The BBC reports: Jeremy Pemberton gay marriage case: Archbishop of York challenged
The Archbishop of York has been challenged over “discrimination” against a gay clergyman who married his same-sex partner.
Jeremy Pemberton can no longer work as a priest in Nottinghamshire and has been blocked from taking a job as a hospital chaplain in the county.
Human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell challenged the archbishop over the case as he arrived at Southwell Minster.
However, Dr John Sentamu said he could not comment due to legal reasons.
Local newspapers carried the story too:
The Peter Tatchell Foundation reported it this way: Archbishop of York beset by gay protesters.
I am glad that this archbishop is being challenged.
We need to see more and more of this.
The people doing it are to be commended for their commitment, energy and guts.
Is this what they call a “facilitated conversation”? If so a transcript of the video would be helpful as it is very difficult to hear what is being said.
This may seem a trifling point, but it’s actually quite significant. Why is Sentamu carrying a crozier? He is not in his own Diocese and, even as an Archbishop, has no jurisdiction outside his own Diocese (York). A crozier (for Anglicans) is a symbol of jurisdiction. Is this just another sign of Sentamu’s increasingly papal behaviour? It may also be a symbolic statement of who is really running Southwell and Nottingham at the moment! In that sense, Peter Tatchell and co were talking to the right person.
James, Newark Advertiser article shows that not only was he processing with a crozier, it was the crozier of the Bishop of Southwell: “The visit will include a procession from the cathedral to the Palace. This will be followed by a blessing and historic knocking on the door of the Palace with Bishop Ridding’s Crozier which will be opened by the Head Chorister, at 3.05pm. Bishop Ridding was the first Bishop of Southwell, from 1884-1904.” http://newarkadvertiser.co.uk/articles/news/Archbishop-of-York-Dr-John-Sentamu-officially I remember reading somewhere that the correct way would have been for Bishop Inwood to process with it and then hand it to Sentamu… Read more »
All of the issues around SSM, Clergy in civil partnerships and sexually active, clergy who perform SSM could be resolved next month.
Plus generally all holders of Bishops licences will be given protection should a case in an Employment Tribunal be won next month. The clergyman will argue that all Bishops are qualifications bodies. For further info on QB’s read the Employment Appeal Tribunal case UKEATS/0031/12/BI.
What a shame that there were not some of us there to support Peter Tatchell. I asked on this site a few weeks ago whether the demonstration was still on but there was no response. I would certainly have been happy to go along. I’m retired so would have enjoyed a day out!!!! A few cassocks around the place would have moved it even further up the news agenda. I was sad to see that Church Times covered the story in a matter of a couple of sentences…I would have thought it deserved better coverage than that. After all it… Read more »
Gill,
I’m intrigued by your comment.
Are you referring to Jeremy Pemberton? Or is there another clergyman further advanced with an Employment Tribunal? If so, are the circumstances similar? I suppose this would have become public information by now if the actual tribunal is going ahead next month?
I understand Colin Coward is claiming somewhere online that BOTH the clerics who have hit the news with their marriage have been disciplined.
Sorry, but did I miss something?
Martin, On 9 October Andrew Foreshew-Cain posted in the open Changing Attitude FB group about his treatment. He writes “As you will know I have been disciplined for marrying Stephen – with presumably the same consequences for me that have happened to Jeremy – ie if I ever want to change job I will be refused a license for a new parish.” You may also want to read the sermon he posted on the CA FB page on 26 September in which he explains in more detail what happened to him. It includes the paragraph “A few days later I… Read more »
Erica, no this is not JP, it is a heterosexual clergyman whose license (among others) was without reason and by letter removed by the Bishop, which is not possible under common tenure. The case is due to explode into the media shortly. JP and others know about this case and theirs would be as good as won if this clergyman succeeds in having the Bishops classified as qualifications bodies.
Erica would you please clarify this story…I’m totally confused by this thread or is it still under wraps?
Thanks in anticipation.
Yes, I cannot find this FB thingamabob.
What you say is reported there is amazing!
How come it. Hasn’t been reported here, or come to that, on the front page of The Times?
Robert, which story would you like me to clarify?
The Andrew Forshew-Cain story? I was responding to Martin who asked whether it was true that two priests had been disciplined for getting married. Changing Attitude has an open Fscebook group and on that Andrew wrote of having received a disciplinary letter after his marriage. In effect thst puts him in the same position Jeremy Pemberton is in, whereby he is safe in his current job but could not move to another one.
Sorry Erica…I think my request should be to Gill re her comment on 17th October. Gill could you give us a little more info please….some of us live out in the sticks and are a bit slow on the uptake!
Still cannot find the original material that was the reason for Coward’s claim ……..
Perhaps that’s why this major story never emerged ……
But a priest punished and then told by the executioner that he has to **** off and find his support and care elsewhere is truly a CofE first in the annals of monstrosity!
Yes Martin you are right there is a very important story here that needs to come out……I know some journalists read Thinking Anglicans so I cannot work out what is going on here….help us somebody please.