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 CommentsFirst, 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 CommentsThe 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 CommentsThe 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€
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 CommentsRichard 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 CommentsThe 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 CommentToday’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.
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 CommentsLast 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 CommentsJohn Richardson thought it would be helpful to give us chapter and verse of the things his diocesan bishop has done that he objects to: he spent time over the weekend listing them out, and you can read his list here:
Bishop John Gladwin on the issue of Human Sexuality.
Meanwhile his Anglican Mainstream colleague Chris Sugden has published an interpretation of “Listening” that can best be described as bizarre.
29 CommentsJonathan Wynne-Jones wrote an article for the Sunday Telegraph which was headlined Bible supports homosexual partnerships, says bishop.
Other responses to the story were reported by Ekklesia.
The tone of the original story, and the reported reactions of conservatives make interesting reading in the light of a recent Fulcrum newsletter article on Homophobia by Andrew Goddard. The long version of his paper (recommmended reading) can be found here.
17 CommentsKendall Harmon has responded to my earlier comment that:
…it is far from clear to me exactly what alternative resolutions would be favoured by those in the AAC and NACDAP who remain fundamentally opposed to the actions of GC2003. I can find no clear statement of an alternative proposal from them.
with a copy of the text linked here, and:
This document can also serve as a response to Simon Sarmiento’s strange assertion that “it is far from clear†to him “exactly what alternative resolutions [to those of the special Commission] would be favoured by those in the AAC and NACDAP who remain fundamentally opposed to the actions of GC2003.†As the Anglican Communion Institute recognizes, that would be resolutions along the broad lines of the one above from January 2005 as well as four of the five 2005 resolutions of the Diocesan Convention of South Carolina.
Will somebody then be filing resolutions to this effect so that they will in due course appear here? It is the absence of any such submission as yet that I find puzzling. Perhaps I don’t understand the GC legislative process.
16 CommentsThe BBC’s Sunday radio programme has two items of interest for the last 14+ minutes of the programme. Using this link, go forward about 30 minutes, for the start:
Better, permanent links on Tuesday now here:
VGR interview 4 minutes
Chelmsford/Kenya interviews 9 minutes
The last report on TA about action at General Convention concerning the Windsor Report was here, on 1 May.
Since then, there has been much online discussion about the resolutions in the Special Commission report but it is far from clear to me exactly what alternative resolutions would be favoured by those in the AAC and NACDAP who remain fundamentally opposed to the actions of GC2003. I can find no clear statement of an alternative proposal from them.
Some alternative resolutions have been filed by dioceses:
Diocese of Rochester C004 Response to Windsor Report
Diocese of Alabama C014 Response to Windsor Report
Diocese of Florida C025 Affirmation of Windsor Report
Diocese of Upper South Carolina C037 Affirming Windsor Report
The AAC analysis is here:“Moving Slowly with Caution Isn’t Stoppingâ€
And the NACDAP statement is here: More Than Twenty Bishops Issue Position Statement
The Anglican Communion Institute has issued this: What it will take
But by far the most detailed analysis of the Special Commission resolutions can be found in this document from PEP: “What Should General Convention 2006 Do?†which can be downloaded from this page as a PDF document. This 17 page document is well worth reading even if you don’t agree with its viewpoint.
1 CommentHere’s a column from the Northern Echo:
At Your Service: Giving succour to flocks of all kinds
In The Times Roderick Strange writes Forty days is an eternity which reminds us of a transcendent dimension. Also Sholto Byrnes reports on An agnostic happy to nurse the ‘vice’ of religion.
Stewart Dakers reflects in the Guardian’s Face to Faith column about Christian Aid Week.
The Telegraph has Christopher Howse writing on intercessory prayer in Sun for the wedding, please.
0 CommentsFrom the IWPR a report by Trevor Grundy Zimbabwean Clerics to Seek Help from Archbishop of York
2 CommentsTwo Three more items:
Church Times Rachel Harden Kenya visit unravels over gays
The Times Ruth Gledhill OUT OF AFRICA: Bishop John Gladwin. Even allowing for this being in the features part of the paper, rather than the news columns, it seems a little odd to me to call Bishop John a “far-left liberal activist” and the comparison with Dr John Reid, who this week happens to be Home Secretary in the UK Government, escapes me entirely. But hey, it’s Friday.
And another comment piece, this one from the Nation in Nairobi, says Gay laws quite ambiguous.
8 CommentsHigh Court throws out Anglican case …Let it be solved at church level is the headline of the cover story in the Malawi Daily Times.
0 CommentsUpdate
Another report from Nairobi:
Nation 26 May Envoy sent to resolve gay row
The latest report from Nairobi:
Nation 25 May Request for sermon by gay rights bishop turned down
Today’s London reports:
Jonathan Petre Telegraph Kenyan hosts abandon bishop due to his liberal views on gays
Maxine Frith Independent Bishop of Chelmsford left stranded in Kenya in row over gay rights
Xan Rice in Nairobi and David Pallister Guardian Kenya’s Anglicans snub bishop over liberal view of homosexuality
And Fulcrum has this article: The Chelmsford Diocese/Mt Kenya link must not be allowed to die
Update Church of England Newspaper has Kenya Archbishop pulls the plug on Bishop Gladwins visit
Reuters Wangui Kanina Kenyan Anglicans reject UK bishop linked to gay group
Yorkshire Post Paul Whitehouse Bishop stranded over gay dispute
Ekklesia English bishop rejected in Kenya over gay row
EADT24 Bishop’s trip stopped over views on gays