL NIGERIA
The first published copy appeared on titusonenine
A Statement on the Church of England response to Civil Partnerships by the Primate of All Nigeria
The email distribution came from Chris Sugden of Anglican Mainstream
Update The statement has now also been published by ACNS here
The text is reproduced below the fold. References in square brackets are to paragraphs of the pastoral statement.
50 CommentsPat Ashworth in the Church Times reports Akinola’s demand to ‘suspend’ C of E viewed with caution:
The Anglican Communion Office has tried without success to contact Archbishop Akinola, who is on holiday until 8 August. Its spokesman, James Rosenthal, said on Wednesday: “We are trying to verify the story from the Archbishop’s office in Nigeria, and have not been able to do that. We are concerned, because it is a very serious matter.” Lambeth Palace said that it could not comment until the story was verified.
Archbishop Akinola is believed to be planning to make a full statement.
Over in the Press Column, not yet on the web, Andrew Brown notes that:
The attribution of the quotes to serious church leaders rather than some random vituperating blowhard on the internet is something that might be missed by a non-specialist. You couldn’t discern it from the language used. They all talk the same way.
The idiots on the internet sound as if they could decide the fate of modern Christianity; the Primates’ opinions have the weightless freedom of email.
The column contains more on this subject…
2 CommentsThere was another deposition in ECUSA today, this one in Eastern Michigan. It provoked a strong reaction from Forward in Faith North America which published five documents relating to this event.
The documents giving the diocesan view of this matter are reproduced here, below the fold.
And this report appeared on TLC Bishop Howe Withdraws Name from Eastern Michigan Censure Letter
Update
A further report on TLC Eastern Michigan Bishop Responds to Critics of His Deposition
If the CAPAC acronym is not yet familiar, read this first
LGCM published a press release The Anglican Communion and the Sunday Times story. A Response from LGCM
Fr Jake has CAPAC; Justifying Criminal Actions
with some really interesting comments
J-Tron has The new “Anglican” alliance and other things that will destroy the Anglican Communion
also with interesting comments, as noted by bls in Never
Mark Harris has The Council of Anglican Provinces of the Americas is a dangerous overreach
Update This matter got a tiny mention at the end of the Church Times story on Akinola:
These developments coincide with another new alliance of conservative Anglicans, to be known as the Council of Anglican Provinces of the Americas and Caribbean (CAPAC), modelled on the Council of Anglican Provinces of Africa (CAPA). The plans and a “Covenant of Understanding” were announced by Archbishop Gomez and the Presiding Bishop of the Southern Cone, the Most Revd Gregory Venables.
The story deserves more attention than that.
5 CommentsForward in Faith UK FiF Response on ‘on Civil Partnerships’
Reform BISHOPS’ PROPOSALS ON CIVIL PARTNERSHIP ACT ‘FLAWED AND UNWORKABLE’ SAYS REFORM
CEN Andrew Carey Andrew Carey on the C of E Bishops Approach to Civil Partnerships
Agape Press Kendall Harmon Church of England’s Homosexual ‘Marriage’ Compromise Has Theologian Concerned
Simon Barrow BEING CIVIL ABOUT PARTNERSHIPS
Sean Doherty Civil Partnerships in the Church of England
Other bloggers have commented on the previously reported response of Archbishop Peter Akinola
(some of these blog entries also have interesting comments)
19 CommentsFr Jake C of E Threatened with Suspension
Simeon in the Suburbs Pope Peter I of Alexandria
Both ENS and the Anglican Church of Canada have issued press releases about this event which occurred in Toronto recently. This was the third such conference to be held.
ENS Afro-Anglicans from around the world gathered in Toronto at third international conference
ACC Afro-Anglicanism conference ends; issues pact reflecting ubuntu
Scroll down either of the press releases to find the full text of The Toronto Accord
3 Comments