The BBC World Service programme Reporting Religion has this:
On this week’s Reporting Religion, we take a detailed look at leadership in the troubled Anglican Church. Dan Damon explores whether the existing leader, Archbishop Rowan Williams, can really handle the pressure. What should he do to unite two opposing groups? Or is he wasting his time trying to find unity in his Church? Dan is joined by one of the Archbishop’s supporters and one of his critics.
Those interviewed include: Andrew Brown, Bishop Tom Butler, Bishop Josiah Fearon, Stephen Bates, Bishop Zac Niringiye.
Listen here. This URL will be valid for one week only. 16 minutes long.
I am glad the PB is spaking. And also the PC (Primate of Canada). It needs lots and lots of straightforward honest talking, sharing and discussing. Andrew Hutchinson’s account of why he signed; and indeed why the PB signed is very revealing; showing how conscientious they have sought to be. However, someone needs to stand up and say, “Enough is enough. This nonsense has gone too far. “ Donald Coggan –bless ‘im intended these occasional meetings, as he said, at the time , to be “for leisurely conversation” –not a Canterbury Curia. Anglicans on the ground the world over, will… Read more »
This World Service extended report is by far the best of the radio reports. I summarised each contributor. Space limits me to one: Bishop of Southwark I still support him, good and noble, fine priest and bishop. Any Ab of C would find it difficult. C o E is broad and Anglican Communion broader. Archbishop Rowan puts unity right at the centre of his concern, and therefore major problems in pursuing that unity in terms of truth. He leans over backwards to support those with whom he would fundamentally disagree, perhaps he treats rather badly those with whom he naturally… Read more »
Jim Naughton has posted a thread on ++Rowan Cantuar’s interpretation of the Primates’ Communique as per a press interview in Tanzania: To quote: “If widely circulated, I believe it will significantly handicap Bishop Jefferts Schori in her efforts to persuade our Church to accept the difficult recommendations being urged upon us by the Primates. I say this in part because Rowan Williams asserts that gay people living in relationships should not be ordained Not ordained as bishops, mind you, but simply not ordained. In the wake of the meeting in Tanzania, both he and Peter Akinola have spoken out against… Read more »
John Henry What Rowan actually said is: Q:It seems that the leaders are more concerned with preserving their cohesion rather than communicating the truth to the faithful. So, given the circumstances, what does the Anglican Church stand for and why are you dilly-dallying to give a stance in this very crucial moral issue? A:The stance of the Anglican Communion is clear: It has never said anything other than that. The ordination of active homosexuals is not acceptable. It has never said anything other than that the marriage of same sex-couples is not to be admitted. That`s what the Lambeth Conference… Read more »
‘That is what we have said. The phrasing of the resolution in 1998 was that homosexual relations were not compatible with scripture. As Archbishop, bishop, priest of the church, that is the teaching which I must keep my allegiance with.’ R Williams BUT that is not what he said in his Michael Harding Memorial Lecture; and it is not what he said before a large gathering of gay clergy at The Royal Foundation of St Katherine (Limehose) but a few years ago. I know, I was there. Why do liberals chop and change like this? Have they no balls ?… Read more »
Can’t an archbishop change his mind, Laurence? Granted he isn’t a Cranmer – the martyr who changed his mind and created Anglicanism – but cut him some slack. The Gospel is about repentance, y’know.
Laurence
Your question “Why do liberals chop and change like this?” makes an inference that Rowan is a liberal.
Nowadays it looks more like he is a conservative who in his impetuous youth contemplated being a liberal. The pity is that the liberals believed that he believed what he said in those sermons and voted him into office on that basis. I am sure there are souls today contemplating whether it was deliberate deceit or spineless shifting under pressure.
No, Steve, once you have truly understood that a form of oppression is wrong you cannot change your mind. “Repentance” has nothing to do with it. Although you might repent not having spoken out sooner or firmer.
I still hope that Rowan isn’t spineless but that he genuinely believes that it is his role to be a facilitator of communication and holding the communion together, regardless of his own personal views.
Erika, I suspect (but don’t know) that RW doesn’t buy this “oppression” talk. If he really thought there was “oppression” going on in this business, I don’t think he would mince words. Homosexuals are not really “oppressed” in the secular western world today, so the rhetoric shouldn’t be overplayed. They have every right to start up and organize churches as they will. And the adventurous ones do. But nobody – me included – has the right to demand that existing churches change their ways to suit them. Nobody is forced to be an Anglican – or a Catholic. The Reforamtion… Read more »
This business that gays honestly existing and thriving in church or society somehow innately oppresses realignment believers in some significant manner is hard to credit. Male-only medical school deans tried that claim when anybody talked about women being admitted, as if having a woman present would so distract the male mind that no work would ever get done. USA slave owners in the south loudly tried the claim for decades, since the immense and hugely profitable USA cotton trade of that era was based on slave labor. Anti-tranny managers tried the claim, indulging us with vague but alarming talk about… Read more »
Steve Watson – existing Churches have changed. Movements changed them, theology changed them, cultural settings changed them. Texts have been altered, unaltered texts have been read differently. And they will change again, as they are doing. We have a woman archdeacon. That was impossible not very long ago. That is a change. No doubt one day there will be a male Archbishop who is partnered with a man and had some sort of church marriage with him. Unless by then Arhbishops have become virtual, and you just enter the question you want and the answer comes out according to formularies… Read more »
I think y’all may be misplacing Archbishop Williams. I suspect it’s more of an issue of not being in a position to oppose The Establishment since he’s one of its major representatives. It’s probably comparable to the position the Vice-President of the US is in when his boss takes a strong stand on an issue. No matter how the VP actually feels, in public he certainly can’t actively oppose the president’s plan. There’s probably a parallel situation in the UK parliament, but I’m not sure what it is.
Jon
He doesn’t support the ‘establishment’, but the reactionaries within the Church.
To be honest, there is a simple answer. Leave. The Church is an utter irrelevance in the UK, and deserves to become more so.
John Spong got it right. Christian myths are there to be rejected.
Merseymike, I’ve missed your posts! I thought you had taken your own advice and washed your hands of the stinking corpse. Please, Mike – at least we can agree that necrophilia is not a good thing?
Oh, I have, Steve, but I will still comment as someone who regards it as my duty to oppose institutional homophobia wherever I find it.