The Guardian has an editorial, In praise of … Dr Jeffrey John
In the recent history of the Church of England, there can have been few more miserably resonant meetings than the one that took place on 5 July 2003 at Lambeth Palace between Archbishop Rowan Williams and his friend the then Canon of Southwark, Jeffrey John. It occurred because the nomination of Dr John, who is gay, as Bishop of Reading had set off a storm at home and overseas. Parishes had threatened to take their money and loyalty elsewhere, and senior clergy in Africa and the Caribbean had called for the nomination to be revoked. The meeting at Lambeth lasted six agonising hours. It ended with Dr John agreeing to sign a letter withdrawing his acceptance of the bishopric “in view of the damage my consecration might cause to the unity of the Church”. A few months later, Dr John moved to St Albans, where he has worked as dean with distinction ever since. Now, seven years almost to the day after the humiliation over Reading, he is a step away from becoming the next Bishop of Southwark. Dr John was shabbily treated over Reading. No damage that his consecration may have done compares to the damage done to the church and Dr Williams by its abandonment. Dr John has behaved with great dignity throughout. He has no presumptive right to the Southwark see. Yet surely neither he nor Dr Williams would have allowed things to get this far if they were not determined to see a different outcome this time. Right should be done. Dr John’s name should go forward.
The Associated Press has A gay bishop for the Church of England?
Surely the AP headline should read
ANOTHER gay bishop !
We have more than one working in the C of E at the moment as Suffragan / Diocesans
Why can’t they speak out backed by good, true and brave heterosexual bishops ?
(Surely, there must be Some ?)
Pantycelyn: I think the problem lies in trying to use the words “brave” and “bishop” in the same sentence.
Some years back, someone at the ACO told me that the ABC had consecrated (or ordained) nine (closeted) gay bishops — it has been implied that during the 17th century all of the ABCs were gay (at least none of them participated in the [semi-]) sacrament of marriage)
Re the AP story’s quotation from Andrew Brown: “If he wins, he will have shot the rapids and the Church of England will finally emerge from the turbulence of the last 30 years with a fairly clear and fairly coherent doctrine about sex.” Clear and coherent? Well, only if that doctrine is that gay/lesbian people can be in Holy Orders only if celibate — which is not at all the doctrine I would hope to see. Or does Mr. Brown mean something else? His words make sense to me only if he means that “celibacy makes all the difference” —… Read more »
OK, so, the meeting to designate a candidate or two (according to some reports) for Bishop of Southwark was yesterday or the day before.
When will they announce the results?
The UK Supreme Court is the latest body to throw itself behind modern understanding of human sexuality and to reject a distinction between homosexual orientation and practice. In HJ v Home Secretary, Lord Hope says: “…unlike a person’s religion or political opinion, it [i.e. “sexual orientation or sexuality”] is incapable of being changed. To pretend that it does not exist, or that the behaviour by which it manifests itself can be suppressed, is to deny the members of this group their fundamental right to be what they are.” He also condemns “the rampant homophobic teaching that right-wing evangelical Christian churches… Read more »
“When will they announce the results?” Someone on Episcopal Cafe said mid-August or so, since they have to do the background checks. Wouldn’t it make more sense to do the background checks earlier in the process? I think the way the Diocese of Virginia did it was to do thorough background checks on the finalists before releasing their names and starting the walkabout process leading up to voting. Some years ago, when background checks were less thorough, we had to drop one of the two people we’d chosen for suffragan because past scandal caught up with one of the men… Read more »
Someone commented the other day that “what goes on in committee stays in committee”. Well, the committee’s leaking like a sieve and reliable sources inform me that the ABC ‘lost it’ in the meeting, has vetoed Jeffrey John’s nomination and Nick Holtam is not on the list either.
“ANOTHER gay bishop !
We have more than one working in the C of E at the moment as Suffragan / Diocesans
Why can’t they speak out backed by good, true and brave heterosexual bishops ?”
Fear and/or lack of personal integrity I would guess. Isn’t it time Mr. Tatchell outed the lot of them?
There’s a Face Book entry by Ruth Gledhill saying something that Jeffrey Johns was NOT selected.
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1755472019&ref=name#!/ruth.gledhill
Well, no, says Jonathan Wynne-Jones, John will not be Bp of Southwark.
The bullies win again.
The ABC reveals yet again he is a politician, a creature about which the American poet e. e. cummings once said was an ass upon which everyone has sat except a man.
There has been a comment from the Diocese of Southwark to the effect that it might not be until October that the result is confirmed. Does that mean that the Church at large has to wait until that time and does it include time that will be taken by the Dioceses to agree to the election – as would be the case in N.Z.? The process needs to be clarified.
Very significant judgment in the Supreme Court. Thank you badman.
I am sure that the project aimed at stopping insurance companies offering professional indemnity to those peddling “cures” for homosexuality will be much helped by this.
So now we know. Jeffrey John has been by-passed yet again! This is proof conclusive that Rowan values unity ahead of integrity. Victory for the Fundys, & a further defeat for the Gospel of Truth & Justice.
Kyrie Eleison, Christe Eleison.
I am not surprised at any of this.
The English Church is in disarray.
While my money has always been on Holtham (and I had thought JJ’s nomination a flight of journalistic fancy) – If the Prime Minister HAS said he wants two names and he now gets a name or names he was not expecting he can say
“No to (all) the above.”
To make his point publicly.
It has happened before.
It will be interesting to see to what degree the clergy and laity in York confront the Archbishop of Canterbury for his spineless behavior regarding the undignified treatment of Jeffrey Johns. Coupled with the amendments Rowan and the Archbishop of York have proposed for women bishops, this could be quite a defining moment for The Church of England. I hope the clergy and laity at least make Rowan squirm.
Fear and/or lack of personal integrity I would guess. Isn’t it time Mr. Tatchell outed the lot of them?
Posted by: Laurence on Wednesday, 7 July 2010 at 9:33pm BST
Believe me, I am sorely tempted to give the names of the ones I know.
But they do need the support of non-gay bishops to do it. Not come out one by one, and be picked off.
Being a Guardian sort, from across the pond, I find this whole business distasteful and silly, past any common sense point. If scapegoating and assaulting queer folks’ leadership and gifts and callings is always going to be the grouch that wins every day, why bother? At the passing moment, this reads/decodes as yet another indication that RW and the CoE powers that be are dead set – and I use the word, dead, advisedly – dead set on NOT having a global big tent when it comes to reforming Anglicanism. Clearly, RW prizes the old-fashioned Anglican closet too dearly. RW… Read more »
What amazes me is that any “thinking” Anglican could have thought that Dean John had a chance. Even a heterosexual like Dean Slee has no chance either. On Episcopal appointments, Anglican Mainstream have won the day!
Yes, Robart the thought of gay bishops or other ministers in the C of E is as unthinkable as way -well –
the end of Apartheid, the fall of the Berlin Wall, the end of capital punishment, peace in Ireland —
or at the level of popular culture
as unthinkable as transexual and gay characters on Coronation Street, Emmerdale or East Enders…
No – you’re right t’will never happen !
(and never has ?)