At the BBC Bishop attacks anti-gay movement. The bishop is Tom Wright of Durham and the article is about an interview that he gave to the World at One programme today. The article includes a link to audio of the interview. One quote from the interview:
“And to be told that I now need to be authorised or validated by a group of primates somewhere else who come in and tell me which doctrines I should sign up to is not only ridiculous it’s deeply offensive.”
Today’s Times has these two comment articles.
A leading article Crossroads for Anglicans: Rowan Williams must face down opposition on all fronts
George Walden Time to come out of the liberal closet on gay clergy, Archbishop: If Rowan Williams continues to claim moral superiority to politicians, he must be honest on this issue
i suppose we should rejoice that a sinner has repented, but it’s all too little, too late. tom wright’s actions have stoked the flames of this fire. this interview won’t put them out. if he wants to do any good now, then thing to do is to make sure that Reform come into line. let them provide church of england services, in church of england robes, and teach church of england theology. let them minister to the whole of their parishes, let them not ignore their duties to provide occasional offices. i know of one reform parish which made baptism… Read more »
This comment doesn’t surprise me. I have no time for Wright, but it is clear that Fulcrum, to which he is aligned, want no truck with the FOCA’s.
They have no idea as to how impossible it would be to apply FOCAism in the UK.
If nothing else, GAFCON has pretty much united the British press – against them! The Times, The Financial Times, The Guardian, The Telegraph and The Independent have all been less than glowing. Maybe FoCA’s English organisers will get the hint?
Best of all, though, it’s driving ‘journalist’ David Virtue bonkers and he’s desperately trying damage control:
First he had a mid-GAFCON rant at the British press:
“Secular Media Response to GAFCON Ranges from Ridiculous to Shameful” – http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=8478
Now he’s at it again:
“Gay-Baiting Secular British Media Misses GAFCON Message” – http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=8524
Do I detect +Dunelm positioning himself for St Augustine’s seat?
One of the All Souls protesters has written a blog post on it – “Schism Marks” – http://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/07/02/schism-marks/ “Speaking to some of the attendees afterwards, I was struck by how little they actually knew about the average gay person’s life. Some went on about AIDS, as if their homophobia was actually an act of compassion. The irony, of course, is that in today’s world – once again, especially in Africa – AIDS is overwhelmingly a heterosexual issue, and attacking gay people, least of all gay Africans, will do nothing to bring the pandemic under control.” He also encourages all to… Read more »
Our Tom says: “And to be told that I now need to be authorised or validated by a group of primates somewhere else who come in and tell me which doctrines I should sign up to is not only ridiculous it’s deeply offensive. “The idea that they have a monopoly on Biblical truth simply won’t do and we must stand up to this, it’s a kind of bullying. ‘We’re the true gospel people, therefore you must listen to us’.” “When one finds people coming high-handedly, who don’t actually know what’s going on, and say, ‘We’ve now drawn up this list… Read more »
A short note on one of the ‘ethnic’ tokens hoisted around by the Gafcon organizers, the Rev. César Guzmán, from Chile. César Guzmán is a 42 yrs old Chilean priest, with a basic degree in English Language and Literature from Universidad de Chile, as well as a BTh and Ministry Diploma and a MTh from Moore Theological College, Sydney, Australia, where he also served as assistant pastor at St. Matthew´s Manly, Diocese of Sydney. Guzmán returned from Sydney as the Moore College representative to Chile, a post based at the CEP or Centre for Pastoral Studies, the theological education institution… Read more »
I still find it amusing that the FOCA’s think that just because they say Anglicanism isn’t defined by linkage to Canterbury, that carries anything more than their opinion!
They will form their own church and they will not be Anglican.
“Do I detect +Dunelm positioning himself for St Augustine’s seat?”
“Bishop Tom” does certainly seem to be upping his public profile. A recent (groveling) cover feature in the New Statesman was closely followed by a less-than-stellar appearance on Comedy Central’s ‘The Colbert Report’ to plug his most recent book. And now this. Could the Bishop of Durham be trying to cast himself as the acceptable face of “Anglican orthodoxy” – in short, our very own Peter Jensen? It would, of course, be cynical to speculate about his motives…
This is further evidence that the “conservatives” (the GAFFEPRONE? the FOCAs?) have badly overplayed their hand.
If conservatives (sans quotatio marks) from Dawani to Wright will have no truck nor trade with their coup d’eglise, it seems unlikely they will have much of a beach head.
Other foot, meet shoe.
Quite right..Bishop Tom ..as those who calim to be the validaters of orthodoxy…. 1) deliberately avoided mentioning or defining what Christ’s words meant about divorce and re-marriage. yet they had the cheek to call their hand book, ” The Way, the life and the truth.” They would not raise the Lord’s teaching as their divisions would become apparent and the thenmem of their handbook was the clarity of Holy Scripture! 2)They also avoided the issue of women’s ordination to keep Uganda, kenya and Rwanda on board. They allowed Anglo-Catholics to subscribe to the Declaration, knowing full well they would carry… Read more »
I think the British Parliament should copyright the term “Anglican” and stop any organisation or church, which doesn’t want to be under the leadership of the Archbishop of Canterbury, from using it. That should solve all our problems.
RIW, There is no need for all this hyperventilating. Some exaggerated statements, but the GAFCON people were able to act together working through steep obstacles and with nay-sayers all around them. People in many areas of life find a way to work together on what they have in common without illusion about differences in some other areas. Why should they be any different? Think about those working for the environment or the various political parties or those working in your cause (do they all agree on all important things before they work together?). There is no illusion or self-deception involved,… Read more »
“Now, perhaps he will understand how North Americans feel when he has done precisely what the GaffeConsters have done. Indeed, he could be decribing his own actions and words with respect to the North American Church over the past few years.”
Brilliant, Nom de Plume, brilliant.
Dear Simon, Is it validaters or validators…?
As a Welshman the English language mystifies me!
Ben W asked: “do they all agree on all important things before they work together?”
Their own answer is YES! Often phrased “can 2 walk together … ?
And the answer given in OT theology is “because both go together to Jerusalem!”
Now you know. It’s called Paradox.
“Some exaggerated statements,” No, Ben, not “exaggerated statements”. To state that TEC is apostate and preaching another Gospel is reviling and unChristian. I am flabbergasted that you would accept their position on sexuality as “orthodox”, as though that defined orthodoxy, yet seem not to bat an eye at the fact that they were unable to affirm three of the Seven Ecumenical Councils! By this act, they prove themselves to be heterodox, and no amount of persecution of gay people can change that. Up till I read that statement, I doubted my assessment of them, which was based on their behaviour.… Read more »
Perhaps half a cheer for Bishop Tom Wright. I am glad that he is deeply offended but he also said that there would not be gay bishops or blessings of civil partnerships in the C of E so really not much sign of an actual change of heart there. Perhaps what he doesn’t like is someone else challenging his own authority.
The GAFCON PROBLEM
The book is perfectly clear and self axplanatory.
We can’t agree what it means………even on serious issues.
Did God devise such a confusing and unstable way of conveying his truth…no He established a teaching Church…the pillar and foundation of the truth ( 1 Tim 3:15)
Well played Goran. Jesus did not call on us to only work with together with souls that agreed and flattered us. But also to work with the vexatious and difficult. e.g Jesus’ exhortations to love our enemies in Matthew 5:43-48. Then there is Paul’s rejection of legalism in Titus 1:8-16, which includes “To the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are corrupted and do not believe, nothing is pure.” Remember, all things are possible with God, recall Matthew 10:17-31 and Jesus’ sadness that those who are “rich” in this life find it hardest to be in heaven… Read more »
A perceptive piece by George Walden, though a closet liberal is better than an out conservative!
Tom Wright’s tone has hardened since earlier in the week. Could this be anything to do with the petition assembled members in York are being asked to sign?
Ford, Is that the test now, whether one accepts all “seven councils?” (I think GAFCON is probably recognizing all of them but simply giving priority to four – here you are jumping to conclusions again!). You talk about the charge that some in TEC are “preaching another gospel.” What about people like Spong, Jenkins, Ingham etc? These are leaders in TEC, CofE and ACC, I would be happy just to see the clear NT confession of Jesus as Lord or of the resurrection from them (to say nothing about the seven councils)! The great Nicene Creed makes that a basic… Read more »
+Tom Wright is an excellent NT scholar with solid credentials. Naturally, he is offended by purple shirts, who lack his scholarly background and knowledge of biblical languages, posturing and telling scholars like him what is “orthodox” biblical scholarship. I concur with Ford Elms who cast doubt on the orthodoxy of the GAFCON-ites/Iker-ites, accepting only 4 of the 7 Ecumenical Councils (which settled trinitarian and christological controversies). How can the 1662 BCP be the standard of orthodoxy for +Jack Leo Iker and his FiF episcopal colleagues, when, in the old Diocese of Dallas, TX, which included both Dallas and Ft. Worth,… Read more »
“People in many areas of life find a way to work together on what they have in common without illusion about differences in some other areas.”
So why can’t the GAFCONners do that regarding those who have no objection to publicly gay priests and/or bishops? Isn’t what we have in common–a belief in Jesus Christ as Lord–more important than specific practice regarding some peoples’ sexuality?
@RIW, Ford Elms, and John Henry:
I have to agree. After wanting for a very long time to give conservatives the benefit of the doubt, anyone who remotely lends GAFCON any credence is frankly beyond the pale in my book. I get the distinct impression these people didn’t even attend confirmation class, yet they strut around in purple. Totally unbelievable.
Meanwhile a heartfelt bravo to +Tom for giving them the third degree.
I thought Spong had retired. How does that make him a leader in the TEC? I know there are some camps who are rushing to acknowledge retired bishops and give them current standing in their “pure” communion. I was unaware that Spong or TEC were doing this. I thought he was just some retired bishop who still enjoys writing and speaking tours but has no positional status. Could someone clarify Spong’s role vis a vis The Episcopal Church, and maybe some of those other bishops who have been appointed in the US/Canada in the last year or so? (Especially those… Read more »
“Is that the test now, whether one accepts all “seven councils?” “ It has been ever since the last one ended, Ben. I take it you didn’t know that before now. Not surprising then that you have fallen prey to those who made up a new definition of orthodox to make themselves appear holy. “What about people like Spong, Jenkins, Ingham etc?” Most liberals I know find Spong woefully antiIncarnational and reject him outright. I find him cold and uninspiring. Since I have said so many times, I find it odd you think I “accept” him. Might that be an… Read more »
“Could someone clarify Spong’s role vis a vis The Episcopal Church” His role, as far as I can tell, is to be the icon of everything that is wrong with TEC. He seems to be considered almost as a shadow Presiding Bishop, whose teachings form the core of TEC’s theology. At least that’s how conservatives seem to consider him. What’s more, if one so much as disagrees with a conservative Evangelical position, one must therefore be a follower of Spong and everything he says. I find this remarkable, since, as you say, he is retired, and not only that, my… Read more »
Ford, Try to read what I actually say. I said there is nothing to say GAFCON rejects 3 of the seven councils, rather they seem to be emphasizing the first four (would you not agree they are the more important?). And my simple point about the three leaders is, they have rejected large swathes of Christian teaching, are you now going to become a “fundamentalist” about “seven councils!” What is more,Spong in TEC by no means stands alone (quite popular in the TEC speaking circuit!) I said nothing about anyone going to hell, though I think the teaching about God’s… Read more »
“would you not agree they are the more important?” No, why would you say they are? I think as accurate an understanding of the Incarnation as it is possible to have is far more important. I believe the errors of Evangelicalism come directly out of a defective understanding of the Incarnation and its purpose. Why would they not mention the latter three, if they accept their decrees? “the teaching about God’s judgement is not about nothing” And maybe this is the point. A lot of Evangelicals seem obsessed with God’s judgement. Basically, and I know this is simplistic, it seems… Read more »