Women Bishops – more delay?
Jonathan Wynne-Jones in a Telegraph article Church leaders ‘back to square one’ as talks on women bishops fail writes:
The Church of England’s plans to allow women to become bishops are in disarray after its leaders failed to reach agreement on how to introduce the historic reform.
and
22 Commentsthe House of Bishops will ask next month’s General Synod for more time to work out a mechanism which they hope will prevent the Church from descending into civil war over the issue.
Coekin: Butler gives his view
The Face to Faith godslot in the Guardian is written by the Bishop of Southwark, Tom Butler. His conclusion:
…We have yet to see how the new clergy discipline measure works in practice. There are cases in the pipeline in several dioceses but none has yet come to fruition. Bishops are concerned, however, that there is a danger that the new processes will dramatically change the nature of episcopal ministry. Typically, bishops prefer to intervene in a problem at an early stage, before matters become too serious. The pastoral and discipline roles of the bishop overlap through personal contact and discussion. Under the new measure the bishop has a formal role of judgment to exercise once the other processes have been completed. The advice is, therefore, for the bishop not to beome too involved at an early stage of a problem because he might prejudice himself from exercising his formal role later in the process. Yet solving problems at an early stage is what most bishops do best.
One must not overemphasise the difficulties. Most clergy most of the time in partnership with one another and with their bishop get on with the ministry of serving God and God’s world with dedication and commitment. They rarely trouble or are troubled by disciplinary measures old or new. But for the handful of cases needing to be handled, I think all bishops are going to be spending a fair bit of time with lawyers.
Christopher Smith, Lambeth Palace Chief of Staff, thinks the Guardian was unfair in its earlier report. (Note, he is not commenting on the other one, which exists only online, not on paper.)
0 Commentsequality: goods and services
The UK government has been conducting a public consultation on its proposals to outlaw Sexual Orientation Discrimination in the Provision of Goods and Services. You can find the consultation document here (PDF). Before you ask, Parliament has already finalised a corresponding set of regulations relating to discrimination on grounds of Religion and Belief. They are in Part 2 of the Equality Act 2006. The power to make these SO regulations is in Part 3.
Yesterday the Archbishops’ Council of the Church of England published its formal response to the government’s consultation. You can read that response in full here (PDF) and it is summarised in this press release.
This morning, Jonathan Petre has a report in the Telegraph Church ‘could be forced to bless gay weddings’.
The CofE’s official response is quite muted in comparison with the responses from the Lawyers Christian Fellowship and from Anglican Mainstream. The latter body provides a convenient link to a recent House of Commons exchange on the matter. (I don’t think this is because AM endorses all the views expressed.)
14 CommentsMost LGBT Anglicans live in the Global South
Last week, the Church Times carried an article by Colin Coward titled Most Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Anglicans live in the Global South. Another copy is here.
This week there is a letter to the editor challenging this article. The letter is from Canon Ben Enwuchola (who is described as “Chaplain to the Nigerian Community in England”) and Canon Chris Sugden. A copy appears here on the Anglican Mainstream site.
I suspect the contents of the letter are likely to be the subject of further challenges. There certainly seems to be increasing activity in the Global South.
5 CommentsCoekin document overflow
It’s hard to keep up with the flow of material: here is another tranche of documents from the CO-MISSION initiative:
The letter by Richard Coekin’s lawyers to the Archbishop’s lawyers concerning the Archbishop’s decision PDF file
The ‘Skeleton Arguments’ presented at the Appeal on behalf of:
Rev Coekin [sic] PDF file
and on behalf of The Bishop of Southwark PDF file.
A legal note of advice concerning the accuracy of the press statements by the Archbishop and the Bishop of Southwark PDF file
Having read all these documents, I can only conclude that Mr Coekin and his lawyers have no intention of accepting the archbishop’s determination. I do hope I am wrong.
2 Commentsthree more Coekin items
First, the Church Times has this report Mr Coekin: licensed again, but warned to be obedient.
Second, Giles Fraser in his Church Times opinion column, has A matter not settled by a Technicality.
Third, and most interesting, the prolific Andrew Goddard has written a further analysis for Fulcrum entitled Some ramifications of the Coekin case:
He concludes thus:
…It had been claimed that such undertakings should not be demanded as they were ‘unreasonable’ and ‘unjustifiable’. These are claims one could imagine being echoed by others who sit loose to the authority of bishops in the Church of England, especially if those bishops are seen as ‘liberal’. This claim is clearly and firmly rejected by the Archbishop. In contrast, he makes clear that ‘their content reflects the legal obligations which Canon Law imposes upon any licensed minister’ (italics added). In short, what Richard Coekin and many of his supporters view as unreasonable and unjustifiable limitations on the freedom of a parish clergyperson are in fact binding obligations under canon law. Furthermore, as noted earlier, doctrinal disagreement with one’s bishop or declarations of ‘impaired communion’ are not legitimate defences for disobeying canon law.
To ask for written undertakings on the part of one individual troublesome priest who had misbehaved, while perhaps providing a form of the ‘merited censure’, could also have been seen as having no wider significance for other clergy and simply be a punishment for his personal misbehaviour. By deciding not to ask for such undertakings the Archbishop has opened the possibility for a personal and relational approach to reconciliation (rather than one of a reluctant legal declaration). But he has done much more. He has made it quite clear that ‘the onus placed upon the Appellant to conform to the discipline of the Church’ (which was the rationale for asking for undertakings) ‘is not in any way lessened’ and that Richard Coekin is left ‘bound to submit to the Respondent’s episcopal authority and accountable for his actions to the wider Church’. Furthermore, this is not only true of Richard Coekin nor is it limited to the peculiar and difficult situation of this sad case. What it was proposed by the Bishop of Winchester to be explicitly required of this one person in this one case is actually now clearly shown to be required of all clergy in all situations. Whatever one’s problems with one’s bishop, no clergyperson is above the law.
No clergyperson in the Church of England can therefore now claim ignorance of the significance and seriousness of their acts if they involve themselves in any ordinations without the approval of their diocesan or if they disregard episcopal directions concerning church planting. Any such actions are a flagrant rejection of the discipline of the church and the standard rhetorical defences offered by those who threaten such actions have been found to be without legal or theological basis. In future any similar acts of disobedience, whether by Richard Coekin or any other cleric, are likely to result in disciplinary proceedings not by summary revocation of their licence but under the new Clergy Discipline Measure. As long as care is taken to follow due process, there can now be little doubt that any bishop faced with repetitions of conduct similar to that of Richard Coekin will be able effectively to discipline those involved as they have been shown by this ruling to have absolutely no justification in law for such actions.
Giles Fraser mentions something that has been asserted by several commenters here on TA: that Emmanuel, the parent church of Dundonald, practices lay presidency at the Holy Communion. If this is true, then will the relevant clergy now be challenged on this?
27 CommentsKasper comes to Market Bosworth
The House of Bishops of the Church of England is meeting this week at Market Bosworth, close to the site where the Plantagenets lost out to the Tudors.
Cardinal Walter Kasper addressed the House of Bishops of the Church of England this week.
See the full text of his remarks below the comment from Rowan Williams on this page. Another copy of it is here.
A press report on this was in The Times Ruth Gledhill Church unity ‘impossible’ if women become bishops. Vox Pop responses are here.
An earlier report in the Telegraph by Jonathan Petre is concerned with what the House of Bishops will do about women bishops: Deal on women bishops could collapse.
The speech by the cardinal made Forward in Faith extremely happy.
28 Commentsmore about Coekin
The press release from the Bishop of Southwark is reproduced here below the fold.
Today, in the Guardian Stephen Bates reports on all this, in Archbishop stokes row over status of rebel evangelical.
And, Stephen also has a rather more colourful opinion piece on commentisfree Invertebrates led by a jellyfish.
Fulcrum has published this statement.
A rather confused and incorrect report from the CEN Bishop rebuked over the sacking of vicar
The press release from Richard Coekin is reproduced below:
16 CommentsMEDIA STATEMENT
RICHARD COEKIN WINS APPEAL FOR RESTORATION OF LICENCE
The Archbishop of Canterbury announced today (5th June 2006) that he has allowed the appeal by Revd Richard Coekin against the revocation of his licence by the Bishop of Southwark, so reinstating Revd Coekin to his role as a licensed minister in the diocese of Southwark.
In response Revd Coekin said: “We thank God that my licence has been reinstated. This has been a long and gruelling process. I am grateful to the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of Winchester for their help in resolving this problem in granting my appeal.
“As the Archbishop has asked, we will want to move on to seek reconciliation with the Bishop of Southwark and all caught up in these events. We continue to pray for them and for the possibility of closer co-operation in the spread of the good news of Jesus.
“There has sadly been a great deal of misunderstanding and some misinformed criticism circulating about our churches and ministries. We hope that in light of this decision that there will now be fresh opportunities to rebuild mutual trust and understanding.
“We organised the ordinations of the staff needed for our congregations because of our temporarily impaired relationship with the Bishop of Southwark. This is due to what we regard as a departure by the House of Bishops from the historic and orthodox moral teaching of the Bible. We continue to pray that the Church of England will remain loyal to its Biblical heritage.â€
ECUSA/Windsor: two essays
First, Lionel Deimel has published a very substantial article entitled Saving Anglicanism: An Historical Perspective on Decisions Facing the 75th General Convention of the Episcopal Church. This is available in PDF format from this page. See also his earlier analysis of the draft resolutions.
Second, Christopher Wells has written an article, which has been published by the Anglican Communion Institute, entitled Wounded in Common Mission: The Term of Inter-Christian Divisiveness.
Both essays have been welcomed by Mark Harris, the first one here, and the second one in an email which he has kindly allowed me to reproduce below the fold here.
I recommend both articles too.
13 CommentsCoekin wins appeal
Richard Coekin has won his appeal to the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Tuesday Press Reports
Telegraph Jonathan Petre Williams reinstates cleric in gay dispute
Times Ruth Gledhill Archbishop takes stand in revoked licence row
Ekklesia Williams reinstates ‘rogue cleric’
——
Press release from Lambeth: Archbishop allows Coekin appeal
Ruth Gledhill has extensive discussion of this on her blog at Coekin wins appeal and this article on Times Online Archbishop backs ‘rogue’ clergyman.
Richard Coekin has issued a statement which you can find here on Anglican Mainstream.
Fulcrum has this comment on its forum, by Graham Kings.
21 Commentschariot racing and lion taming for the archbishop
The Archbishop of Canterbury will lead the St Albans Festival Pilgrimage on 24 June.
See the diocesan press release:
Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, will make a special pilgrimage to St Albans to celebrate the life and death of Britain’s first martyr on June 24.
“We are delighted to welcome the Archbishop to St Albans” said the Very Revd Dr Jeffrey John, Dean of St Albans. “The pilgrimage is a very special re-enactment of the trial and execution of Alban using larger than life puppets. It will be a colourful, spectacular and wonderful thanksgiving for Alban.”
Dr John adds, “The pilgrimage has been growing in size in recent years and this year the Archbishop will even be able to see re-enactments of chariot racing and lion taming.”
Pilgrims from all over the UK and countries including Germany and Italy will congregate at the site of Alban’s trial in Roman Verulamium, not far from the Cathedral. They will set off on foot following the giant puppets of Alban, the persecuted priest to whom he gave shelter. Pilgrims will be accompanied by hundreds of red roses, a symbol of Alban, as they walk up the hill to the Cathedral.
Services to be held in the morning and the afternoon will provide the opportunity for prayerful contemplation of Alban’s sacrifice in which he allowed the priest he was protecting to flee his Roman persecutors by exchanging clothes with him. After a flogging, a trial and sentence of death, Alban continued to declare his Christian faith and was executed on the site of the Cathedral that bears his name.
Over 200 local children will be involved in the preparations for the event helping to create the chariots, the puppets and ornate decorations for the inside of the Cathedral.
For more details see the cathedral website.
1 CommentBBC interviews Bishop Gladwin
Today’s Sunday radio programme interviews John Gladwin about what really happened last week. 5 minutes long.
Go about 39 minutes forward using this link (better link on Monday).
New permanent link to this here.
Pentecost columns
Guardian Judith Maltby Face to Faith is about listening.
The Times Lavinia Byrne The Spirit is benign, subtle, toxic – and can be found in the back of a cab
Telegraph Christopher Howse The letters on the brick wall
And, from the Tablet an article by James Alison The wild ride
5 CommentsKenya and Chelmsford: press conference
Last Updated Saturday
Fulcrum has issued a statement in relation to all this, Kenya, Chelmsford and Communion: What are the issues?
The Archbishop of Kenya has issued this press statement.
——
The Bishop of Chelmsford, John Gladwin, returned home from Kenya today, and held a press conference.
ACNS carries the press statement that he issued.
Ruth Gledhill attended the press conference and has written about it at some length on her blog, which also has pictures. She has titled the entry Gladwin: I blame the devil. She also has a shorter account on Times Online headlined Bishop stranded in Africa blames the devil.
The newspaper version of this report is Devil of a time for bishop in the bush.
Update East Anglian Daily Times Bishop plays down Kenyan ‘snub’
Update Saturday The latest from Nairobi in the Nation Fresh row over gay-rights bishop
Footnote: the Church of England Newspaper has published this report, written earlier in the week, which most oddly refers to the bishop repeatedly as Mr Gladwin.
Another footnote: in today’s Church Times Giles Fraser refers to the reporting on Bishop Gladwin in his opinion column.
And a third footnote: Anglican Mainstream has published a letter to the Church Times which will not appear on tthe latter’s public website for another week: Kenyan snub to Bishop: don’t blame conservatives.
36 Comments