Bishops denounce Obama blackmail over gay rights: Anglican Ink. April 27, 2013 April 27, 2013
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Ink, Church of the Province of the West Indies, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Marriage, Politics.Tags: gay marriage
comments closed
The Anglican bishops of the West Indies have urged their governments to hold fast and resist pressure from Britain and the United States to legalize gay rights and gay marriage.
In a statement released on 25 April 2013 following the House of Bishops meeting in Barbados, bishops of the Church the Province of the West Indies (CPWI) reiterated their belief in marriage “defined as a faithful, committed, permanent and legally sanctioned relationship between a man and a woman.”
“The idea of such unions being constituted by persons of the same sex is, therefore, totally unacceptable on theological and cultural grounds,” the bishops said. The CPWI consists of eight dioceses: the Diocese of Barbados, the Diocese of Belize, the Diocese of Guyana, the Diocese of Jamaica and the Cayman Islands, the Diocese of the Bahamas and the Turks and Caicos Islands, the Diocese of the North Eastern Caribbean and Aruba, the Diocese of Trinidad and Tobago and the Diocese of the Windward Islands.
Read it all in Anglican Ink.
Hong Kong push for gay civil rights: The Church of England Newspaper, April 14, 2013 p 7. April 13, 2013
Posted by geoconger in Church of England Newspaper, Civil Rights, Hong Kong Sheng Kung Hui, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Marriage.Tags: Hong Kong, Sexual Orientation Discrimination Ordinance, York Chow Yat-ngok
comments closed
Church leaders in Hong Kong have welcomed the proposal for public consultations on a Sexual Orientation Discrimination Ordinance (SODO) that would protect the civil rights of the homosexual community. While declining to speak to the merits of any particular bill, Roman Catholic and Anglican leaders have voiced their general approval of civil rights legislation.
On 1 April 2013 Dr York Chow Yat-ngok, a leading Anglican layman and the former secretary for food and health, took office as chairman of Hong Kong’s Equal Opportunity Commission.
Last month gay activists attacked the appointment of Dr. Chow arguing that his religious principle would prejudice the debate. However Dr. Chow told the South China Morning Post he was a “liberal-minded” Christian and not prejudiced against gay people.
The issue should be handled discreetly. “In the process of legislation, there should be more discussion. Because not everyone would be courageous enough or would choose to disclose their own sexual orientation,” Dr. Chow told Radio Television Hong Kong.
“My religious background is relatively conservative, but even the Anglican Church in England is discussing this issue now,” he said adding that “regardless of what my religious background is or my personal view… these people should not be discriminated against.”
In November 2012 a proposal was put forward in the Legislative Council to launch a public consultation to gauge potential support for SODO. After vigorous debate the motion was defeated and Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying dismissed calls for a consultation in a policy address in January.
Evangelical leaders had voiced concern that SODO would lead to gay marriage. Choi Chi-sum, secretary-general of the Society for Truth and Light, said they were “disappointed” that Dr. Chow had now offered his public support for the ordinance before consulting groups who opposed the legislation.
Created in 1996 the equal opportunities commission has a mandate to work towards the elimination of discrimination on the grounds of sex, marital status, pregnancy, disability, family status and race. This brief should be extended to sexual orientation Dr. Chow said.
Global Lutheran schism over homosexuality: The Church of England Newspaper, February 17, 2013 p 7. February 22, 2013
Posted by geoconger in Church of England Newspaper, Church of Sweden, Ethiopian Evangelical Church Mekane Yesus, Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.Tags: Wakseyoum Idosa
comments closed
The Ethiopian Evangelical Church Mekane Yesus (EECMY) has broken with the Church of Sweden, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and all “churches who have openly accepted same-sex marriage.”
The split between one of the largest African members of the Lutheran World Federation mirrors and liberal American and European churches mirrors the disputes in the Anglican Communion over doctrine and church discipline.
The General Assembly of the Mekane Yesus (Place of Jesus) Church, meeting in Addis Ababa from 27 Jan to 2 Feb, ratified a July 2012 decision by its church council to end Eucharistic fellowship with the two leading liberal members of the World Lutheran Fellowship over their decision to allow gay clergy and same-sex blessings.
“The ELCA is very saddened by this decision,” said the Rev. Rafael Malpica Padilla, executive director for ELCA Global Mission, noting the American Lutheran church had been “walking with the people of Ethiopia for more than 50 years, and our sister church, the Church of Sweden, for more than 150 years.”
While the Mekane Yesus Church is “closing the door to this partnership,” Mr. Malpica Padilla said the ELCA and the Church of Sweden “are not locking the doors from our side. It is open for when you decide it is time to resume this journey together. It is my hope that in the near future, we will again walk together in Christian love.”
In his address to January synod meeting, the president of the EECMY, the Rev. Wakseyoum Idosa said the EECMY “had lived in partnership with some partners for over a century.”
“Challenges and changes that we encounter in out contexts are forcing us to make decisions which are consistent with our belief about God and our biblical, theological and ethical understandings and our contexts where the church operates. One of these challenges as you all know is the controversial issue on human sexuality which has been on the agenda of the EECMY since 2006.”
The EECMY had issued a “clear statement on the position of the church on this issue” in 2010, President Idosa said, and the Council of the Church at its July meeting determined to take action to break with the Church of Sweden and the ELCA.
“The decision of the Council that has been endorsed by the General Assembly will be communicated to the concerned churches on the basis of the bilateral relations that exist between the church and concerned partners,” he said.
Founded by Lutheran missionaries in the 19th century, the Mekane Yesus church has experienced rapid growth over the past forty years. President Idosa told the General Assembly over the past three years the church had added one million members, and at year’s end counted 6,012,184 members and 7,840 congregations.
No sex please, we’re Catholic: Get Religion, January 30, 2013 January 30, 2013
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Ordinariate, Get Religion, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Women Priests.Tags: New York Daily News, Pastoral Provision
comments closed
The perils of re-writing another news outlet’s work were on full display this week in an article that appeared in the New York Daily News. Based upon a news story broadcast by Buffalo’s WGRZ-TV, “Call him ‘The God Father’: Husband and dad will become Roman Catholic priest — and take vow of celibacy” reports that a former Episcopal priest who upon his re-ordination as a Catholic priest will begin a “sex-free life”, is filled with errors of fact and false assumptions about sacerdotal celibacy.
It is not clear at what point the errors entered into the food chain. Perhaps the subject of the story John Cornelius misspoke; perhaps WGRZ-TV misstated the quotes — or it may have be the fault of the Daily News. Whatever the reason, the only trustworthy fact that I would take away from this story is that former Episcopal priest John Cornelius will be re-ordained as a Roman Catholic priest on 26 Jan 2013. Beware of everything else.
Let’s start with the lede.
John Cornelius will be ordained a Roman Catholic priest this weekend — and with the blessing of his wife they’re giving up their sex life. Cornelius, a father of three, will become the first married Roman Catholic priest in New York — and Sharyl, his wife of 33-years, has agreed to the whole celibacy thing. “We have decided to do that voluntarily,” Cornelius told WGRZ-TV. “I have always had friends that are Roman Catholic priests and I appreciate what they’ve given up to serve God and the priesthood.”
The story continues:
Cornelius, 64, is a former Episcopalian priest who converted three years ago to Catholicism. He said his old church had gotten too liberal for him. “There was the ordination of the homosexual priest in New England,” he said. “Then it came time for women’s ordination. … It may have been okay for other people, but it was just too much for me.”The article reports Fr. Cornelius retired as an Episcopal priest in 2010 and “jumped at the chance after Pope Benedict issued a directive last year aimed at filling the depleted Catholic ranks with converted Episcopalian priests.”
It closes with the news that Fr. Cornelius will serve a “flock of other former Episcopalians at the Fellowship of Saint Alban” outside Rochester and speaks briefly of his faith journey. Let’s pick the low hanging fruit first and work towards the conceptual failures in this story. The chronology offered in the quote by Fr. Cornelius is incorrect.
Women priests were authorized in 1976 by the Episcopal Church (though a group had been illicitly ordained earlier). Non-closeted, non-celibate gay/lesbian clergy were first ordained in 1979 in New York city and by the early ’90s a number of dioceses were ordaining gay clergy. And the first “gay” Episcopal bishop, the Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson, was consecrated in New Hampshire in 2003. The chronology offered by Fr Cornelius is incorrect. And the suggestion that the Catholic Church is free from the controversies surrounding gay or women clergy is not so straight forward.
And no, John Cornelius will not be the first married RC priest in New York. That honor belongs to Fr. Scott Caton of the Diocese of Rochester who was ordained under the 1980 Pastoral Provision. Fr. Cornelius may be the first priest ordained in New York state for the Ordinariate of the Chair of St Peter.
What is the difference between the pastoral provision and the ordinariate? The first has been around since 1980 and permits certain Protestant clergy who are married to be re-ordained as Catholic clergy. The second was created in 2011 as a home for Anglican communities (clergy and laity) who wish to seek full corporate unity with the Catholic church while retaining some Anglican liturgical forms and their own ecclesial structures. The article does not do justice to these distinctions.
And, is it fair to say the re-ordination of ex-Episcopalians and Lutherans is a tool to fill the “depleted” ranks of the Catholic clergy?
And, is it fair to say that by “giving up their sex life” Fr. Cornelius and his wife have “agreed to the whole celibacy thing”? Can abstinence from sexual relations with a spouse be considered celibacy — as understood by the Catholic Church? Is a “sex-free life” the definition of sacerdotal celibacy? Or is there a bit more to it than that?
The New Advent dictionary begins its definition of celibacy by writing:
Celibacy is the renunciation of marriage implicitly or explicitly made, for the more perfect observance of chastity, by all those who receive the Sacrament of Orders in any of the higher grades.
Are Fr. Cornelius and his wife practicing celibacy, abstinence or chastity? No questions are asked by the article about clerical celibacy, nor are comments or observations made by knowledgeable sources — a bishop, theologian, church spokesman, et al. Is this the norm for re-ordained Episcopal clergy? Is this renunciation of the marital state a spiritual discipline, a physical separation — what is going on here?
I don’t know. Do you?
African outrage over civil partnership decision: The Church of England Newspaper, January 20, 2013 p 7. January 25, 2013
Posted by geoconger in Church of England, Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.Tags: civil unions, Eliud Wabukala, gay marriage, Nicholas Okoh, Stanley Ntagali
comments closed
Howls of outrage and disbelief from the Anglican Churches of Africa and Asia have greeted last month’s decision by the House of Bishops to end the ban on clergy in gay civil partnerships from being appointed to the episcopate.
Archbishops representing a majority of the active members of the Anglican Communion have urged the Church of England to pull back, saying the bishops’ decision violates international Anglican accords, creates moral confusion over church doctrine and discipline, holds the church up to ridicule, and will provide Islamist extremists a further excuse to persecute Christian minorities.
The 12 Jan 2013 statement by the nine primates of the Global South Coalition follows critical responses from the Archbishops of Kenya, Uganda and Nigeria. Archbishop Nicholas Okoh of Nigeria said the bishops of his church had agreed to break with the Church of England should the English bishops’ decision be implemented.
“Sadly we must also declare that if the Church of England continues in this contrary direction we must further separate ourselves from it and we are prepared to take the same actions as those prompted by the decisions of The Episcopal Church (USA) and the Anglican Church of Canada ten years ago.”
Archbishop Stanley Ntagali of Uganda said the decision “to allow clergy in civil partnerships to be eligible to become Bishops is really no different from allowing gay Bishops. This decision violates our Biblical faith and agreements within the Anglican Communion.”
The decision to permit partnered gay clergy to serve as bishops “only makes the brokenness of the Communion worse and is particularly disheartening coming from the Mother Church,” he argued.
The Archbishop of Kenya, Dr. Eliud Wabukala concurred, saying the announcement “will create further confusion about Anglican moral teaching and make restoring unity to the Communion an even greater challenge.”
The “proviso” that clergy in civil partnerships remain celibate is “clearly unworkable. It is common knowledge that active homosexuality on the part of Church of England clergy is invariably overlooked and in such circumstances it is very difficult to imagine anyone being brought to book,” the archbishop said on 6 Jan.
However, “the heart of the matter is not enforceability, but that bishops have a particular responsibility to be examples of godly living,” he argued. “It cannot be right that they are able to enter into legally recognised relationships which institutionalise and condone behaviour that is completely contrary to the clear and historic teaching of Scripture” and the teaching of the church.
“The weight of this moral teaching cannot be supported by a flimsy proviso,” Archbishop Wabukala said.
African objections were not to the appointment to the episcopate of men who had a same-sex sexual orientation, but to those clergy who had contracted a gay civil partnership being appointed to the episcopate. The proviso that such relationships were celibate only when they involved the clergy of the Church of England was preposterous, one African bishop explained.
The Global South archbishops added this decision was “wrong” and had been “taken without prior consultation or consensus with the rest of the Anglican Communion at a time when the Communion is still facing major challenges of disunity.”
“The Church, more than any time before, needs to stand firm for the faith once received from Jesus Christ through the Apostles and not yield to the pressures of the society,” the archbishops said.
Evangelical backlash follows England’s decision to allow “gay” bishops: Anglican Ink, January 7, 2012 January 8, 2013
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Ink, Church of England, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.Tags: Anglican Mainstream, Chris Sugden, Church of England Evangelical Council, Eliud Wabukala, Michael Lawson, Philip Giddings, Stanley Ntagali
comments closed
Archbishop Stanley Ntagali of Uganda
Conservative Evangelical leaders have charged the Church of England’s House of Bishops with hypocrisy, denouncing the 20 Dec 2012 announcement that gay clergy in civil partnerships, who remain celibate, may be appointed as bishops.
“A bishop known to be in a civil partnership could hardly be a focus of unity nor be a bishop for the whole church,” the leaders of Anglican Mainstream said over the weekend, while the Archbishops of Uganda and Kenya have warned that appointment of a partnered gay bishop would be a grievous blow to the wider Anglican Communion.
“Our grief and sense of betrayal are beyond words,” Archbishop Stanley Ntagali of Uganda said on 7 January 2013.
Read it all in Anglican Ink.
The Magic Circle and the Soho masses: Get Religion, January 3, 2013 January 3, 2013
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Ordinariate, Get Religion, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Roman Catholic Church.Tags: Bishops Conference for England and Wales, Soho Masses, Vincent Nichols
comments closed
The line between criticism and carping is not always clear. A story may appear to be well written, well sourced, balanced and complete to a casual reader. The same story, however, may appear naive, incomplete or wrongheaded to someone who has knowledge or opinions on the issues.
An article in today’s Guardian entitled “Gay mass services in Soho abolished by archbishop of Westminster” illustrates this problem. Taken on its own terms, this article is very good. However, to those who have been following the Soho masses controversy in the Catholic Church in England, this story prompts a “yes, but …” reaction, as it is written in the belief that the Roman Catholic Church is a unitary structure with a common doctrine.
While that may be true on paper, that is far from true in practice. The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales (BCEW) does not and has not shared the same views on social and moral issues as Pope’s John Paul II and Benedict XVI. For those unencumbered with a knowledge of English ecclesiastical intrigue, the Catholic Church may appear a monolith — it isn’t. But is it fair to critique an article in a general interest newspaper for not telling the story to the satisfaction of those in the know?
The lede to this story begins:
The Archbishop of Westminster, head of Roman Catholics in England and Wales, has ordered that special fortnightly “Soho masses” for gay and lesbian churchgoers in central London are not appropriate and are to be axed.
The services, intended to be particularly welcoming to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered Catholics, had been held at Our Lady of the Assumption church in the West End for six years with the blessing of senior clergy but had attracted criticism from traditionalists.
The story then moves to analysis, noting this will be seen as a victory for “traditionalists” within the church. And the curtailment of the Soho masses comes as the church battles the coalition government over its plans to introduce gay marriage in England and Wales.
The article gives a clear summary of the announcement made by Archbishop Vincent Nichols, reporting “the archbishop is said to believe that the pastoral care of the lesbian and gay church community should now be uncoupled from the sacrament of Mass, and that the [gay] community should not be singled out to have ‘special’ masses.”
The Catholic Church will continue to offer “pastoral care” to gays and lesbians “on Sunday evenings at Farm Street Church of the Immaculate Conception in Mayfair.” And in an interesting twist, the church that hosted the Soho masses will be turned over to the use of the “Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham, the body set up by Rome to cater for those who have defected from the Church of England to the Catholic church.”
The article notes the existence of the Soho masses had angered traditionalists who saw the services as a challenge to the church’s teaching on human sexuality, and then cites extracts from the archbishop’s letter that re-iterates the church’s teaching on these issues. The story closes with quotes from two conservative Catholic critics of the Soho masses, who welcome the news.
For the Guardian, this was a remarkably neutral report — that shaded towards the conservative side. No liberal voices appeared in the story attacking the church for homophobia or insensitivity to counter the two conservative voices. The article was also framed in a neutral tone, not picking sides — reporting the facts of the archbishop’s letter without comment.
Save for the absence of a liberal response, on its face this article passed the test of sound journalism — and as the story was framed about the announcement and not the reaction, the absence of contrary voices was not fatal. It allows the Guardian to come back to the issue with a second day story.
Yet, I was struck by the absence of a paragraph or clause that reported the end of the Soho masses was an about face for the archbishop. The article notes this was a victory for traditionalists, but does not go on to say that hardly any of the hierarchy are traditionalists — and that includes Archbishop Nichols.
The always readable, and quotable, Damian Thompson of the Daily Telegraph and Catholic Herald coined the phrase the “Magic Circle” to describe the liberal block that controls the hierarchy of the English Catholic Church. The Magic Circle (a wonderful phrase — if Thompson is not the author, he nonetheless has given it cachet) has safely ignored directives from Rome to conform its practices to Catholic teaching. The Catholic Herald reported in February 2012 Archbishop Nichols defended the Soho masses while the Catholic World Report had a 2011 story that noted the archbishop called for critics of the Soho masses to be silenced.
Now the archbishop has silenced the Soho masses. What happened to cause this extraordinary change? Is Archbishop Nichols shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here that the Soho masses convey false teachings on Catholic moral doctrine?
And, the site of the Soho masses will now be turned over the Anglican Ordinariate — again, extraordinary. The influx of conservative Angl0-Catholics into the Ordinariate has been fought by the Magic Circle through delay, obstruction and (I believe) a degree of venality. What has happened to produce the sea change in the CBEW?
While this article gives good treatment in 750 words to the Soho masses announcement, it does not go down deep into the story and answer the question “why”. Now, is this a problem? I would expect the Catholic Herald and other specialty publications to focus on the ecclesiastical and bureaucratic infighting that led to this announcement. But should the Guardian wade into these waters? What say you GetReligion readers? Is my critique justified or am I carping — asking that the Guardian to be something that it is not.
First printed in Get Religion.
Anglican-Orthodox relations near death, Moscow warns: The Church of England Newspaper, December 2, 2012 p 6. December 7, 2012
Posted by geoconger in Church of England, Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Russian Orthodox, Women Priests.Tags: Justin Welby, Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk
comments closed
Women bishops, gay marriage, and other innovations of doctrine and discipline will end meaningful Anglican-Orthodox relations, Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk, chairman of the Moscow Patriarchate’s Department for External Church Relations (DECR) has warned.
At a 26 Nov 2012 meeting in Moscow, Ambassador Tim Barrow and second secretary James Ford met with leaders of the Russian Orthodox Church. According to the official press statement “Metropolitan Hilarion greeted the Ambassador and shared his reminiscences of his student years in Oxford and his impressions of the recent visit to London where he attended celebration of the 50th anniversary of the Sourozh diocese.”
They also discussed the situation of Christians in the Middle East and North Africa, the role the Russian Orthodox and Polish Catholic Churches had played in reconciling the “peoples of Russia and Poland” and the state of “Orthodox-Anglican relations at present” – which the Moscow Patriarchate said were at a nadir.
On 13 Nov, Hilarion wrote to the Archbishop of Canterbury-designate, Bishop Justin Welby, offering his greetings upon the Bishop of Durham’s appointment as 105th Archbishop of Canterbury. However, Hilarion said meaningful Orthodox-Anglican ecumenical dialogue had all but died, and it was the Anglicans who have killed it.
In a carefully worded letter, Hilarion stated Moscow expected Bishop Welby to discipline the liberal wing of the Anglican Communion. Bishop Welby had been “entrusted with the spiritual guidance of the entire Anglican Communion, a unique union of like-minded people, which, however diverse the forms of its existence in the world may be, needs one ‘steward of God’ the guardian of the faith and witness to the Truth.”
“Regrettably, the late 20th century and the beginning of the third millennium have brought tangible difficulties in relations between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Churches of the Anglican Communion,” Hilarion said.
“The introduction female priesthood and now episcopate, the blessing of same-sex ‘unions’ and ‘marriages’, the ordination of homosexuals as pastors and bishops – all these innovations are seen by the Orthodox as deviations from the tradition of the Early Church, which increasingly estrange Anglicanism from the Orthodox Church and contribute to a further division of Christendom as a whole,” he wrote.
First published in The Church of England Newspaper.
Gay therapy ban ruled unconstitutional: Anglican Ink, December 4, 2012 December 5, 2012
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Ink, Free Speech, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.Tags: Jerry Brown, Pacific Justice Institute, SB 1172, Sexual Orientation Change Efforts
comments closed
Gov. Jerry Brown
A Federal Court in California has issued an injunction blocking implementation of SB 1172 – a law which would prohibit licensed therapists from counseling minors who wish to change their sexual orientation.
In a decision hailed as a victory for religious liberty and free speech, on 4 Dec 2012, District Court Judge William Shubb held the law was unconstitutional.
“Because the court finds that SB 1172 is subject to strict scrutiny and is unlikely to satisfy this standard, the court finds that plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims,” Judge Shubb held, “based upon “violations of their rights to freedom of speech under the First Amendment.”
Read it all in Anglican Ink.
Whistling in the dark about Islam and reform: Get Religion, December 3, 2012 December 3, 2012
Posted by geoconger in Civil Rights, Get Religion, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Islam, Press criticism.Tags: Asia Times, France, gay Muslims, latent-Episcopalian syndrome, Le Monde, Ludovic-Mohamed Zahed, reformation of Islam, Spengler
comments closed
Has anyone seen a story in the U.S. press about the opening of France’s first gay-friendly mosque? I’ve not come across anything in the U.S. mainstream media so far, but the story has received a great deal of play from the European press.
Now the cynic in me would want to feign shock at the New York Times not having picked up this story as it deals with an issue dear to its heart. However, it is the foreign policy ramifications of this story that I thought would attract the attention of the U.S. media elite — for the underlying theme of this story has been the philosophical principle behind U.S. Middle East policy. All right-thinking people — government leaders, columnists, the professoriate — believe Islam can be reformed and its tenets brought in line with the Western liberal mind. I am surprised not to have seen America’s public intellectuals jump all over this story.
On Friday Le Monde published a tight, nicely written story entitled « Une “mosquée” ouverte aux homosexuels près de Paris ». Drawing from a Reuters wire service story and its own reporting, Le Monde reported that a gay French Muslim had opened a mosque in a borrowed room on the grounds of a Buddhist dojo outside Paris.
Reuters reported:
Europe’s first gay and lesbian-friendly mosque opens on Friday in an eastern Paris suburb, in a challenge to mainstream Islam’s long tradition of condemning same-sex relationships. The mosque, set up in a small room inside the house of a Buddhist monk, will welcome transgender and transsexual Muslims and seat men and women together, breaking with another custom where the sexes are normally segregated during prayer. Its founder, French-Algerian gay activist and practicing Muslim Ludovic-Mohamed Zahed, will also encourage women to lead Friday prayers, smashing yet another taboo.
“It’s a radically inclusive mosque. A mosque where people can come as they are,” said Zahed, 35, whose prayer space will be the first in Europe to formally brand itself as a gay-friendly mosque, according to Muslim experts.
M. Zahed sounds like he has latent Episcopalian-syndrome and uses all the right sort of Christian left buzz words. The story offers a few more words of explanation from M. Zahed, negative reactions from French Muslim leaders and closes with comments from a French academic.
“The goal of these Muslims is to promote a form of Islam that is inclusive of progressive values,” said Florence Bergeaud-Blackler, an associate researcher at France’s Research and Studies Institute on the Arab and Muslim World. The push by gay Muslims for acceptance comes as a younger generation of Muslims is questioning some of the existing interpretations of the Koran as over-conservative. “Even though they are still a extreme minority, their views have a solid theological basis. So their message is not having an insignificant impact,” Bergeaud-Blackler said.
The Le Monde story goes a bit deeper. The comments from French Muslim leaders are much harsher than those reported by Reuters.
« Il y a des musulmans homosexuels, ça existe, mais ouvrir une mosquée, c’est une aberration, parce que la religion, c’est pas ça », estime Abdallah Zekri, président de l’Observatoire des actes islamophobes, sous l’autorité du Conseil français du culte musulman (CFCM).
Which I roughly translate as:
“There are Muslim homosexuals. They exist. But to open a mosque, that is an aberration because homosexuality is contrary to our religion,” said Abdallah Zekri, president of the Islamophobia (sorry AP but that’s what Le Monde calls it) Observer for the CFCM.
Le Monde also has some choice quotes from M. Zahed as well.
« Les musulmans ne doivent pas se sentir honteux. L’homosexualité n’est condamnée nulle part, ni dans le Coran ni dans la sunna. Si le prophète Mahomet était vivant, il marierait des couples d’homosexuels. » Il rêve d’un islam « apaisé, réformé, inclusif », qui accepterait le blasphème car « la pensée critique est essentielle pour le développement spirituel ».
Which I understand to mean:
“Muslims should not feel ashamed. Homosexuality is not condemned either in the Koran or in the Sunna. If the Prophet Muhammad were alive, he would marry of homosexual couples.” [Zahed] dreams of “peaceful, reformed, inclusive” Islam which which accepts blasphemy as “critical thinking essential to its spiritual development.”
Le Monde frames the story in a sympathetic light to M. Zahed. He is the underdog seeking to reform an ossified, dyed in the wool religious establishment. The article offers both sides of the debate — M. Zahed’s beliefs and the institutional response. 
However, I am surprised this item has not received the New Yorker 10,000 word treatment. A Muslim who speaks like an Episcopalian I imagine would be catnip to the mainstream American media.
The Islam of M. Zahed is that of Presidents Bush and Obama. Government policy since 9/11 has been predicated on the belief that Islam is like Christianity or Judaism. Given enough time, money and jawboning, Islam can reform and accommodate itself within a secularist pluralist society.
Le Monde‘s article about M. Zahed and Islam is written from a Westernized Christian worldview. Change the location to Texas and Islam for Southern Baptists and you would have the exact same story — even down to the buzz words and phrases proffered by M. Zahed. How often is it repeated that Jesus never said anything about homosexuality?
However, Islam is fundamentally different from Judaism and Christianity and this difference is what makes it nearly impossible for Islam to reform. And, it is the consensus of Islamic scholars that Islam is in no need of reform. Writing in the Asia Times under the pen name Spengler, David P. Goldman’, stated:
Hebrew and Christian scripture claim to be the report of human encounters with God. After the Torah is read each Saturday in synagogues, the congregation intones that the text stems from “the mouth of God by the hand of Moses”, a leader whose flaws kept him from entering the Promised Land. The Jewish rabbis, moreover, postulated the existence of an unwritten Revelation whose interpretation permits considerable flexibility with the text. Christianity’s Gospels, by the same token, are the reports of human evangelists.
The Archangel Gabriel, by contrast, dictated the Koran to Mohammed, according to Islamic doctrine. That sets a dauntingly high threshold for textual critics. How does one criticize the word of God without rejecting its divine character? In that respect the Koran resembles the “Golden Tablets” of the Angel Moroni purported found by the Mormon leader Joseph Smith more than it does the Jewish or Christian bibles.
Now almost 10 years old, Spengler’s “You say you want a reformation?” remains fresh and his observations stand as a challenge to U.S. government policies that believe Islam can be transformed into another variety of American Protestantism.
Speaking at the U.N. in September, President Obama said of the Arab Spring:
“True democracy—real freedom—is hard work,” Mr. Obama said. “Those in power have to resist the temptation to crack down on dissidents. In hard economic times, countries must be tempted— may be tempted—to rally the people around perceived enemies, at home and abroad, rather than focusing on the painstaking work of reform.”
Can Islam, which allows for no distinction between church and state, reform? The academic cited in the Le Monde piece believes it can. France’s first gay mosque will be a symbol of the younger generation’s desire for an “Islam that is inclusive of progressive values,” she stated. A contrary voice speaking to Islam’s response to minority voices (past and present) would have been a welcome counterweight. And give pause to those expecting peace to break out all over the Muslim world.
First printed in Get Religion.
Missile from Moscow for Justin Welby: Anglican Ink, November 13, 2012 November 13, 2012
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Ink, Archbishop of Canterbury, Church of England, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Russian Orthodox, Women Priests.Tags: Hilarion of Volokolamsk
comments closed
Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk
Meaningful Orthodox-Anglican ecumenical dialogue has all but died, the Moscow Patriarchate has told the next Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby – and it is the Anglicans who have killed it.
On 13 Nov 2012,Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk – the chairman of the Department of External Church Relations for the Russian church – wrote to Bishop Welby extending Moscow’s greetings upon his appointment as 105th Archbishop of Canterbury.
In a carefully worded letter, Hilarion stated Moscow expected Bishop Welby to discipline the liberal wing of the Anglican Communion. Bishop Welby had been “entrusted with the spiritual guidance of the entire Anglican Communion, a unique union of like-minded people, which, however diverse the forms of its existence in the world may be, needs one ‘steward of God’ the guardian of the faith and witness to the Truth.”
Read it all in Anglican Ink.
Anglican Unscripted Episode 55, November 3, 2012 November 3, 2012
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Church of Canada, Anglican Ordinariate, Anglican.TV, Archbishop of Canterbury, Church of England, GAFCON, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Marriage, Property Litigation, Virginia.Tags: Hurricane Sandy
comments closed
Anglican Unscripted Hosts Kevin and George talk about Gafcon II and the need for a global Anglican Congress to protect the Communion. You will also learn about Rome’s desire to bring Protestants into the ever expanding Ordinariate. AU also asks you to pray for the victims of Hurricane Sandy and we bring you perspective from skyscraper based storm landfall.
Canon Ashey talks about the dummying down of Scripture and other news from ACC-15. Peter has the latest rumors about the Crown Nomination Committee and Allan Haley discusses the second state to refute the validity of the Dennis Canon. Comments to AnglicanUnscipted@gmail.com #AU54 Please Donate to http://www.anglican.tv/donate
Diocese of Edmonton endorses gay blessings: The Church of England Newspaper, October 21, 2012 p 7. October 25, 2012
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Church of Canada, Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Marriage.Tags: Diocese of Edmonton, gay marriage, Jane Alexander
comments closed
The Rt Rev Jane Alexander
The Diocese of Edmonton has endorsed gay blessings. At a meeting of its diocesan synod on 13 October 2012 delegates to the Synod voted by strong majorities to accept resolution G-3 “Blessing Same-Gender Committed Unions”. Introduced by the Dean of Edmonton the resolution asked the “Synod request the Bishop to grant permission to any clergy who may wish to offer prayers of blessing for covenanted same-gender relationships.”
In her presidential address to the meeting, Bishop Jane Alexander urged members of the diocese to agree to disagree. “Over the years the church has weathered some pretty divisive and combustible issues,” she noted, citing remarriage after divorce, slavery and the ordination of women.
The church had survived these fights, she asserted because Anglicans had been willing to engage in dialogue and remain united. “Can we see each other as Christ sees us and resolve to be together, to talk together, to pray together?”
Edmonton becomes the seventh of Canada’s 30 dioceses to endorse gay blessings.
First printed in The Church of England Newspaper.
Bishop’s apologia for gay marriage released this week: The Church of England Newspaper, September 23, 2012, p 6. September 24, 2012
Posted by geoconger in Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, New Hampshire, The Episcopal Church.Tags: gay marriage, Gene Robinson
comments closed
Scriptural condemnations of homosexuality are cultural constructs that are products of their time, not eternal truths the Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire argues in a new book set for release on 18 Sept 2012.
Bishop Robinson made headlines in 2003 when he became the first openly non-celibate gay clergyman consecrated as a bishop in the Anglican Communion. At his diocesan convention last year, he announced he would step down from office at the end of January, 2013.
In his book God Believes in Love: Straight Talk About Gay Marriage (Alfred A. Knopf, $24) Bishop Robinson discussed his views on same-sex marriage and cited his own domestic arrangements in support of changing church teachings on marriage. When he met his partner, Mark, “for the first time, I was able to express my love for someone through my body. … I experienced a wholeness and integration between body and spirit I had only dreamed about. I remember thinking, ‘So this is what all the fuss is about! No wonder people like — and hallow — this!’” he wrote.
First printed in The Church of England Newspaper.
Gay marriage a greater moral threat than terrorism, bishop warns: The Church of England Newspaper, August 5, 2012 p 6. August 13, 2012
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Church of Kenya, Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Terrorism.Tags: al Shabaab, Diocese of Mombasa, Julius Kalu
comments closed
The Anglican Bishop of Mombasa has come under sharp criticism for saying the moral threat to society posed by gay marriage was of greater long term consequence to Kenyans than the threat from terrorism.
On 22 July 2012 Bishop Julius Kalu told worshipers at Mombasa’s Anglican cathedral “our greatest fear as Church should not be the grenade attacks, but the new teachings like same sex marriages.”
Kenya has witnessed an upsurge of sectarian violence in recent months. In April a grenade attack on a church killed one worshiper and on 1 July gunmen raided two churches killing at least 17 and wounding more than 60 people in Garissa, the capital of Kenya’s Northeast Province along the border with Somalia. Garissa serves as the Kenyan Army’s base of operations in its campaign against the al Qaeda linked Somali Muslim terrorist group al Shabaab.
Bishop Kalu told the cathedral congregation that churches had seen a fall in attendance since the start of the al Shabaab bombing campaign as people have stayed at home, afraid of the violence. While not deprecating the threat of terrorist violence, the bishop stated the greater evil was the lies of Satan that would pull people away from the faith – not the attacks of men.
“Christians must be fully armed spiritually as it is only divine intervention that will enable the country overcome these challenges,” the bishop said according to the East African Standard.
“The Church is at war with enemies of the faith,” Bishop Kalu said, citing those who sought to change the doctrine of marriage.
An editorial in the Nairobi Star took the bishop to task for his comments arguing that “these gays are not hurting anyone. They are minding their own business. And what they do behind closed doors with a consenting partner should remain private, just as it should for husband and wife.”
“Terrorism on the other hand is a deadly threat to Kenya,” the Star said as “many Kenyans die each year at the hands of al Shabaab. Tourism at the Coast is depressed because of terrorism. Gays do not hurt Kenya. Terrorists do hurt Kenya. It is extraordinary that Bishop Kalu cannot see this,” it said.
First printed in The Church of England Newspaper.
Sexualty fight heats up as Irish Archbishop announces his retirement: Church of England Newspaper, June 17, 2012 June 18, 2012
Posted by geoconger in Church of England Newspaper, Church of Ireland, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.Tags: Alan Harper, Diocese of Armagh, Harold Miller, Paul Colton
comments closed
The Primate of All Ireland, Dr. Alan Harper, has announced that he will step down by 1 October 2012, leaving his successor the task of moderating the church’s spirited debate over homosexuality.
In a statement released last week the Church of Ireland Press Office said Dr. Harper “will continue to carry out all the duties and responsibilities of the Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of All Ireland as normal until 30 September 2012.”
“The Church of Ireland House of Bishops will consider in due course the selection of a successor,” the press office said.
The Archbishop of Dublin, Dr Michael Jackson, said: ‘In responding to the Archbishop of Armagh’s announcement of his forthcoming retirement, I wish to pay tribute to his strong commitment to fairness and steadfastness in office.”
“Across the Church of Ireland, Archbishop Harper has sought to enable a wide range of voices to be heard on a broad spectrum of topics,” Dr. Jackson said. “Together with all my fellow–bishops, and the Church of Ireland at large, I wish Archbishop Harper and Mrs Harper everything that is best in retirement.”.
Born in Tamworth, Staffordshire in 1944, Dr. Harper was educated at Leeds University and worked for the Archeological Survey of Northern Ireland before he entered Trinity College Dublin to train for the ministry.
Ordained deacon in 1978 and priest in 1979, Dr. Harper began his ministry in Northern Ireland in Connor diocese from 1978-1980. In 1980 he moved to Derry diocese to be incumbent of Moville and then became incumbent of Christ Church Londonderry from 1982-1986. Returning to Connor diocese Dr. Harper served as incumbent of Malone from 1986-2002.
On 17 December 2001 Dr. Harper was elected Bishop of Connor and on 9 January 2007 he was elected Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of All Ireland by the House of Bishops.
Tensions over homosexuality and church have dominated the deliberations of the Church of Ireland during the last few years of Dr. Harper’s tenure as primate. The outgoing archbishop has sought to engender conversation over this issue, while maintaining the current church teachings on human sexuality.
At its May meeting of General Synod, the church adopted Motion 8 which reaffirmed its traditional teaching on marriage and rejected gay marriage and gay clergy. In the wake of the Motion 8 vote evangelical and liberal bishops indicated the fight was far from over.
Speaking to the Belfast News Letter, Bishop Harold Miller of Down & Dromore, a leading Evangelical bishop, said he would like the Church of Ireland to adopt a policy like that of the Church of England which requires clergy who enter into civil unions to give assurances to their bishop that their private conduct is in conformance with the church’s standards of clergy conduct.
The recent vote by synod had made clear that “sexual intercourse is only properly within marriage, that marriage can only be defined as between one man and one woman for the Church of Ireland, so same-sex marriage is out and that outside marriage what is asked of people is that they live chaste lives,” the bishop said.
Permitting the Dean of Leithlin to enter into a civil union was a “serious situation,” the bishop said, and “it would be very helpful to hear some clarification about the situation.
One of the two bishops who voted against Motion 8, Bishop Paul Colton of Cork told his diocesan synod that he would not back away from his commitment to “diversity”.
“Are we not instead called to live uncomfortably and prophetically in a place where the edges of belonging are fuzzy rather than defined; attracting people in rather than pushing them out; breaking down barriers; taking down walls of division; including rather than excluding,” he asked on 9 June 2012.
“I believe and hope that in this part of the Church of Ireland, the response to lesbian and gay fellow Christians will be marked by continued welcome and inclusion and, indeed, there is, to my mind, a sound Christian charter and path in those words I saw over the door of Christ Church Cathedral, Vancouver: ‘Open doors; Open Hearts; Open Minds’,” the bishop said.
First printed in The Church of England Newspaper.
Australian bishop rejects church ban on gay clergy: The Church of England Newspaper, May 27, 2012 p 7. June 4, 2012
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Church of Australia, Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.Tags: Diocese of Gippsland, John McIntyre
comments closed
Bishop John McIntyre
An Australian bishop has told his diocesan synod that as a matter of conscience he cannot abide by the church’s policy forbidding the ordination or deployment of non-celibate gay clergy.
In his presidential address to the 36th meeting of the Synod of the Diocese of Gippsland, Bishop John McIntyre said that as a matter of conscience he could not conform to the House of Bishops protocol on gay clergy. At their March meeting the bishops agreed that they accepted “the weight” of the 1998 Lambeth Resolution on Human Sexuality as well as resolutions adopted by the Australian General Synod as “expressing the mind of this church on issues of human sexuality.”
The bishops stated they would “uphold the position of our Church in regard to human sexuality as we ordain, license, authorise or appoint to ministries within our dioceses.”
In a statement given to Eternity magazine, a spokesman for the primate, Archbishop Phillip Aspinall said “In effect it is an undertaking not to ordain, license, authorise or appoint persons whom the bishop knows to be in a sexual relationship outside of marriage.”
In his 19 May 2012 address, Bishop McIntyre said that he would not conform with this protocol.
“I will appoint to office in our diocese those whom I believe God is calling to minister among us,” he said adding that this as “my commitment to God and to you, and I am willing to live with any consequences that may arise from remaining true to that commitment.”
The bishop explained that his defiance was based upon his reading of Scripture.
“Only in light of reflection on God’s Word did I finally come to understand. Despite what I or others may believe is their worthiness, the fruit of the works of many gay and lesbian people has brought God’s blessing to me and to many other people, both in and beyond the church. That is the measure of their worthiness to minister in the name of Jesus Christ in the life of the church, and in the community in the name of the church. That indicates their place in the life of God’s people.”
“Put simply, I think God has been saying to me for many years now ‘If it is good enough for me, John, why is it not good enough for you?’” the bishop said.
Science and new ways of reading Scripture had led the bishop to this conclusion.
“The world is round, not flat, despite what those who first penned the words of the Bible thought and assumed. It took the church a long time to acknowledge this, and in the name of orthodoxy, it treated Galileo rather shabbily along the way.”
The medieval church’s rejection of Galileo was an “exegetical parallel” for the church as it wrestled with homosexuality.
“Because of recent new understanding, we now all know that same-sex attracted people are not heterosexual people who have made a perverse choice about how they express their sexuality. They simply are what they are. We might like to argue about whether this is how life should or should not be, but that will not change the way it is. And we have to respond to what is,” Bishop McIntyre said.
First printed in The Church of England Newspaper.
Evangelical pressure on pro-gay Irish bishop: The Church of England Newspaper, May 27, 2012 p 7. May 31, 2012
Posted by geoconger in Church of England Newspaper, Church of Ireland, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.Tags: Harold Miller, Michael Burrows, Reform Ireland, Tom Gordon
comments closed
Bishop Michael Burrows
Evangelical leaders in the Church of Ireland are pressing the church to question the Bishop of Cashel & Ossory and the Dean of Leithlin, asking that they clarify their actions and views on homosexuality.
In a statement printed on its website last week, Reform Ireland criticized the Bishop Michael Burrows of Cashel & Ossory for his support of gay clergy civil unions and his vote against Motion 8 at last week’s meeting of General Synod in Dublin.
The Bishop of Down & Dromore, the Rt. Rev. Harold Miller – a co-sponsor of Motion 8 with Archbishop Michael Jackson of Dublin – told the Belfast News Letter the man at the centre of the gay clergy civil union row, Dean Tom Gordon, should clarify whether his gay civil union was platonic or sexual.
The 10 May post on the conservative Evangelical group’s website was sharply critical of Bishop Burrows, who it called “one of the bishops at the centre of the homosexual row.”
His “unilateral actions instigated the greatest degree of disunity the Church of Ireland has seen in the modern era, was one of those whose remarks led to the motion, affirming the traditional Christian belief in marriage as outlined in Canon 31, being dismissed: this, despite the fact that the House of Bishops themselves had as a body brought the motion to the General Synod in the first place!”
“What a shambles! It was even applauded – at least by those keen to introduce homosexuality as a valid Christian lifestyle in the Church of Ireland,” Reform said, adding that it “begs the question what unity is there in the Church of Ireland and what sort of behaviour are the House of Bishops modelling?”
Bishop Burrows did not respond to a request for comments.
After being withdrawn from consideration Motion 8, which affirmed the church’s traditional moral teachings and implicitly rejected gay marriage and non-celibate gay clergy, was reintroduced by the bishops on the second day of synod with slight amendments, and was overwhelmingly approved by all houses of synod on the third day of proceedings following four hours of debate. Bishop Burrows, along with Bishop Paul Colton of Cork, Cloyne and Ross, voted against the motion.
In an interview published 15 May 2012 with the News Letter, Bishop Miller said he would like the Church of Ireland to adopt a policy like that of the Church of England which requires clergy who enter into civil unions to give assurances to their bishop that their private conduct is in conformance with the church’s standards of clergy conduct.
Bishop Miller said that “as I understand it,” the Church of England’s position is that “if a minister is in a civil partnership that person has to make it clear to their bishop that it’s not a sexual relationship.”
“The Church of Ireland has not yet made that clear,” the bishop said.
The recent vote by synod had made clear that “sexual intercourse is only properly within marriage, that marriage can only be defined as between one man and one woman for the Church of Ireland, so same-sex marriage is out and that outside marriage what is asked of people is that they live chaste lives,” the bishop said.
Dean Tom Gordon’s entering into a civil union was a “serious situation,” the bishop said.
“You can see what has happened in the church – and I think it would be very helpful to hear some clarification about the situation.
“I mean, I don’t know, for example, if Dean Tom Gordon would be prepared to clarify the situation and say: I am not living in a sexual relationship. That may well be the case,” Bishop Miller said.
First printed in The Church of England Newspaper.
ARCIC co-chair: Anglicans and Catholics do not share a common moral view on homosexuality: The Church of England Newspaper, May 20, 2012 p 6. May 28, 2012
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Communion, ARCIC, Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.Tags: David Moxon
comments closed
Participants of ARCIC III
Anglicans and Roman Catholics have differing views on the morality of homosexual behavior, the Anglican co-chair of the ARCIC talks claimed last week.
Archbishop David Moxon’s remarks came as members of the third session of the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission (ARCIC III) gathered in Hong Kong for their second session of ecumenical dialogue.
Meeting at the Mission to Seafarers in Kowloon from 3-10 May 2012, the commission released a statement saying the gathering “built upon the schema it had prepared at its first meeting. The schema seeks to address the interrelated ecclesiological and ethical questions of its mandate under four headings: the identity and mission of the Church; the patterning of the Church’s life that undergirds local and universal communion; shortcomings in the churches which obscure the glory of God; and ethical discernment and teaching. Members presented papers in each of these areas which were discussed both in plenary and in small groups.”
The communiqué stated that to “assist its own understanding, the Commission is preparing case studies in three ethical areas: matters which historically once seemed settled but which, upon reflection, have come to be viewed quite differently by both traditions.(slavery); issues on which Anglican and Roman Catholic teaching is at variance (divorce and remarriage, contraception); and evolving issues (a theology of work and the economy). It is not intended that the Commission will seek to resolve disputed ethical questions. Rather, its purpose is to analyze the means by which our two traditions have arrived at or are currently determining ‘right ethical teaching’.”
Speaking to the press after the meeting the Anglican co-chair, Archbishop Moxon stated that homosexuality was another ethical area where Anglicans and Roman Catholics diverged. He told ENI that it is easier for the two churches to have a common understanding on social ethics, but not sexual ethics and the topic of homosexuality. But he stressed that the study of some “first principles” from the two churches, like the study of the Bible, may help to build up common ground.
The Commission will prepare further papers, expand the case studies, and continue its work in preparation for its next meeting 29 April to 6 May 2013.
First printed in The Church of England Newspaper.
Has Time printed the worst Anglican article ever?: Get Religion, May 18, 2012. May 18, 2012
Posted by geoconger in GAFCON, Get Religion, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, New Hampshire.Tags: Gene Robinson, Time Magazine
comments closed
“How Will Anglicans React if New Hampshire Episcopalians Elect Another Gay Bishop?” Time Magazine asks in a 17 May 2012 article printed on its website.
To which this Anglican responds, “Why don’t you ask them?”
Question headlines are often a flag of trouble ahead for an article — a signal that the article will be weak. The question is usually a rhetorical one — the answer is given by the editorial voice of the article. Or it is some sort of “come on” — an exaggerated statement to attract the reader’s attention.
No, this is not the worst Anglican article ever printed. There have been silly Anglican articles, wrong Anglican articles, dumb Anglican articles, partisan/hack job Anglican articles, and egregiously cruel and ignorant Anglican news articles printed over the past few decades, so it is false and unkind of me to say this is the worst Anglican article ever. Nor can the author be blamed for the silly headline, as reporters seldom write their own headlines.
But this article on the forthcoming episcopal election in the Episcopal Diocese of New Hampshire is a wreck. While the editorial voice of this ill-informed story supports the progressive agenda in the Episcopal Church, it does so by treating the actors in this drama as one dimensional creatures — cartoons who represent issues rather than people whose lives are not exclusively driven by issues in human sexuality.
The lede of this story begins:
In the summer of 1992, an Episcopalian priest in Baltimore officiated at the wedding of two female congregants. Though he had been “careful to obtain all the necessary permissions,” it wasn’t long before the Rev. William Rich found himself on the front page of the Baltimore Sun and at the center of a religious controversy. Rich was criticized by many in the community and church for performing a gay wedding ceremony, but he’s never regretted the move. …
First problem — the claim that Fr. Rich performed a wedding for two women is false. The 1992
Baltimore Sun article reported that a blessing ceremony took place — but also stated this ceremony was not a marriage and should not be construed as being a marriage.
Father Rich, who is a chaplain at Goucher College, says the ceremony he devised at the request of the women involved was not a wedding but “the blessing of two people committed to each other.”
The Bishop of Maryland told the Sun:
Bishop Eastman said he was assured by the priest “that the liturgy in question was not in any sense intended to be a marriage as Christians understand that sacrament.”
“It was meant to be a private event addressing personal, pastoral needs,” the bishop added. “Neither the two women involved nor Father Rich desired to advance a cause or make a public statement of any kind.”
There is a difference between marriage in a church and the blessing of two people in a same-gender relationship. It is a gross error to conflate the two.
The article then transitions into the story that Fr. Rich is one of three candidates standing for election as Bishop of New Hampshire. It reports that he is an “openly gay man” and and notes that delegates to the diocesan electoral convention:
… will cast their vote by secret ballot to choose a replacement for the current bishop, the retiring Gene Robinson, who is also gay. If a second gay man is elected to the post, the selection will likely reverberate through the staunchly conservative arms of the Anglican Communion, a global network of churches to which the Episcopalians belong. It could also widen a fissure in the network that’s been forming for quite some time.
Second problem — the analysis offered here is just plain dumb. Gay and lesbian clergy have stood for election in several dioceses of the Episcopal Church since Gene Robinson was elected in 2003, and one was elected suffragan or assistant bishop in the Diocese of Los Angeles in 2009. The news that a gay clergyman is standing for election as bishop of New Hampshire is hardly shocking to anyone who has any knowledge of the Episcopal Church or the wider Anglican Communion.
The assertion that the election of Fr. Rich would widen a “fissure in the network” is an equally silly statement. The Anglican Communion is not a network of churches but a communion of churches — this is a theological term. The Lutheran World Federation is a network of churches. The Roman Catholic Church is a single church — it would say it is the church. Anglicans like the Orthodox are in between. They see themselves as part of a single catholic church whose members reside in autonomous national churches — one of the battles being waged within the Anglican world is on the nature of this autonomy. Is it absolute or conditional?
To call Anglicans a network of churches implies Time has decided that it backs one side in the dispute — or is an indication of ignorance.
I suspect it is ignorance on Times’ part, as the impending fissure has already happened. Approximately 22 of the 38 provinces of the Anglican Communion are in some form of impaired communion with the Episcopal Church. This rupture has taken many forms, but the break has already occurred.
(Last October the Episcopal Church’s national office released talking points disputing the figure of 22 of 38 cited by GetReligion’s Mollie Ziegler Hemingway in an article she wrote for the Wall Street Journal. However, a little checking showed the Episcopal Church’s claim to be false.)
The current state of play is of a broken communion. One where some bishops will not attend meetings if other bishops, whom they regard as apostate, are present. A communion where its leaders can no longer worship together as they cannot all receive the Eucharist, Holy Communion, in the same service. As the former primate, (the archbishop or presiding bishop of a province) of the Province of the Southern Cone (the southern half of South America) told me in 2009, the traditionalists do not believe the leaders of the Episcopal Church are “Christians as we understand it.”
The article attempts to place what it thinks might be the impending split in historical context, stating the:
… crack in the Anglican community began to appear about nine years ago when Robinson became the first openly gay (and not celibate) man to be ordained as bishop.
Problem three — The crack has been around for almost 40 years and has been steadily widening. The consecration of Gene Robinson was a significant event, but hardly the first event in the splintering of the Anglican Communion. GetReligion’s tmatt has written extensively on this point and I need not restate the accurate Anglican timeline here.
The language used by this article is biased and ill-informed and full of questionable assumptions and conclusions. The story of Gene Robinson wearing a bullet-proof vest to his consecration is shared. And yes, it is true he wore such a vest. Yet the article does not go further in developing this point and the claims repeated over the years of physical danger. The only clergyman whose murder so far can be laid at the feet of the Anglican wars is Canon Rodney Hunter of Malawi. Popping in the death threat business without context speaks to the lack of knowledge of the subject under review.
Ignorance continues to drive this story to its end. It notes:
It doesn’t look like the issue is dying down, either. Last month, an ultra-conservative Anglican offshoot group, the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans, held a conference in London to address the gay bishop question.
Problem four — The FCA conference was not held to address the gay bishop question. The FCA seeks to reform and renew the Anglican Communion from within and by doing so, win souls for Christ. It is also laughable to call the FCA an “ultra-conservative Anglican offshoot group” as it leaders represents the majority of members of the Anglican Communion. One might was well say the Diocese of New Hampshire is an “ultra-liberal Anglican offshoot group”.
The article continues with silly statements and assertions about the structure of the Anglican Communion, why Archbishop Rowan Williams announced his retirement, but returns to New Hampshire for its close.
When asked about the potential for controversy if the diocese were to elect another gay bishop, Reverend Adrian Robbins-Cole, the president of the Standing Committee, insisted that the committee only felt excitement about Rich, as well as the other two candidates, Rev. Penelope Maud Bridges, and Rev. A. Robert Hirschfeld. “What we really focus on is trying to be guided by God to elect the bishop who we need in New Hampshire and whom we think is going to thrive and grow,” Robbins-Cole says. “That’s our real focus.”
A grammar point here. It should be “the Rev.”, never “Rev.”
I do feel sorry for Fr. Rich, Time is touting his candidacy in such a vulgar way that it might well trigger a backlash among New Hampshire voters. It also does a disservice to Fr. Rich’s candidacy as it turns him into a one dimensional figure whose only merit is that he is gay. Being classified as a novelty candidate, or a one issue priest, treats him as a token and implies the Diocese of New Hampshire sees only that aspect of his life and work.
What then can one say about this wreck? It is factually incorrect, ill-informed about the issue, dismissive and disparaging of one side, and condescending towards the other. It asks a question of Anglican conservatives, but goes for answer to a white Australian conservative — when the majority of voices arrayed against the liberal wing of the church are African, Asian and Indian.
This may not be the worst Anglican article ever written, but it comes close.
First printed in GetReligion.
Methodist “no” to homosexuality: The Church of England Newspaper, May 13, 2012 p 6. May 17, 2012
Posted by geoconger in Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Methodism.comments closed
Gay activists demonstrating at the Methodist General Assembly
The General Conference of the United Methodist Church has reaffirmed its teaching that same-sex relationships are “incompatible with Christian teaching.”
On 3 May 2012 delegates to the church assembly meeting in Tampa voted by a 60 per cent to 40 per cent margin to affirm the church’s traditional teaching in the Book of Discipline on human sexuality. The Book of Discipline, Paragraph 161F states: “The United Methodist Church does not condone the practice of homosexuality and considers this practice incompatible with Christian teaching.
As the vote was announced, gay activists clad in rainbow stoles took to the floor of the meeting in protest, temporarily suspending the proceedings. Resolutions asking the General Conference to state that it disagrees over the issue of homosexuality were also defeated.
With approximately 8 million members, the Methodist Church is among the largest denominations in the United States. However, almost half of its membership now resides overseas. While the issue may be brought back to the next meeting of the General Conference in 2016, it is unlikely to pass as the American half of the church has been in decline while the overseas half has grown rapidly.
The vote not to repudiate its teachings on homosexuality follows recent moves by the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the Presbyterian Church USA and the Episcopal Church to normalize homosexuality.
First printed in The Church of England Newspaper.
Reporting on gays, women and the PCUSA splits: Get Religion, April 27, 2012 April 27, 2012
Posted by geoconger in Get Religion, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Presbyterian/Church of Scotland, Press criticism, Women Priests.Tags: First Presbyterian Church of Colorado Springs
comments closed
Thou shakest thy head and hold’st it fear or sin
To speak a truth. If he be slain, say so;
The tongue offends not that reports his death:
And he doth sin that doth belie the dead,
Not he which says the dead is not alive.
Yet the first bringer of unwelcome news
Hath but a losing office, and his tongue
Sounds ever after as a sullen bell,
Remember’d tolling a departing friend.The Earl of Northumberland in Henry IV part II
Act I, scene 1, lines 95-103
William Shakespeare
Blaming the teller of bad news for the bad news is as old as time. Reporters who break stories about malfeasance in churches are often attacked for airing dirty linen. I’ve been reproached by those perturbed by what they read in my stories about bad behavior in churches. My critics argue that as a Christian (which I am) and a priest (which I am) I should suppress discomforting or embarrassing news. I should take as my guide Matthew 18:15-17.
15 If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. 16 But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’17 If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.
I am not persuaded by their Biblical exegesis nor by the merits of the argument, believing that truth telling is a higher virtue than face saving. The phrase, “shooting the messenger” is a valid rejoinder to these criticisms,
The same retort can be applied to media criticism. Complaining about what something is not, rather than addressing what it is, is a form of shooting the messenger. When there is a hole in a story a reader should not assume the reporter is responsible. Some things are unknowable — try as we like, reporters are not omniscient.
A recent story in The Colorado Springs Gazette on the disaffiliation of one of the state’s largest churches from its parent denomination — the Presbyterian Church of the U.S.A. (PCUSA) — brought this problem to mind.
Let me say up front there is nothing wrong with the article on the First Presbyterian Church of Colorado Springs’ vote to leave its presbytery — it is a workman-like story that relates crisply the facts. But The Gazette story entitled “Sparked by acceptance of gay ministers, First Presbyterian bolts denomination” seemed to be missing something. This something was not the rather dumb headline. The story makes it clear that it was not only about gay ministers and the church didn’t bolt — but reporters do not write headlines and this brick forms no part of my critique.
The lede is clean and lays out the facts well:
In an historic vote Sunday morning, the largest Presbyterian church in Colorado voted overwhelmingly to leave its governing body and join a new, more conservative denomination.
An estimated 95.5 percent of the 1,769 congregants who cast ballots at First Presbyterian Church in downtown Colorado Springs voted to leave the mainstream Presbyterian Church USA in favor of the newly-created Evangelical Covenant Order of Presbyterians.
The new denomination was created with the help of First Presbyterian’s senior pastor Jim Singleton.
The reporter’s editorial voice comes into play at this stage through her selection of quotes — and to her credit she does not play favorites. After relating the news of the vote, the author addressed the question of the minority who opposed the vote — identified as 80 out of almost 1780 members who voted. The first quote comes from a church spokesman who acknowledges that “some members may leave.
This is followed by a quote from a church spokesman stating the vote was historic. Background on the church and its decision to leave the PCUSA follows with The Gazette avoiding the mistake of portraying this as being solely a gay issue.
Sunday’s vote was the culmination of almost a year’s worth of work by church leaders who wanted to distance themselves from the Presbyterian Church USA. That organization voted in 2011 to allow openly gay ministers to be ordained, but First Presbyterian leaders say the divide is greater than just that issue – going back to a basic way that scriptures are read and interpreted.
“God has called us to respond to his call, step into something new and hold firm to our understanding of scripture,” Cindy Sparks, chair of the church’s Board of Trustees said Sunday morning.
Further detail on the vote and what happens next follow, as does a quote from a member of the minority opposed to the split, and closing quote from a member of the majority. All in all this was a very clean story.
But it was also incomplete. The pastor is quoted as saying this was historic. Well why was it historic? The story is not clear on this point. Was it historic for First Pres, for Presbyterians in Colorado, for all Presbyterians?
I was struck by the weakness of the pastor’s comments reported in the article as to why it was historic. Did the reporter not do her job? Did she not understand what was said? I think she did. The problem was that she was not given much to work with.
When I checked the church’s website and read the statement issued after the vote, I found that all the reporter had to work with were some rather anodyne comments. If you want to know why this was a “historic day”, you won’t find an answer from the church.
As an aside — What is it about Colorado Springs and conservative churches? First Presbyterian of Colorado Springs was the largest PCUSA congregation in Colorado and it quit is denomination. In 2007 Colorado’s largest Episcopal Church, Grace and St Stephen’s in Colorado Springs, quit its denomination over the same basic issues as First Presbyterian. That split ended badly for the parish and the Episcopal Diocese of Colorado — the Presbyterians appear to have avoided the path of litigation. Is there something in the air, or unique to the culture of that community that would see schisms in two mainline congregations — as well as produce inordinately large Episcopal and Presbyterian churches?
To find out why this was historic — and why this story has wider significance you need to do some research in the congregation’s website. What is the significance of the choice of First Pres’s new denomination? The article mentions that the pastor, Jim Singleton, helped form the ECO — Evangelical Covenant Order of Presbyterians — but why did the church not join one of the existing conservative Presbyterian groups?
A letter to the congregation on the church website states that it was the issue of women ministers that led First Pres to the ECO, as the existing conservative groups were not as accepting of women clergy as was First Pres.
One of the subtexts often unreported in the stories about the mainline splits is the question of women clergy. Conservatives leaving the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, the Episcopal Church and the Presbyterian Church may be at odds with their denomination’s teachings on human sexuality, and they may express this as being a division over the interpretation of Scripture, but amongst themselves they are divided over women clergy.
And this division over women clergy is driven by the interpretation of Scripture. What criteria is First Pres using to say that the PCUSA has broken with Scripture over homosexual clergy, but not over women clergy? In asking this question, I am not assuming an answer — rather seeking development of an issue. One, for example, that may well divide the nascent Anglican conservative church, the Anglican Church in North America, and is dividing First Pres and the ECO from the Evangelical Presbyterian Church.
I also liked this article from The Gazette because it did not make the mistake so often made by newspapers in distilling the mainline splits into a story about opposition to gay ministers or gay marriage. That is part, but is far from the whole story. It is the back half of the story — the question of where these breakaway churches are going and why — that was missing. And, if the church can’t explain why — a reporter can’t tell her readers why.
The first bringer of unwelcome news, as Shakespeare observes, hath but a losing office. Beating up on the press for omitting part of a story is easy. But when the actors in the drama don’t say their lines — the reporter is unable to say it for them.
What say you GetReligion readers? Is this a case of the subject, not the journalist, dropping the ball? Who should be telling this story?
Gay clergy banned in Australia: The Church of England Newspaper, April 22, 2012 p 7. April 20, 2012
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Church of Australia, Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.Tags: John McIntyre
comments closed
Bishop John McIntyre
The annual meeting of the Australian church’s House of Bishops in Melbourne has adopted a protocol reaffirming the church’s position banning the ordination and deployment of non-celibate gay clergy.
On 29 March 2012 Anglican Media Sydney posted to its website the statement adopted by the meeting. It noted that “in comparison with other Bishops meetings, especially those associated with the Episcopal Church in the United States, the Australian agreement is being seen as a conservative stance.”
The protocols “express the common mind of the bishops as determined by consensus at our National Meeting” the bishops wrote, noting that they had agreed to “abide by them and renew this commitment annually by consensus.”
The bishops said they “accept the weight of 1998 Lambeth Resolution 1.10 and the 2004 General Synod resolutions 33, 59 and 61-64 as expressing the mind of this church on issues of human sexuality.”
They “undertake to uphold the position of our Church in regard to human sexuality as we ordain, license, authorise or appoint to ministries within our dioceses.”
And they “understand that issues of sexuality are subject to ongoing conversation within our Church and we undertake to support these conversations, while seeking to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.”
In a statement given to Eternity magazine, a spokesman for the primate, Archbishop Phillip Aspinall said “In effect it is an undertaking not to ordain, license, authorise or appoint persons whom the bishop knows to be in a sexual relationship outside of marriage.”
Spokesman for Changing Attitude Australia did not respond to a request for comments, nor did the Bishop of Gippsland whose licencing of a partnered gay priest to a parish living last year prompted sharp criticism. Bishop John McIntyre told the ABC radio service the appointment of a partnered gay priest did not violate the 1998 Lambeth Conference resolution on human sexuality, “because I didn’t actually ordain this man. He was ordained over 30 years ago in the diocese of Melbourne.”
The new protocol, however, clarifies the understanding of the issues for the Australian church as it forbids the call and employment of clergy whose personal lives do not conform to the church’s teaching on marriage and sexual relations.
Church of Ireland debates sex and Christian belief: The Church of England Newspaper, March 15, 2012 March 15, 2012
Posted by geoconger in Church of England Newspaper, Church of Ireland, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Marriage.Tags: Alan Harper, gay marriage, Michael Jackson
comments closed
The Archbishops of Dublin and Armagh. Photo: Church of Ireland Press Office
The Church of Ireland has reaffirmed its belief in traditional marriage. In a statement released at the conclusion of a two-day meeting in Ballyconnell, the Archbishops of Armagh and Dublin stated the “church’s position on marriage as being the union of one man and one woman remains constant”.
Approximately 450 members of the Church of Ireland’s General Synod met from 9-10 March 2012 at the Slieve Russell Hotel in Co Cavan at a special meeting of synod called to discuss human sexuality “in the context of Christian belief”.
The meeting had been organized by the Irish House of Bishops in response to the controversy surrounding the revelation that the Dean of Leighlin in July 2011 registered a same-sex civil union with his partner, with the tacit approval of his bishop.
The special two day meeting was not designed to achieve a resolution to the disputes over human sexuality, organizers of the conference told The Church of England Newspaper, but to further debate. The gathering was also closed to the press in order to facilitate the free flow of discussion.
The conference opened with address from Dr. Alan Harper, the Archbishop of Armagh and Dr. Michael Jackson, the Archbishop of Dublin and was followed by round table discussion of the scripture and human sexuality led by Bishop Richard Clarke of Meath and Kildare. After a break for dinner the conference reassembled to hear “storytellers” offer “their personal experiences from gay perspectives.”
A series of seminars were offered on Friday evening and Saturday morning. The Rev Doug Baker, a consultant to the Church of Ireland’s Hard Gospel Committee and instructor at the Church of Ireland Theological Institute, spoke on the topic of handling conflicts within the church, while Mrs. Ethne Harkness and Judge Catherine McGuinness gave an overview of the state of legislation in Northern Ireland and the Republic on civil partnerships and the proposals being put forward by the coalition government on gay marriage.
Two ecumenical participants, Bishop Jana Jeruma-Gringberga of the Lutheran Church in Great Britain and Dr Andrew Goddard of the Church of England led a seminar on the science and psychology of same-sex attraction and gender determination, while Dr. William Olhausen, rector of Killiney Parish, Ballybrack, and Dr Stephen White, Dean of Killaloe in Co Clare spoke to the theological issues at play.
Dr. Bryan Follis, rector of All Saints’ Church, Belfast and the Rev Brian O’Rourke, rector of St Anne’s Church, Shandon in Cork offered differing views on the pastoral care of gay people in congregations. Dr Follis affirmed the church’s traditional teaching on the morality of homosexual behavior, but discussed ways of providing pastoral support to those with a homosexual orientation that reflected the love of Christ while being faithful to his word. Mr. O’Rourke, rector of parish self-described “inclusive church” argued the church should provide the same level of support to gay people that it did to all others, including offering them the opportunity to marry.
Two sets of parents spoke of their experiences with gay children, while the chairperson of Changing Attitude Ireland, Canon Virginia Kennerley and the chaplain at Queen’s University Belfast, the Rev. Barry Forde, spoke on the question whether it was possible to agree to disagree.
On the second day, the Bishop of Down & Dromore, the Rt. Rev. Harold Miller led a study for the conference on the Gospel texts surrounding human sexuality (Matt 5:17-48; Matt 19:3-12; Matt 25:31-46; John 4:1-54), while the Bishop of Kilmore, Elphin & Ardagh, the Rt. Rev. Ken Clarke, discussed Rom 1:8-32 and 1 Cor 1:1-20.
In their statement the archbishops affirmed the conference had seen “substantial conversation reflecting strongly held convictions characterised by clarity of expression without judgmentalism.”
It had been held in a climate of “respectful dialogue” and it was “clear that there is a breadth of opinion in the Church of Ireland on these matters but also a strong sense of the cohesiveness of the church.”
First printed in The Church of England Newspaper.
Gay clergy row heating up in Australia: The Church of England Newspaper, March 2, 2012 p 4. March 8, 2012
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Church of Australia, Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.Tags: David Head, Diocese of Gippsland, John McIntyre
comments closed
Bishop John McIntyre of Gippsland
A new hot spot appears to be forming in the Anglican Communion’s decade old war over human sexuality following the appointment of a partnered gay clergyman to a parish benefice in Australia. The Bishop of Gippsland has rejected suggestions he violated the letter and spirit of Australian canon law and pan-Anglican agreements on human sexuality by licencing Mr. David Head to serve as minister of the Anglican Church in Heyfield, Victoria.
On 27 February 2012, Bishop John McIntyre told the ABC radio service the appointment was not improper. “If [conservatives] think that I have acted against the Lambeth Resolution [1.10 of 1998 on human sexuality], they need to think again, because I didn’t actually ordain this man. He was ordained over 30 years ago in the diocese of Melbourne.”
The appointment of Mr. Head has caused some controversy in the rural diocese in Victoria as the announcement was made via a front page article in the December issue of diocesan newspaper that pictured the minister with his partner. Sources within the diocese tell The Church of England Newspaper they were perturbed the bishop had chosen to make the announcement in this way, and one large parish has already voiced its objections to the bishop’s unilateral decision to change diocesan policy.
One Gippsland clergyman, who asked not to be named, told CEN that the bishop’s actions were not unlike shifting abuser clergy between posts with the new diocese taking no responsibility or notice of inconvenient truths arising from the old diocese. The issue will likely be brought before the May meeting of synod, CEN was told.
The Sydney-based Anglican Church League (ACL) released a statement expressing its “dismay” with the bishop’s actions on 12 Feb 2012, which it said violated Scripture, Lambeth 1998 Resolution 1.10, the Jerusalem Declaration of 2008 and the Australian Church’s professional standards for clergy.
“Appointments like this put unwanted strain and tension upon relationships between the various dioceses of the Anglican Church of Australia. It also contributes to the fragmentation of the Anglican Communion,” the ACL said.
Bishop McIntyre rejected this argument, saying he had told his diocese at is 2011 synod that Gippsland would be a welcoming diocese for gays and lesbians. Nor had he violated any rule, guideline or canon.
Mr. Head “has been a priest in a parish in the diocese of Melbourne where, when he was inducted into that parish the bishop of the day welcomed not only him, but his partner Mark into the life of the parish and the people of that parish were well aware that David was in that relationship, living in the vicarage of that parish,” he said.
“I see myself simply as having appointed to a position in this diocese a person who was, to use the formal language, ‘a priest in good standing in his previous diocese’,” Bishop McIntyre said.
ACL chairman Dr. Mark Thompson told CEN this argument was specious. “In the face of all that has gone on since Lambeth 1998 Bishop McIntyre’s decision cannot be excused as a mere oversight,” he said.
He noted that while the appointment of Mr. Head “may not be an ordination – what an extraordinarily narrow reading of the central issue – it was still an appointment which should not have been made.”
“Bishop McIntyre is aware” he added, of the “official reiterations of biblical teaching on the subject [of human sexuality] by Anglican authorities in Australia and elsewhere. Nevertheless he would seem unwilling to draw back from this scandalous appointment and by going ahead he has heightened tensions within the Anglican Church of Australia.”
“Actions such as this have torn the Anglican Communion apart. In the face of all that has gone on since Lambeth 1998 Bishop McIntyre’s decision cannot be excused as a mere oversight.
First printed in The Church of England Newspaper.
Gay rights v church rites: Get Religion, January 17, 2012 January 17, 2012
Posted by geoconger in Church of England, Get Religion, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Press criticism.Tags: Daily Mail, Jeffrey John, The Independent
comments closed
I’d like to call your attention to some great religion reporting in the British press this week concerning Dr. Jeffrey John, the Dean of St Albans. Attention to detail and context, lightness of touch, lucid prose and a high degree of intellectual and moral sophistication mark these stories. There are also a few stinkers — the Guardian manages to mangle the facts and make unwarranted assumptions — but overall the reporting has been very good so far.
Let me focus on two of the best I have seen: the Independent and the Daily Mail.
Jonathan Petre of the Daily Mail broke the story of the week with his report that a senior cleric of the Church of England is threatening to sue the church on the grounds of employment discrimination for denying him preference because he is gay.
For those who have followed the Anglican wars of the past twenty-five years, Jeffrey John ranks with Gene Robinson and Jack Spong as being among the most newsworthy, admired or infamous (depending upon your perspective) liberal Anglican clerics. John figures prominently in Stephen Bates of the Guardian’s 2004 book A Church at War: Anglicans and Homosexuality, which I heartily recommend to those who wish to delve deeper into this issue.
Petre (pronounced Peter) and the Sunday Times broke the story — but as the Times is behind a paywall it will not come into consideration in this post. The next day the Guardian and Telegraph followed with stories of their own, along with the Huffington Post and other outlets. The Independent ran its story on the second day as did the BBC.
Some thoughtful opinion pieces have appeared as well, notably in the Guardian by Andrew Brown, George Pitcher in the Daily Mail and from popular bloggers including Peter Ould and Cranmer. Because this was handed to the majors for a Sunday splash the church press in England, The Church of England Newspaper and the Church Times, won’t have reports out until Friday.
I want to hold out the Daily Mail story as an example of a great breaking news report, and the Independent for providing superior analysis and detail. The Daily Mail opens with:
A controversial gay dean has threatened to take the Church of England to court after he was blocked from becoming a bishop.
The Very Rev Jeffrey John, Dean of St Albans, has instructed an eminent employment lawyer to complain to Church officials after being rejected for the role of Bishop of Southwark.
Sources say the dean, one of the most contentious figures in the Church, believes he could sue officials under the Equality Act 2010, which bans discrimination on the grounds of sexuality. Such a case could create a damaging new rift within the CoE.
Dr John was at the centre of a storm in 2003 when forced to step down as Bishop of Reading by Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams after it became known that he was in a gay, though celibate, relationship. The furore fuelled a bitter civil war within the Anglican Church that has dominated Dr Williams’s decade in office.
The story offers details of John’s career, noting he had allegedly been blocked by Archbishop Rowan Williams from becoming Bishop of Southwark in 2010, and reports he has engaged a high powered employment law attorney to represent him — an attorney who won a high profile case against the Church of England when it refused to hire a gay man as a youth minister.
This is a great example of a finely written first day story. In the small space allowed him by the Mail, Jonathan Petre gives the pertinent facts and history that allow the casual reader to understand why this is a major issue for the Church of England. We know this story will have legs. Petre’s style is tight and his reporting neutral. While we can expect the Daily Mail to take a conservative position on this matter, Petre’s story does not push the party line but allows the facts to tell the story.
He also avoids speculation. It would have been very easy to have written this story with a spiteful tone — implying John was being presumptuous and was a fool for not knowing how this would look to others. But Petre does not go down that road, because, (I suspect) he knows that this is not the case and that it is more likely that the very press-shy John has chosen to make this an issue for the cause of equal treatment for gay and lesbian clergy. In any event Petre knows when to stop the story an opening day story. He does a great job.
Of the second day stories, Jerome Taylor’s story in the Independent’s is far and away the best I have seen. It also ran an leader and published a somewhat silly op-ed piece. But the Taylor article is the one worth reading. Here is an example of his analysis:
The Church long ago decided there was essentially nothing to stop a gay man who lived a life of celibacy from becoming a bishop. Even within the orthodox wings there was acceptance it would be difficult to exclude someone who was living in an entirely celibate civil partnership – for most traditionalists the line in the sand was engaging in a physical, same-sex relationship.
But a grey area remained concerning clergy who at one time or another had a same-sex relationship but had since abandoned it in favour of celibacy. Could someone who had been physically homosexual ever become a bishop?
The Church’s legal note provided a stark answer. Only those who had “repented” their physically homosexual past could be considered for a bishop. You could be a gay bishop, but only if you vocally shunned your sexual past, a condition which is not imposed on heterosexual applicants.
Within conservative wings the caveat quickly became gleefully nicknamed “The Jeffrey John clause” – after the openly gay Dean of St Albans who was humiliatingly made to relinquish his appointment to the Bishop of Reading in 2003 following traditionalist outrage over his promotion. Dr John lives in a celibate relationship but has always said refused to apologise for his past.
In effect, the decision meant those who remained in the closet could climb the ecclesiastical pole, but those who were honest about their sexuality were disbarred. To the liberals it was a slap in the face – another clear indication that senior leaders within the Church of England had no desire to rock the boat or confront an issue that has deeply divided the Anglican Communion for much of the past 15 years.
This is a thoughtful and succinct summary. I admire his prose, his detail and insight. I also admire Taylor’s moral sense. Though I do not share his sentiments, I applaud his pursuit of truth and his attack on cant (something the Church of England does very well).
To get a sense of how strong a story this is, compare it to the second day story in the Guardian. That story manages to mangle the history — making John a candidate for Bishop of Bedford when he was nominated to be Bishop of Reading — and also makes unwarranted assumptions. Here is but one example:
Conservatives have reacted with dismay to news of John’s apparent hiring of Alison Downie, an employment and discrimination law specialist, to fight his case over the Southwark post, which eventually went to Christopher Chessun.
How does the Guardian know this? With whom has it spoken? There is no shortage of conservative Church of England clergy who could give flesh to this assertion. I am also uncomfortable with the assumption the Guardian makes that John is driven by personal bitterness in challenging the church’s policies, when there is no evidence to substantiate this.
The issue of same-sex marriage is a contentious one in Britain. The Church of England, the Catholic Church and a number of civil society organizations have voiced their opposition to government proposals to broaden the gay civil unions law to marriage — the John affair adds another twist to what will be an interesting year for religion reporters.
The British press has taken a few hits of late, battered by the scandals surrounding the Murdoch tabloids. But as you can see from these stories, when they are good, they are great.
Wedding ring photo courtesy of Shutterstock.
First published in GetReligion.
Debate doctrine, not sex say Irish evangelicals: The Church of England Newspaper, December 9, 2011 p 7. December 9, 2011
Posted by geoconger in Church of England Newspaper, Church of Ireland, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.Tags: Church of Ireland Evangelical Fellowship, New Wine Ireland, Reform Ireland, the Evangelical Fellowship of Irish Clergy
comments closed
First printed in The Church of England Newspaper.
Evangelical leaders in the Church of Ireland have questioned the parameters of the church’s forthcoming debate on human sexuality, warning that beginning the debate on this point might provide a political solution to a theological problem.
In a 29 Nov 2011 letter written under the signature of the Church of Ireland Evangelical Fellowship, the Evangelical Fellowship of Irish Clergy, New Wine Ireland and Reform Ireland, Irish evangelicals took the bishops to task for their passive approach to the divisions that appear set to tear the church apart.
The bishops’ response to one of their colleague’s approval of the same-sex civil partnership ceremony contracted by a senior clergyman “could convey the impression that the bishops are simply responding to issues that are not, in part, of their own making.”
In July the Dean of Leighlin registered a same-sex civil union with his partner, apparently with the tacit approval of the Bishop of Cashel and Ossory. When news of the event broke, it caused an outcry in the Irish Church and on 5 October 2011 the bishops released a pastoral letter calling for a moratorium on clergy entering into same-sex civil partnerships. They also asked critics of gay civil unions to moderate their language too while the Church begins debate.
The bishops said they had been planning on reviewing their 2003 statement on human sexuality, however, “recent well–publicised events within the Church of Ireland concerning the issue of serving clergy and civil partnerships have caused considerable hurt and confusion to many. Others saw what had happened as a positive development. In the Church of Ireland as a whole, in consequence, this has led to a painful experience of disunity.”
The bishops stated they would organise “a major conference in spring 2012” to discuss the issue, but noted the meeting “is not envisaged to be an end in itself” and would not settle the issue.
However, the bishops must realize that their indecision played a key part in “allowing the debate to unravel as it has,” the Irish evangelicals said.
“There has been a failure to engage in any process following the 2003 statement,” the evangelicals said, and this coupled with the “perception” that the gay union was contracted with the “foreknowledge and/or approval of a serving bishop” created an environment “not conducive to facilitating constructive dialogue.”
“We would seek a greater acknowledgment by the bishops of their own role in not building upon the letter of 2003 and, either individually or collegially, overseeing the present situation that has caused considerable hurt and confusion to many,” the said.
While they endorsed the call for debate, they stated that beginning the conversation with a discussion on human sexuality was the proper course. “The defining issue is our vision of God, and what it means for His people to represent Him in His mission of love to redeem His world. If we start with the ethics of human sexuality the danger is that we will end up with rather legalistic and regulated forms of wording as to what is or is not acceptable, with potentially some very hurtful and divisive dialogue along the way.”
But if the debate began with a discussion of “our vision of God we might just end up with a renewed confidence in what it means to be a redeemed and transformed people,” the evangelical leaders said.
God & gays: the BBC on the Marin Foundation: Get Religion, Sept 29, 2011 September 29, 2011
Posted by geoconger in Get Religion, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.Tags: Andrew Marin, BBC, CBN
comments closed
“Can one man build effective bridges between evangelical Christians and Chicago’s gay community?”
This question kicks off a fascinating article written by Christopher Landau for the BBC World Service’s Heart and Soul Programme entitled “Why conservative Christians flock to a Chicago gay bar“. I honor the BBC for tackling this difficult story; one with landmines for the unwary journalist.
But I ask, who would criticize a story about Andrew Marin: a man who “believes that polite, honest conversation between people of all perspectives is essential if Christians are to address questions about sexuality more effectively”? Who would be so heartless as to be against peace, love and happiness? It would be like drowning kittens.
I answer, me. This profile misses the mark. In its attempt to allow Andrew Marin to tell his story, it neglects to put that story into context. It makes assumptions and value judgments about the Evangelical Christianity and the GLBT movement that Marin seeks to reconcile without allowing the protagonists to define their terms or explain their cause.
This BBC story is quite similar to an Aug 2010 CBN broadcast entitled “Christian’s Outreach to Gays: I’m Sorry“. It too tees one up for Marin, not pressing him to define or defend his views, nor presenting opposing or critical comments. Marin even offers the same “Bible-banging homophobic” ‘money’ quote in each piece. He has his patter down pat.
Am I saying Marin’s work is misguided? No.
I am not offering opinions about his ministry or Christian moral teaching or the gay critique of institutional Christianity. It is the way the story has been crafted that I find unsatisfactory. No dead cats here.
Follow me then inside and see if you come out where I do.
The article begins by stating Marin is a “straight” evangelical Christian who:
.. works to try to bring Christians and gay people together in open conversation about sexuality and spirituality – and that includes running a large-scale meeting four times a year at Roscoe’s, one of America’s most famous gay bars.
That is no small achievement in a culture where openly gay people and evangelical Christians have long viewed each other with suspicion.
The scene has now been set and the BBC’s editorial voice speaks, saying “[Marin] believes that too many Christians don’t understand the complexity of the small number of Bible verses that mention homosexuality – he also thinks that gay people are often too quick to dismiss Christianity.”
On the heals of these strong sentiments, the story moves to a chronicle of Marin’s evolving beliefs and how he came to this work.
He had grown up in a conservative Christian household, and says he was “the biggest Bible-banging homophobic kid you ever met”. .. “I didn’t know what to do. I thought there was no way my theological belief system could ever line up with my [gay] friends’ way of life, so I ended up cutting ties with them.”
But Andrew Marin says that over the following months, he believed God was asking him to get back in touch with his friends and apologise to them.
A few weeks later, along with two of the three friends, he moved into Boystown [a gay neighborhood in Chicago].
The article then offers a colorful anecdote from his ministry and an explanation of his worldview.
One of the most unusual aspects of the Foundation’s work are its Living in the Tension gatherings, where people from all perspectives gather together to explore questions about Christian faith and sexuality. .. Most intriguing were two gay Christian men who had reached dramatically different conclusions about faith and sexuality.
Will is an openly gay man, and a pastor in the United Methodist Church.
He says he has resolved a “creative tension” he initially felt between his calling to ministry and his sexuality.
Sitting opposite him was Brian, who also says he’s always known he was gay – but whose traditional theology meant he chose to marry a woman and has since fathered a child.
He says that falling in love with his wife was “an experience that I can only say was through God himself bringing my wife and me together”.
A gay clergyman and an ex-gay: a nice counterpoint. This leads to the story’s cri de coeur:
But the Marin Foundation believes that polite, honest conversation between people of all perspectives is essential if Christians are to address questions about sexuality more effectively.
Not everyone is convinced that Christians are ready – or able – to have many such discussions. .. He says that the Marin Foundation simply wants to get gay people thinking about Christian spirituality in its broadest sense, without a disproportionate emphasis on sexual morality.
“What we try and do is help the person live the most faithful, God-honouring life that they can through their understanding of where God is leading them.”
This open-ended approach will frustrate both traditionalist and progressive Christians.
But few can argue with the fact that Andrew Marin’s foundation has enabled many conservative churches to begin open discussions about sexuality for the first time.
Now what is wrong with that? Well there is the small matter of hyperbole: Marin’s work has led “many” conservative churches to discuss human sexuality “for the first time”. Which churches? Or does he mean congregations? It seems conservative churches have been talking about sex for quite some time. Controversies over contraception, divorce and remarriage, the swinging 60′s, and now gay rights have been topics of seemingly unending discussion for the past seventy-five years, while the Bible seems to have had a bit to say about this (c.f. the Apostle Paul).
An expert’s voice is heard towards the close, a Harvard professor who says “my hope is that I would be willing to kneel at a communion table with my bitterest enemy in these debates.” Yet this quote shows the Harvard man holds a particular theological view of the Eucharist as a sacrament of unity that would not be shared by conservative evangelicals. For conservative evangelicals, one must have a shared doctrine to share communion, while for Roman Catholics, the Orthodox and like groups Eucharistic discipline forbids allowing those outside the fold from receiving the sacraments.
But more than this, the voices of evangelical Christians and the gay non-Christian community are missing from this article and last year’s CBN story. Robert Gagnon, the leading scholar on the traditional side of the debate, has sharply critiqued Marin’s work finding it to lack theological and Scriptural vigor. The blogosphere is also replete with critics of Marin from the opposite corner. Where are they?
Why spoil the sweetness and light with clouds of criticism? Because such reporting is unfaithful to the story.
American journalism is founded upon a methodology best articulated by the German historian Leopold von Ranke. It is a scientific objective worldview that sees the task of the journalist (like the historian) to report what actually happened (wie es eigentlich gewesen). In this school of writing, the journalist must set aside his own views and present a story on its own terms, to establish what the facts are and let the facts dictate the story.
Omitting dissent, in this view of reporting, gives a false impression of the past and injects the present into the past.
These high minded words beg the question whether such a project is even possible in this post-modernist age. Is it still possible for a reporter to show what actually happened?
NY passes gay marriage law: The Church of England Newspaper, July 1, 2011 p 7. July 5, 2011
Posted by geoconger in Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Marriage, New York.comments closed
Bishop Mark Sisk of New York
First published in The Church of England Newspaper.
The state of New York has legalized ‘gay marriage’. On 24 June, the state senate voted 33-29 to redefine marriage, making New York the largest and most influential American state to adopt the innovation. It also ends a string of defeats for the gay marriage movement, which saw similar bills rejected in Maryland and Rhode Island last month.
Church leaders in New York split over the vote, with five of the state’s six Episcopal bishops backing the measure while the Roman Catholic and Evangelical Churches opposed it.
In 2009 a similar bill failed to pass the Democrat-controlled senate. The state senate swung Republican last year, giving the GOP a 32-30 margin. However, when the vote came before the senate last week four Republicans voted in favour of the bill after language protecting religious liberties was introduced by Gov Andrew Cuomo.
The National Organization for Marriage, which opposed the bill, lambasted the “sham religious liberty language” in the compromise and vowed to turn the four Republican out of office.
Maggie Gallagher, founder of the National Organization for Marriage, warned: “New York Republicans are responsible for passing gay marriage. The party will pay a grave price.”
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins also blamed Republicans saying that “while it was the Democrats who were pushing this agenda, it is the Republicans in the NY Senate who ultimately allowed this to happen.”
New York Bishop Mark Sisk told the Episcopal News Service he welcomed the legislation, saying: “It was with thanksgiving and joy that I received the news of the New York State legislature’s affirmative action on the Marriage Equality legislation that it had been debating with such intensity.
“The legislation, as enacted, appears to be closely aligned with the long-standing views of this Diocese that the civil rights of all people should be respected equally before the law.
“The legislature’s action in broadening the definition of marriage to include same-sex unions has to do with civil law, as it properly should,” Bishop Sisk noted.
“It does not determine Church teaching about the nature of sacraments. That is our continuing work. However, nothing in the unfinished nature of that work should cause us to hesitate to give our most profound thanks for the step that has been taken in affording equal civil rights for our brothers and sisters,” the Bishop said.
Central Africa clarifies provincial position on homosexuality: The Church of England Newspaper, June 10, 2011 June 10, 2011
Posted by geoconger in Church of England Newspaper, Church of the Province of Central Africa, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.comments closed
Archbishop Albert Chama
First published in The Church of England Newspaper.
Homosexual relations are a sin, the Archbishop of the Church of the Province of Central Africa said last week, releasing a statement clarifying the province’s stand on the issue dividing the Anglican Communion.
Archbishop Albert Chama also said that his church’s continued interaction with those portions of the Anglican Communion that have sought to normalize same-sex relations should not be construed to mean the Central African church had endorsed the innovation.
Homosexuality has been a divisive political and ecclesial issue in Central Africa. The former bishop of Harare, Dr. Nolbert Kunonga has charged the province with being ‘soft’ on homosexuality, and has used the controversies within the Anglican Communion to his advantage in the property disputes with the province. In neighboring Zambia and Malawi, western NGO’s and overseas governments have also pressed for the reform of sodomy laws criminalizing “unnatural vice.”
However, the pressure to reform Central African criminal and civil codes to bring it in line with modern European sensibilities has been heavy handed at times, and has caused a backlash by church and government leaders resentful of the encroachment upon their national sovereignties.
Central Africa has also come under pressure from other Anglican African provinces for its decision to keep open its links to the American Episcopal Church and Anglican Church of Canada, and for an explanation of the unofficial statement released by one bishop on behalf of the entire province after the All-Africa bishops meeting in Entebbe that chastised the wider African church for its break with the Episcopal Church.
In his June 4 statement, Archbishop Chama stated he wanted to make the province’s stance on homosexual conduct clear, and that the province did not condone homosexuality.
Central Africa had also “made it very clear even to churches around the world that we interact with, that if there are any members or priests that practice homosexuality, they should keep them away from us,” he said.
There would be no change in church teaching on this issue, the archbishop said, according to the Lusaka Times.
Gay unions are ‘God’s will’, Brazilian archbishop says: The Church of England Newspaper, May 27, 2011 p 6. May 28, 2011
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Episcopal Church of Brazil, Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Marriage.comments closed
Archbishop Maurício de Andrade
First published in The Church of England Newspaper.
Anglican leaders in Brazil have divided sharply over that country’s Supreme Court ruling recognizing same-sex unions. On May 5 the Federal Supreme Court (STF) held the right to freedom of expression should be construed to include the choice of sexual conduct, and authorized gay civil unions.
On May 16, the primate of the Episcopal Anglican Church of Brazil, (IEAB), Archbishop Maurício de Andrade lauded the decision as an “important advance in our society” for “equality and citizenship.” The ruling was part of God’s plan for Brazil, he noted, and should be seen as the “gradual and subtle inspiration of the Holy Spirit in transforming our society.”
However, the breakaway Bishop of Recife, Robinson Cavalcani, along with leaders of the Roman Catholic Church, denounced the ruling, saying that reducing sexual conduct to a choice of expression undermines traditional marriage.
The justices of the STF voted 10 to zero to give legal sanction to gay civil unions. The decision grants gay couples many of the rights enjoyed by married couples, including pension benefits and inheritance. ”The freedom to pursue one’s own sexuality is part of an individual’s freedom of expression,” said Justice Carlos Ayres Britto, the author of the ruling, in explaining the decision.
The ruling has raised legal as well as moral qualms in South America’s largest country. Brazil’s constitution does not touch upon the subject and the ruling is drawn from language governing free speech and expression. It has also been denounced as anti-democratic as it takes the issue out of the hands of legislators.
Archbishop Andrade said the ruling “poses serious challenges to all Christians of all churches because it requires openness to recognize that [homosexual] relationships are part of the way of being of the society and of the human nature.”
Bishop Cavalcanti, however, sharply denounced the decision. “Immorality was legalized. Sin was legalized. Brazil is in mourning.”
The evangelical leader predicted the “next step is the criminalization of heterosexuals who do not recognize the normalcy of homosexuality.” He noted that an act pending before the Brazilian Senate, PLC 122, seeks to curtail freedom of religion and freedom of speech of those who see homosexual conduct as sinful in deference to the right of freedom of expression to those who promote it as a moral good.
However, Bishop Cavalcanti stated the new ruling would not change church teaching, and he called Evangelicals and Anglicans across Brazil to remain faithful to Scripture and to the moral teachings of the church.
Bishop calls for decriminalisation of homosexuality: The Church of England Newspaper, April 14, 2011 April 14, 2011
Posted by geoconger in Church of England Newspaper, Church of the Province of Uganda, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.comments closed
Bishop Christopher Ssenyonjo
First published in The Church of England Newspaper.
A former Ugandan bishop has urged a UN panel in New York to press for the decriminalization of homosexuality to help fight the HIV/AIDs epidemic.
On April 8, Bishop Christopher Ssenyonjo told the panel the “criminalisation of homosexuality remains the most significant barrier” to halting the spread of the disease. “We need to ask if our laws or beliefs help or prevent the spread of HIV and hinder or support families caring for loved ones,” the bishop said according to press accounts of the gathering.
The one-time Church of Uganda bishop is not the sole African Anglican voice urging moderation of the continent’s sodomy laws, with bishops in Central, South, East and West African urging a rethink. In March, Bishop Brighton Malasa of Upper Shire, Malawi urged caution over government calls to criminalize lesbian behavior, while the Church of Uganda and the Church of Burundi last year quietly lobbied their governments against introducing harsher regulations governing homosexual conduct.
A controversial figure within the African Church, Bishop Ssenyonjo has been a public advocate for reforming Uganda’s sodomy laws, and changing the Church of Uganda’s teachings on homosexuality.
Supporters of Bishop Ssenyonjo, who retired as the second Bishop of West Buganda in 1999, have often brought him to the US and UK to campaign for gay rights causes. In 2010 the bishop participated in the consecration of the suffragan Bishop of Los Angeles, the Rt. Rev. Mary Glasspool—the Episcopal Church’s second ‘gay’ bishop.
However, reports on the bishop’s background provided by his partisans have misstated his status, the Church of Uganda tells The Church of England Newspaper. Claims the bishop was deposed in 2007 for his support for the gay community or his association with gay pressure groups are false, the church notes.
Bishop Ssenyonjo was deposed on Jan 17, 2007 by the Church of Uganda after he took part in the consecration as bishop of a former Anglican priest for the independent Charismatic Church of Uganda, the Ugandan provincial secretary told CEN.
“One of the co-consecrators was another deposed Uganda Bishop, the former bishop of North Mbale. He had been deposed because he took a second wife. So, Ssenyonjo was not deposed because of his association” with gay advocacy groups, the spokesman said, but for having conferred episcopal orders upon a priest in a church not in communion with the Church of Uganda.
Southern African bishops chided for their indecision on gay blessings: The Church of England Newspaper, March 25, 2011 p 8. March 25, 2011
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Church of Southern Africa, Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.comments closed
Southern Africa House of Bishops
First published in The Church of England Newspaper.
Evangelical leaders in the Anglican Church of Southern Africa have called upon the church’s Synod of Bishops to clarify their ambiguous statements on human sexuality.
On March 17, the Fellowship of Confession Anglicans (FCA) in South Africa published an open letter on the internet, making a “plea for clarity on the position and teaching of our faith” in light of bishops’ February pastoral letter.
At the close of their Feb 7-12 meeting in Natal, the Southern African bishops deferred taking action on adopting guidelines for the blessing of same-sex unions, citing legal difficulties and theological divisions within their ranks.
A draft document entitled “Pastoral Guidelines in Response to Civil Unions” was reviewed by the bishops at their Sept 2010 meeting and distributed to the dioceses. The February 2011 meeting, however, stated the bishops were not able to approve the document. “It is difficult to give blanket guidelines [on same-sex blessings] because the position is starkly at variance in the legal systems of the seven countries where we work.”
“We continue to work on creating guidelines in several areas of difficulty raised by the issue of civil unions,” the bishops said—which are legal in South Africa, but illegal in the six other nations in the province.
The FCA called upon the bishops to be faithful to their mission to “guard the faith.”
By failing to make a clear statement, the Anglican Church of Southern Africa appeared to have aligned itself “with the dying (revisionist and liberal) minority” within the Anglican Communion and failed to heed “seriously the concerns of the orthodox majority.”
“Sexuality is the touchstone in this Anglican fragmentation,” the FCA said.
However, the issue is not “sexuality per se” but a “rebellion against our creator and his ways which he gives to us” as found in Scripture. Sexuality was not a dividing issue in itself, “but a leadership in the church which chooses to ‘play at being god’ is a much more serious issue,” they said.
Offering encouragement to people to engage in behavior “which is unacceptable to God (which the Bible describes as sin) is not a pastoral role that God can endorse,” the FCA said, adding that they were concerned the Southern African bishops “find it hard to call sin, sin. We are answerable to God not to a human-centred ideology.”
The February bishops’ statement displayed a failure of “godly pastoral leadership,” the FCA said.
“It matters not what the legal position may be in the seven states in which our Province is represented. God’s standards call all laws into question” that do not conform to his word, the FCA said, urging their bishops to take their place with the majority of the Anglican Communion against unbelief and error.
Church call for caution over Malawi sodomy laws: The Church of England Newspaper, March 11, 2011 p 8. March 14, 2011
Posted by geoconger in Church of England Newspaper, Church of the Province of Central Africa, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.comments closed
Bishop Brighton Malasa of Upper Shire, Malawi
First published in The Church of England Newspaper.
Church leaders in Malawi are divided over a new law criminalizing same-sex relations between women.
The Malawi Council of Churches (MCC) has endorsed the bill introduced by President Bingu wa Mutharika and adopted by parliament last month which adds same-sex relations to women to the list of acts forbidden by the country’s sodomy laws. However Anglican leaders have warned the law will impact the country’s war on HIV/AIDS, and that criminalizing and stigmatizing homosexual acts is not the ‘Christian’ way to deal with the issue.
Lutheran Bishop Joseph Bvumbe, chairman of the MCC, told reporters homosexual practices “threaten the family unit” and contradicted “Malawi’s rich traditions, culture and its spirituality as a God fearing nation.”
“We uphold the current Penal Code provisions that criminalise homosexual acts and or practices, even though they aim to bring about reform, the Church should treat practicing and self-affirming homosexuals as sinners just as any other persons engaged in the persistent, unrepentant acts of sin,” the MCC said.
Homosexuals should be “loved and ministered to. The church therefore must accompany the homosexuals in their struggle to transform their lives,” the MCC statement noted.
However, the Anglican Bishop of Upper Shire, the Rt. Rev. Brighton Malasa urged a more “generous pastoral response” towards homosexuals. “Let us invite gays and lesbians, because they are sinners, unto Christ; let us not chase them away to perish” he told a Malawi newspaper.
In a speech to religious leaders ministering to groups at risk for HIV/AIDS, Bishop Malaso said the church should not support “finger-pointing, condemnation and discrimination.”
The bishop told The Church of England Newspaper the church’s mission was “to embrace sinners, assist them to reform and move forward. The church should be seen providing counselling and total pastoral care to all, more especially in this time, when HIV and AIDS is so high and if we are to curb the challenges of the same, we need to fight HIV holistically, without leaving out anyone.”
Bishop Malasa also upheld the Anglican Communion’s formal stance on homosexuality as encapsulated at the 1998 Lambeth Conference in Resolution 1.10, which assured “homosexual persons” that they “are loved by God and that all baptised, believing and faithful persons, regardless of sexual orientation, are full members of the Body of Christ,” but reaffirmed “homosexual practice as incompatible with Scripture.”
“I 100 per cent support the stand taken by the Anglican Bishops at the Lambeth Conference 1998 and believe the church should accompany all to salvation,” Bishop Malasa told CEN.
Anti-discrimination laws not binding on church agencies, court rules: The Church of England Newspaper, Jan 7, 2011 p 6. January 11, 2011
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Church of Australia, Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Politics.comments closed
Peter Kell of Anglicare
First published in The Church of England Newspaper.
Church leaders in Sydney have applauded a tribunal ruling that places freedom of conscience above state anti-discrimination laws.
Last month the New South Wales Administrative Decisions Tribunal held that a foster care agency affiliated with the Wesley Mission was exempt from the Anti-Discrimination Act and could refuse to accept homosexual couples as foster parents.
The decision comes over a year after the same tribunal ordered the foster care agency to pay a £5500 fine and amend its selection criteria so as not to discriminate against homosexuals.
The Wesley Mission’s foster care arm, Wesley Dalmar Services, appealed the decision and on Nov 1, 2009 an appeals panel held the agency was not obligated to accept a gay couple as foster parents. Presiding Magistrate Nancy Hennessy instructed the lower court to take into account the religious sensibilities of Wesleyanism, and whether the agency would be obligated to reject same sex couples in order to be faithful to its beliefs.
In its Dec 27, 2010 decision the tribunal conceded it was obligated to grant the exemption as the language of the Act permitted church affiliated agencies to receive government payments for foster care, while claiming an exemption from the obligation of placing children for foster care with same sex couples.
In its ruling the tribunal commented the grounds for requesting a religious exemption were “singularly undemanding” and noted that “this may be a matter which calls for the attention of parliament.”
However, a spokesman for the NSW Attorney-General said there were no plans to review the Act as the legislation was an appropriate middle ground between the claims of religious freedom and freedom from discrimination.
Cardinal George Pell welcomed the decision and said churches must be able to choose whom they wanted to use in the provision of services. A spokesman for the Diocese of Sydney told the Church of England Newspaper that it also welcomed the ruling.
The diocesan-affiliated social service agency, Anglicare Sydney, had also lobbied the government last year to reject an amendment to the Adoption Act that would permit the adoption of children by same sex couples.
In a twelve-point statement summarizing its views, Anglican CEO Peter Kell argued that gay adoptions were not in the best interest of children and that there was not a “strong need” to change the law, as there was “no shortage in the supply of suitable parents willing to adopt children.”
Mr. Kell stated that “no adult has the right to adopt a child” and that the appeal to anti-discrimination laws by gay adoption and fostering advocates put the “rights of adults ahead of children.”
“Childrens rights are precious – they should never be a political football for others,” he observed in a statement published on the diocesan website.
NSW did amend the Adoption Act in 2010 and allowed gay couples to legally adopt children, but allowed church adoption agencies the right to refuse to provide services to gay couples without breaching anti-discrimination laws.
Toronto gay blessing guidelines released: The Church of England Newspaper, Nov 12, 2010 p 8. November 16, 2010
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Church of Canada, Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.comments closed
First published in The Church of England Newspaper.
The Diocese of Toronto’s same-sex blessings guidelines published last week will not violate the Anglican Communion’s moratorium on same-sex blessings, a letter from the diocese’s five bishops to their clergy claims. While the ceremony will acknowledge God’s blessings upon the couple, the Toronto rite will impart no legal or ecclesial recognition of the same-sex couple’s relationship.
The four page document, dated Oct 28 and mailed to the diocesan clergy last week, states that Toronto Archbishop Colin Johnson will licence a small number of parishes to perform the “Blessing of Same Gender Commitments” rite.
The bishops said they sought to find a way to honour the communion’s ban on public rites for same-sex blessings as well as the Canadian Church’s desire to extend pastoral generosity to same-sex couples. The new rites seek to accommodate those in “stable committed same gender relationships” seeking the church’s support for their relationship and those in the diocese who view such a relationship as sinful.
“The diversity of our diocesan community demonstrates that we are called to witness to the faith in a variety of ways, and though such witness is rooted in differing interpretations and understanding of holy scripture and the tradition, they are recognizably Anglican,” the guidelines state.
However, the rites may not include an “exchange of consents” and a “declaration of union.” A civil same-sex marriage may not be conducted within the context of the service also. The rite will not be recorded as in the parish marriage register and no “nuptial blessing” may be offered to the couple.
The bishops have permitted a “statement of covenant or commitment” in the ceremony, a blessing of the “persons in their commitment” and a “symbolic expression” of the commitment—however, symbols such as wedding rings or anything that could be “understood as symbolising marriage” are forbidden.
Clergy cannot be compelled to perform the ceremony, but are asked to refer inquirers to their bishop if parishioners wish such a blessing which the clergy cannot provide.
The Anglican Church of Canada’s General Synod in 2004 voted to defer a decision of same-sex blessings until 2007, but affirmed the “integrity and sanctity of committed adult same-sex relationships”. The 2007 General Synod rejected a resolution permitting bishops to authorise rites for the blessing of same-sex unions and in 2010 it deferred action once more in favor of continued “conversation.”
The 2010 General Synod did “acknowledge diverse pastoral practices as dioceses respond to their own missional contexts.”
Following the synod Archbishop Fred Hiltz informed the Anglican Consultative Council the Canadian church was in compliance with the moratorium as the national church had not adopted gay blessings, even though New Westminster began offering the blessings in 2002, and the dioceses of Huron, Ottawa, Montreal, and Niagara have moved forward with the innovation. On Nov 6, 2010 the Synod of the Diocese of Saskatoon passed by a margin of two votes a resolution calling upon its bishop to authorise same-sex blessings.
In 2009 Toronto announced its plans for gay blessings, but said it would approve pastoral but not sacramental rites for blessings.
In an open letter to the Toronto bishops, the Dean of Wycliffe College in Toronto, the Rev. Ephraim Radner said the distinction drawn was too fine. “It is hard to escape the fact that the process you have now set in motion-one that involves public proposals, discussions, synodical actions, and all dealing with a way of ordering a particular ‘pastoral response’ that involves episcopal oversight and particular permissions, following directives that involve the nature of prayers – cannot avoid being seen as one of ecclesial ‘authorization’ of liturgical matters surrounding same-sex unions,” he said.
While the bishops may have believed they were only giving a structure to a an arrangement for “private prayers”, the “very process you are following” calls for “formal, episcopal, diocesan, public, liturgical prayers of blessing,” Dr. Radner said.
It would be “very difficult indeed to make the case and persuade others” that what Toronto had now done violated the Lambeth Conference moratorium and had in opposition to the “concerns of many Anglicans around the world,” he concluded.
Gay bishops unlikely in the C of E, Church Commissioners tell Parliament: The Church of England Newspaper, Nov 12, 2010 November 14, 2010
Posted by geoconger in Church of England, Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.comments closed
First printed in The Church of England Newspaper.
A celibate priest in a gay civil partnership is unlikely to be appointed a bishop of the Church of England, the Second Church Estates Commissioner told Parliament last month, even though there is no explicit prohibition on such an appointment.
On Oct 26 the member for North East Derbyshire, Ms. Natascha Engel (Lab.) asked the Second Church Estates Commissioner Mr. Tony Baldry what “representations” the Church Commissioners had received on the “criteria for the appointment of bishops in the Church of England.”
Mr. Baldry responded that the canons require that “anyone to be considered and consecrated” be “male and over 30.”
Ms. Engel noted that the Archbishop of Canterbury had “recently written a newspaper article saying that it is okay to be a gay bishop as long as one is celibate.” What then was the Church of England’s stance on clergy in civil partnerships? “If they are celibate, are they okay to be bishops too?”
The Second Church Estates Commissioner responded that there was no “rule” which forbad “a celibate person in a civil partnership from being considered for appointment as a bishop,” but the appointment was improbable.
“The issue is whether someone in that position could act as a focus for unity in a diocese. That would have to be considered by those responsible for making any episcopal appointment,” Mr. Baldry said.
No resolution of same-sex blessings debate from SA House of Bishops meeting: The Church of England Newspaper, Oct 8, 2010 p 8. October 9, 2010
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Church of Southern Africa, Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.comments closed
The Southern African House of Bishops, September 2010
First published in The Church of England Newspaper.
The Southern African House of Bishops has released draft guidelines on same-sex unions, asking the church’s 25 dioceses to discuss the proposals and report back to the bishops’ spring meeting.
Meeting from Sept 27 – 29 at the Kopanong Conference Centre in Benoni in the Gauteng East Rand province, the bishops returned to the question of same-sex blessings for the third time in six years. Details of the proposals have not yet been made public, but are understood to try to accommodate the church’s traditional stance on marriage with the pastoral needs of church members in civil same-sex unions.
The Southern African church is the most theologically diverse of all the African provinces of the Anglican Communion, and its bishops are not of one mind on the issues of human sexuality. Within its leadership can be found supporters of the Gafcon movement such as Bishop Bethlehem Nopece of Port Elizabeth, and ACC Standing Committee member the Rev. Canon Janet Trisk, a supporter of the ‘Sea of Faith’ movement—a school of thought that draws upon the work of Don Cupitt and whose aim is to “explore and promote religious faith as a human creation.”
In a statement released after their meeting last week the bishops said a draft document “entitled ‘Pastoral Guidelines in Response to Civil Unions’ was given careful consideration. It has been drafted in response to pastoral situations that are arising within parishes as a consequence of South Africa’s Civil Union legislation.”
An amended draft has now “been referred back to the Diocese for comment and will be discussed by us again at the February Synod of Bishops. As Bishops all are acutely aware of the need to act pastorally and prudently on this sensitive matter, while at the same time committed to remaining within the accepted teachings of our Church on marriage and the ongoing dialogue within the Anglican Communion.”
Last week’s pastoral letter builds upon letters released at the close of the 2004 and 2007 meetings. Following the April 2004 session, the bishops stated the Southern African Church was “committed” to Resolution 1.10 of the 1998 Lambeth Conference and to the Primates’ call “not to solemnise same-sex marriages but to continue in dialogue on this and related issues.”
The bishops said that as a matter of doctrine, they were uncertain as to how such a rite would work. “The blessing of a union or partnership is regarded as the equivalent as solemnising a marriage.”
A blessing serves to “underline the fact that that which has already been done by God is good. When we bless, we therefore acknowledge through an act of thanksgiving what already exists in God. In this regard we are as yet uncertain as to the application of this understanding to same-sex partnerships,” the 2004 statement said.
In a statement released at the close of their Sept 2007 meeting, the bishops again reaffirmed Lambeth 1998 Resolution 1.10, but expanded the boundaries of their thinking; writing that they did not “believe sexual orientation” was a “barrier to leadership within the church. However, maintaining as we do, that Christian marriage is a lifelong union between one man and one woman, we hold that clergy unable to commit to another in a Christian marriage partnership are called to a life of celibacy.”
The 2007 statement followed a request to the bishops by the Cape Town synod for “pastoral guidelines for ministering to those who are in committed same-sex relationships.”
The year before the South African Parliament voted to allow same-sex couples to “solemnize and register a voluntary union by way of either a marriage or a civil partnership,” after the South Africa’s Constitutional Court Appeal held the common-law definition of marriage should be changed from a “union between a man and a woman” to a “union between two persons.”
In other business, the bishops at the 2010 meeting noted the creation of the new Diocese of Mbhashe, and heard a report on the “growing human rights abuses” in Swaziland. They reported that those bishops who attended the All African Bishops meeting in Entebbe, “gave mainly positive reports. However, while not able to endorse all that was said and done at that meeting, we state our full commitment to the Anglican Church in Africa, of which we are a part.”
As in 2007, the bishops reaffirmed their support for the Anglican Covenant, which they saw as a “tool for healing and for helping the Communion move forward” in its divisions over doctrine and discipline.
Diocese faces gender discrimination complaint before a Canadian Human Rights Tribunal: The Church of England Newspaper, Sept 24, 2010 p 6. September 24, 2010
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Church of Canada, Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.comments closed
Bishop Michael Ingham
First published in The Church of England Newspaper.
The Diocese of New Westminster has been named a defendant in a complaint filed with the British Colombia Human Rights Tribunal and has been charged with sex, age and disability discrimination by a Vancouver transsexual.
In June, Pamela Burge (65) filed a complaint charging the 127 Society for Housing, her building manager, and the Diocese of New Westminster with violating the B.C. Human Rights Code for evicting her from her apartment managed by the church-affiliated society. She charged the defendants were uncomfortable with her being a transsexual and wanted her to leave the property.
The first diocese in North America to authorize rites for the blessing of same-sex unions, New Westminster and its bishop, the Rt. Rev. Michael Ingham, have been in the forefront of the gay rights movement within the church. However, supporters of Ms. Burge have denounced the diocese as being hypocritical for having placed its financial interests ahead of the civil rights of a transsexual.
“I could never imagine this happening to me as a middle-class man or even as a regular woman,” she told the Georgia Straight, adding “What rights do you have—never mind if you’re a tranny—if you go to a building managed by a nonprofit?” said Ms. Burge, who formally had been known as Tim Burge.
Ms. Burge, who lived at the apartment complex for 12 years, denied claims made by the Society that she was in arrears on her rent, and said the building’s manager had evicted her due to her status as a transsexual. Ms Burge’s appeal to the Residential Tenancy Branch, which arbitrates landlord-tenant disputes, was unsuccessful as the board found in favour of the Society last month. However, the Straight reported the arbitrator of the hearing “repeatedly referred to her as ‘Mr. Burge’” during the proceedings “which offended her” and that as a consequence she was unable to present fairly her case.
Stymied in her attempt to find justice, Ms. Burge then brought a complaint to the Human Rights Tribunal. According to its website the tribunal’s job “is to resolve human rights complaints in a way that is fair to the parties” by “helping the parties to settle the complaint; deciding preliminary applications to dismiss complaints; and holding hearings.”
The tribunal “operates much like a court but is less formal and more flexible,” and has the legal authority to enforce its rulings.
The diocese did not respond to requests for comments.
Church State clash over gay marriage in Argentina: The Church of England Newspaper, July 30, 2010, p 5. August 2, 2010
Posted by geoconger in Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, La Iglesia Anglicana del Cono Sur de America.comments closed
Bishop Gregory Venables
First printed in The Church of England Newspaper.
Argentina has become the first Latin American national to recognize gay marriage.
Over the vigorous protests of Catholic and Protestant leaders, the Argentine Senate on July 15 passed a gay marriage law endorsed by President Cristina Fernández. By a vote of 33 to 27 with three abstentions, the Senate passed the gay marriage bill following 15 hours of contentious debate.
“I am very satisfied. It has been a positive vote,” said President Fernández upon hearing of the vote while on a state visit to China.
While Protestant leaders had opposed the bill, the fight over gay marriage had pitted the Fernández government against the country’s influential Catholic Church in a political battle that analysts note had more to do with anti-clericalism than with gay rights.
In the run up to the vote Argentina’s Synod of Catholic Bishops had warned “this is not a private matter or a matter of religious choice, this is a reality rooted in the very nature of humanity, which is male and female.”
The Archbishop of Argentina, Cardinal Jorge Bergogolio before the vote said “this is no mere legislative bill. It is a move by the father of lies to confuse and deceive the children of God.”
President Fernández responded saying the Cardinal’s statement was “really reminiscent of the times of the Inquisition,” and argued that the proposed law “recognizes a pre-existent reality” and “the rights of minorities.”
The night before the vote, Catholic and Evangelical leaders organized a march upon the Congress building in Buenos Aires. Over 60,000 protesters waived orange flags and held aloft placards denouncing the bill while a statement released by the march organizers declared, “we won’t vote for politicians who vote for the marriage of homosexuals.”
On June 30 Anglican, Evangelical, Catholic and Orthodox leaders testified before the Senate’s legal committee against the proposed law. The Presiding Bishop of the Anglican Church of the Southern Cone and Bishop of Argentina, the Most Rev. Gregory Venables urged legislators to reject the government’s bill. Expanding the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples would shake and divide the nation, he said.
“If you take the Old and New Testaments” it is plain that “God foresaw marriage as being for a man and a woman.” The Biblical text “leaves no possibility of marriage as anything else,” the bishop said, for marriage is the “sign of the union of Christ and his Church.”
“I can only bless what God blesses” (Yo sólo puedo bendecir lo que Dios bendice), Bishop Venables told the Senate, urging them to take head to the views of the “86 per cent of the country that is Christian”, adding that the government had been wrong not to consult with the people before it began its political push for gay marriage.
Political analysts in Argentina note the battle over gay marriage has little to do with the intrinsic issues, but is part of a wider political battle between President Fernández and her husband, former President Nestor Kirchner, against the Catholic Church.
The Catholic Church has been sharply critical of the government’s failures to address corruption and poverty. The split with the church was evident on July 9, when President Fernández broke a long-held presidential tradition by missing the Te Deum Mass for Argentina’s Independence Day. The country’s constitution designates Roman Catholicism as the country’s official religion.
“Kirchner’s epic vision of politics and his need to turn every issue into a mortal combat have driven him to seek the defeat of [Cardinal] Bergoglio and the church,” said Joaquin Morales Sola, a columnist at the conservative La Nacion newspaper.
“Kirchner doesn’t care about the gay community,” said opposition leader Elisa Carrio of the Coalicion Civica party. “Kirchner is using the gay-marriage issue to take on Bergoglio,” she said.
No decision on gay blessings from Canadian synod: The Church of England Newspaper, July 2, 2010 p 6. July 8, 2010
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Church of Canada, Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.comments closed
The Rt. Rev. Michael Bird of Niagara, bishop of one of the three dioceses in Canada where same-sex blesses take place
First published in The Church of England Newspaper.
Canada’s General Synod has voted not to make a decision on the issue of same-sex blessings. Meeting in Halifax last month, the 350 member triennial meeting of synod adopted a resolution that recognizes that same-sex blessings are being performed in the dioceses of New Westminster, Niagara and Ottawa, but declined to affirm or condemn the innovation.
“We are not prepared to make a legislative decision,” the resolution stated. “Despite all our differences, we are passionately committed to walking together, protecting our common life.”
Archbishop Fred Hiltz told a press conference at the close of the nine-day meeting that the resolution “recognises the reality for what it is in the church right now.”
“We’re not in a position of going back to dioceses where they have made a decision, one way or the other, and say, ‘You must change your mind on this.’ … I can recognize that something has happened in another diocese (however) I may not approve of it,” he said.
In 2002 the Diocese of New Westminster under the leadership of Bishop Michael Ingham instituted gay blessings. The innovation did not have the sanction of the Province of British Columbia and Yukon or the General Synod, but no sanction has been levied against the diocese.
In recent years a number of Canadian dioceses have expressed a desire to institute gay blessings or gay marriage, while others have been steadfastly opposed. A number of congregations and retired bishops have broken away from the Anglican Church of Canada to join the Anglican Network in Canada—a diocese of the Anglican Church in North America, while lawsuits over church property are underway in British Columbia and Ontario.
Archbishop Hiltz told the June 11 press conference that synod believed that “now is not the time to force the issue.”
“We’re not ready for that kind of a step. We’ve gone down that road before and we’ve always ended up in state of chaos.”
Irish bishop calls for a rethink of abortion laws: The Church of England Newspaper, June 18, 2010 p 5. June 23, 2010
Posted by geoconger in Abortion/Euthanasia/Biotechnology, Church of England Newspaper, Church of Ireland, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.comments closed
Bishop Michael Burrows
First published in The Church of England Newspaper.
The Church of Ireland’s Bishop of Cashel and Ossory, the Rt Rev Michael Burrows, has urged Anglicans to rethink their stance on abortion and gay unions, writing in his diocesan newspaper it was time for Ireland to “come of age.”
The Government of the Republic of Ireland on June 26, 2009, introduced a Civil Partnership Bill in the Dáil that if adopted would recognise same-sex civil partnerships, but stops short of gay marriage. On May 27, 2010 the Bill was released from committee and is scheduled to pass to the report stage this month. If adopted by the Irish Parliament, it would likely be enacted by October 2010.
In his June diocesan newspaper, Bishop Burrows said “civil partnership legislation is certainly not perfect but it deserves to be welcomed and to be given time.”
The Republic of Ireland was about to “embark upon something of a new social order” by adopting civil unions, he said, adding “I dare to hope that those who choose civil partnership will find it gives them some deep sense of peace and acceptance.”
The bishop also said that it was time for a rethink of Irish abortion laws. Over 18 years had passed since the infamous “X case”, where the Attorney General filed an injunction to prevent a 14-year-old girl from travelling to Britain to have an abortion after having been raped.
On appeal, the Irish Supreme Court held that if there was a real and substantial risk to the life, as distinct from the health, of the mother, and this could be averted only by the termination of her pregnancy, then abortion was lawful. However, the court also found that if there was no such threat to her life, the constitutional right to travel could be restrained if the trip were for the purpose of obtaining an abortion.
Bishop Burrows wrote that “18 years is a long time; it is the time it takes individual humans to ‘come of age’. As a society, however, we have failed dismally to come of age in relation to matters at the heart of the X case.”
“We still remain hypocritical and incapable of engaging with the truth about ourselves at a legislative level – despite successive referenda on these matters, tragic individual human stories are dragged all the way to the Supreme Court in the absence of legislation,” the bishop said.
While not actively calling for the legalisation of abortion, Bishop Burrows noted that he had a “high view of politics and parliament, yet elsewhere I have had occasion to condemn what I term the ‘systematic spinelessness’ of the Legislature when it comes to a range of ethical issues surrounding the beginning of human life.”
Ugandan president denounces pro-gay lobbying by Europe in Africa: The Church of England Newspaper, June 11, 2010 p 6. June 21, 2010
Posted by geoconger in Church of England Newspaper, Church of the Province of Uganda, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Politics.comments closed
First published in The Church of England Newspaper.
The President of Uganda, Mr. Yoweri Museveni has dismissed Western claims that conservative American evangelicals are manipulating Africans into adopting an ‘anti-gay’ agenda, saying homosexuality was un-African and contrary to the continent’s moral scruples.
The Ugandan president was joined by the Bishop of Harare, Dr. Chad Gandiya at the Anglican Shrine to the Uganda Martyrs in Namugongo outside Kampala on June 3, in denouncing homosexuality as un-Christian and un-African.
The president denounced Western pressure on Uganda to conform to European views on morality. “Europeans are putting pressure on us because of homosexuality. They say it is the religious groups which are against the practice but this is not true. Even before we got religion, our culture was against homosexuality just like it was against girls getting pregnant before marriage,” the president said on the feast day of the Anglican martyrs.
Upholding traditional moral standards was a “way of bringing discipline in our society. Bad things must be done away with and we only retain and improve the good ones. Uganda is one of the few countries standing against such decadence,” he said.
The president said that Europe was washed up. “Europeans are falling, if we follow them, they will lead us to Sodom and Gomorrah. I salute the martyrs who stood against homosexuality. They stood for what they believed in with cleanliness on Christianity and our heritage,” President Museveni said.
A statement released by the president’s office said that the King of the Buganda, Kabaka Mwanga “had learned the practice of homosexuality from Arab traders and used it against his subjects. When the Christians refused he ordered their killings. The martyrs were killed between 1885 and 1887, many of them burnt to death at Namugongo.”
The Ugandan martyrs were beatified by Pope Benedict XV in 1920 and canonized by Pope Paul VI in 1964. Their feast day of June 3 is a major event for the Catholic and Anglican churches of Uganda with an estimated one million pilgrims from Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi, and the Congo visiting the shrines.
Pro-gay pressure groups in the US, UK and Europe have claimed that conservative Americans are the driving force behind Africa’s repulsion of homosexuality, while a number of newspapers have editorialized against African laws on these issues.
The guest speaker at the ceremony, Bishop Gandiya of Harare bewailed the assertiveness of the gay movement. “We are living in a world which is upside down. Some people talk about wicked things as if they are good. We need people to stand up for the truth and reject homosexuality,” Bishop Gandiya said, according to the Kampala Monitor.
The confusion of “right with wrong” has “destroyed the morals in the young population,” Bishop Gandiya said.
The Primate of Uganda, Archbishop Henry Orombi of Kampala applauded President Museveni’s stance of placing principle before political expediency, and urged Anglicans to model their behavior on the Uganda Martyrs and commit themselves to service to God, their family and Uganda.
President of Malawi pardons gay couple: The Church of England Newspaper, June 4, 2010 p 8. June 10, 2010
Posted by geoconger in Church of England Newspaper, Church of the Province of Central Africa, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue.comments closed
President Bingu wa Mutharika of Malawi
First published in The Church of England Newspaper.
The President of Malawi has pardoned two men sentenced last month to 14 years imprisonment for sodomy following pleas for clemency from world political and religious leaders.
On May 20 Steven Monjeza and Tiwonge Chimbalanga were convicted of “indecent practices between males” and “unnatural offences.” They were arrested following a Dec 28 engagement ceremony that sought to test Malawi’s colonial era sodomy laws and provoke debate over homosexuality in the conservative Central African nation.
The convictions had sparked concern from overseas leaders and churchmen. On May 26 the bishops of the Anglican Church of Southern Africa released a statement urging South African President Jacob Zuma to intercede for the two men with the government of President Bingu wa Mutharika, while Archbishop Rowan Williams on May 27 said he welcomed the South African bishops’ statement in support of clemency.
President Mutharika pardoned the two men on May 28 following a meeting with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. The UN leader urged the President to reform Malawi’s vice code and asked Parliament to “take appropriate steps to update laws discriminating based on sexual orientation in line with international standards.”
The president said “these boys committed a crime against our culture, our religion and our laws.
“However, as the head of state I hereby pardon them and therefore ask for their immediate release with no conditions,” he told reporters, adding that “I have done this on humanitarian grounds but this does not mean that I support this.”
On Dec 28 Chimbalanga (20) and Monjeza (26) participated in an engagement ceremony at Mankhoma Lodge in Malawi’s commercial capital, Blantyre. Dressed in traditional Malawian attire, the couple exchanged presents and announced their intent to marry. The ceremony did not go off as planned, however, as power cuts interrupted the proceedings and on-lookers voiced disapproval after Chimbalanga’s gender — he was dressed as a woman — was made known to patrons of the lodge. The couple’s actions were reported to the police, who took them into custody later that day for violating “offences against morality” under sections 153 and 156 of the penal code.
After the pair’s conviction, the South African bishops stated that though there was a “breadth of theological views among us on matters of human sexuality, we are united in opposing the criminalisation of homosexual people.”
The sentence of 14 years hard labour was a “gross violation of human rights” the bishops said, and urged the South African government to lobby for “the swift release of these two individuals, who have committed no act of violence or harm against anyone; for the quashing of the sentence against them; and for the repeal of this repressive legislation.”
However, Malawian government and church leaders have supported the prosecution of the two men and a reform of Malawian laws is unlikely. During the trial, President Mutharika had called homosexuality “evil and very bad before the eyes of God,” while Anthony Kamanga, Malawi’s solicitor general and secretary for justice and constitutional affairs, told CNN that the country’s vice laws do not conflict with the constitution.
The Minister of Gender and Children, Patricia Kaliati told the BBC the two men would be rearrested if they reoffended.
The president’s pardon does not “mean that now they are free people, [and] can keep doing whatever you keep doing,” she said.
A Foreign Office spokesman said Britain welcomed “the announcement by President Mutharika to pardon Mr Tiwonge Chimbalanga and Mr Steven Monjeza. Britain has a close and strong partnership with Malawi and it is in this spirit that we raised our concerns about these convictions with the government of Malawi.”
“The UK believes that human rights apply to everyone regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.”
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said: “These individuals were not criminals and their struggle is not unique. We must all recommit ourselves to ending the persecution and criminalisation of sexual orientation and gender identity.
“We hope that President Mutharika’s pardon marks the beginning of a new dialogue which reflects the country’s history of tolerance and a new day for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender rights in Malawi and around the globe,” Mr Gibbs said.
The crisis over homosexuality has passed, Jefferts Schori says: The Church of England Newspaper, May 28, 2010 p 7. June 5, 2010
Posted by geoconger in Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, The Episcopal Church.comments closed
Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori
First published in The Church of England Newspaper.
The crisis in the Anglican Communion over homosexuality has passed the US Presiding Bishop told a South Carolina newspaper last week, as the Episcopal Church has come around to accepting the normalcy of ‘gay’ bishops.
Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori’s statement to the Greenville News follows upon similar remarks made by the Archbishop of Sydney earlier this month that decisions have been finalized and the crisis has passed within the Communion. For Bishop Jefferts Schori—an outspoken supporter or the mainstreaming of homosexuality—-and Dr. Jensen—a champion of the traditional Biblical view of human sexuality, the decision by the American Episcopal Church to go ahead with the consecration of a second gay bishop has changed the Communion.
Speaking in advance of the consecration of the Bishop of Upper South Carolina on May 22, Bishop Jefferts Schori said the American decision to go ahead with gay bishops and blessings had actually strengthened the church’s relations with some portions of the Anglican Communion. She also contrasted the silence from Canterbury and large sections of the overseas church over the consecration of Mary Glasspool with the furore that followed the 2003 consecration of Gene Robinson.
“The reactivity right now” over the consecration of Mary Glasspool in Los Angeles “is much, much less than it was seven years ago,” Bishop Jefferts Schori said .
American Anglicans had come around to her point of view, she added. “I think the church, and certainly the part of the church in the United States, is reasonably clear about where we’re going, even though everybody doesn’t agree. And those in the church, I think, are willing to live with that tension,” she said.
Bishop Jefferts Schori conceded “there are certainly parts of the Anglican Communion that continue to be unhappy with the Episcopal Church and the church in Canada, but we continue to build relationships across the communion, mission partnerships, and I think those are probably stronger than they were 10 years ago, and there are more of them.”
In a statement released after the April 28 Singapore Global South to South Encounter, Dr. Jensen stated Dr. Rowan Williams’ pledge to do something about the Glasspool consecration was moot.
The Archbishop of Canterbury “seemed to suggest that the consecration of a partnered lesbian Bishop will create a crisis. In fact the crisis itself has passed. We are now on the further side of the critical moment; the decisions have all been made; we are already living with the consequences,” he said.
The split between left and right within the Anglican Communion had its first public airing at the 2003 emergency primates meeting at Lambeth Palace, shortly before the Robinson consecration. A number of Global South primates led by Nigerian Archbishop Peter Akinola declined to participate in a Eucharist with US Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold. Dr. Williams was able to convince the Global South group to relent, but at the 2005 Primates Meeting in Northern Ireland, and at all subsequent primates meeting, no corporate Eucharists were celebrated.
At the Alexandria primates meeting in 2009, Presiding Bishop Gregory Venables of the Southern Cone told The Church of England Newspaper that the Global South group did not consider Bishop Jefferts Schori “to be a Christian as we understand it.”
In Singapore last month, the Global South’s view that the American and Canadian churches taught a false gospel that led to damnation was spelled out. “In recent years the peace of our Communion has been deeply wounded by those who continue to claim the name Anglican but who pursue an agenda of their own desire in opposition to historic norms of faith, teaching and practice,” the Singapore communiqué said.
The embrace of the gay agenda by the US and Canada was a rejection of “the Way of the Lord as expressed in Holy Scripture,” and the election of a second gay bishop “demonstrated” a “total disregard for the mind of the Communion.”
The North Americans have continued “in their defiance as they set themselves on a course that contradicts the plain teaching of the Holy Scriptures on matters so fundamental that they affect the very salvation of those involved.”
These “actions violate the integrity of the Gospel, the Communion and our Christian witness to the rest of the world,” the Global South said.
The Communion waits upon Dr. Williams to speak about Mary Glasspool: The Church of England Newspaper, May 24, 2010 p 7. May 27, 2010
Posted by geoconger in Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Los Angeles.comments closed
Dr. Rowan Williams
First published in The Church of England Newspaper.
The consecration of a lesbian bishop in Los Angeles has drawn a quick response from partisans of left and right in the US, but little comment from church leaders across the Communion.
On May 15 US Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori consecrated the Rt. Rev. Mary Glasspool as suffragan bishop of Los Angeles. Following Canon Glasspool’s election in December, the Archbishop of Canterbury said the election of a lesbian bishop “raises very serious questions not just for the Episcopal Church and its place in the Anglican Communion, but for the Communion as a whole.”
In his video address to the Singapore South to South Encounter last month Dr. Williams said he was “in discussion with a number of people around the world about what consequences might follow from [the Glasspool election], and how we express the sense that most Anglicans will want to express, that this decision cannot speak for our common mind.”
A spokesman for Lambeth Palace last week told The Church of England Newspaper that Dr. Williams would not comment again, but would likely speak after the consecration.
Sources close to the archbishop tell CEN that Dr. Williams will likely consult with the House of Bishops this week during their meeting in York before he makes a formal response, so as to make sure the bishops are on board before he acts.
The Archbishop of York has also been silent over the Glasspool consecration, but in an interview with Radio New Zealand, Dr. John Sentamu said that “the difficulty I have got with the Episcopal Church is that while we are in the [listening] process, they have decided to go ahead” with the consecration of gay bishops.
However, Dr. Sentamu dismissed suggestions the Communion would fall apart, stating on March 13 the Anglican tradition of “scripture, tradition and reason” coupled with “experience” would see the church through the crisis. “Once you have got these four strands working together” the church can accommodate diverse opinion, he said.
Liberal activists in the US have applauded the Glasspool consecration. Los Angeles priest, the Rev. Susan Russell, commented that at the service she “sang out of hope that the steps we took Saturday in the Diocese of Los Angeles would be a beacon of light and life to all who are looking for signs of God’s love, peace, justice and compassion.”
Conservative activists have been less sanguine. The Rev. Todd Wetzel of Anglicans United saw the Glasspool consecration as evidence the Episcopal Church was walking away from the Anglican Communion. “While the public rhetoric of the Episcopal Church continually affirmed their care and consideration for the rest of the Communion, the actions of this insular body made those statements empty sentiment,” he said.
However, political scientist and journalist Walter Russell Meade saw the Glasspool consecration as the “beginning of the end of the Episcopal Church as we have known it.”
While Meade places himself on the liberal wing of the theological spectrum, he commented that it was “impossible to avoid the reflection that the Episcopal church is unilaterally imposing its own vision of the church on a worldwide communion.”
“Even if the mind of the church ultimately comes round to the Episcopal view of homosexuality, the Episcopal church has made a profound and historic error in attempting to force this choice on the Anglican Communion as a whole,” Meade argued.
The leadership of the Episcopal Church “in the last generation has frittered away its moral and political authority and capital,” he said, and its “inability to respond creatively to the challenges” facing it today was “accelerating its decline.”
Baker plan for the Episcopal Church: The Church of England Newspaper, May 7, 2010 p 7. May 16, 2010
Posted by geoconger in Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, The Episcopal Church.comments closed
The Hon. James A. Baker, III
First published in The Church of England Newspaper.
A former American Secretary of State has written an open letter to the Episcopal Church urging its liberal and conservative members to declare a cease fire in the war over homosexuality.
Writing in the Spring issue of the Virginia Theological Seminary magazine, James A. Baker III urged Episcopalians to “agree to disagree” on the “contentious issues of sexuality.”
Mr. Baker served as Chief of Staff to President Ronald Reagan from 1981 to 1985 and as Secretary of the Treasury from 1985 to 1988 during President Reagan’s second term. Mr. Baker served as Secretary of State from 1989 to 1993 under President George H.W. Bush and has been a lifelong member of St Martin’s Episcopal Church in Houston, Texas.
Mr. Baker stated that he claimed “no expertise” in the polity of the Episcopal Church, and began with the assumption the church was “tolerant of differing opinions” and permitted “great latitude for decision making” at the parish and diocesan levels. Most lay Episcopalians were tired of the conflict, he said, and looked forward to the day when the church would “no longer frequent the national news” because of its divisions over human sexuality.
“Some issues can be so vigorously contested that resolution is unreachable, at least for a while,” he said, adding that “to try to force resolution prematurely—so that one side is victorious and the other is defeated—yields no resolution at all. That is a recipe for continuing conflict and increasing anger.”
The Episcopal Church had reached the point that “for the foreseeable future,” the disputes over gay bishops and blessings would not be resolved. “Squabbling over church assets is the wrong way to resolve this impasse,” he said, noting that the “predictable result of continuing the battle will be public conflict without end.”
Baker’s plan would be to allow congregations to “agree to disagree, with each side expressing respect for the good faith of the other.” Each parish would be allowed to decide by a majority of votes by its members the “position it would take on these issues of sexuality.”
“Bishops in exercising oversight of the parishes in their dioceses on issues of sexuality would do so in keeping with that particular parish’s most recent vote,” he said.
To get to this point, Mr. Baker asked the bishops of the church to exercise “gracious restraint” until legislative safeguards could be put into effect that would protect those holding divergent views.
The former Secretary of State conceded that “those on the extreme sides of the debate” would not agree with this approach, but “now is not the time to allow these issues of sexuality to further splinter the church.”
Unless a truce is arranged, the church would continue hemorrhaging members, he said. “We can allow the gales of acrimony to blow us into further disarray. Or, we can accept this difficult challenge, harness those same winds, and chart a unified direction for the church that we all love, no matter which side of the debate we take,” Mr. Baker said.
Don’t change “don’t ask, don’t tell” chaplains say: The Church of England Newspaper, May 5, 2010 May 6, 2010
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Church of North America, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Politics.comments closed
First published in The Church of England Newspaper.
President Barack Obama’s call for the US military to end its ban on homosexuals serving in the armed forces will decimate the ranks of the chaplain corps, 42 retired senior Army, Navy and Air Force chaplains declared last week in an open letter to the president.
“If the government normalizes homosexual relations in the armed forces, many (if not most) chaplains will confront a profoundly difficult moral choice, whether they are to obey God or to obey men,” the April 28 letter said.
Ending the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy (DADT) will curtail religious freedom and affect military readiness by marginalizing those with “deeply held” religious beliefs, the letter signed by the retired Protestant chaplains from the Baptist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Reformed and Anglican traditions—including the Anglican Church in North America.
“Making orthodox Christians — both chaplains and servicemen — into second-class Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, or Marines whose sincerely held religious beliefs are comparable to racism cannot help recruitment or retention,” they argued.
In his January State of the Union Address, President Obama said he would ask Congress to end the ban on gays in the military. In testimony before Congress on Feb 2, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, said he personally supported ending DADT.
The Pentagon has begun a study of the effects of repealing the ban, and on April 30 Secretary of Defence Robert Gates wrote to House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) saying he “strongly opposed any legislation that seeks to change this policy prior to the completion of this vital assessment process.”
The Pentagon working group reviewing the implications of repealing DADT has until December to submit its report. DADT was enacted by President Clinton in 1993 after Congress passed a law that same year banning homosexuals from serving in the military. Though it bars gays from serving in the military, it also bars the military from asking service members their sexual orientation.
Changing DADT, the retired officers said, would muzzle chaplains, dictating what they could say in sermons and in counselling sessions. If the policy was changed, chaplains who did not support the normalization of homosexuality could be dismissed from the service or “run the risk of career-ending accusations of insubordination and discrimination,” the letter said.
The Rt Rev David Bena, the former suffragan Bishop of Albany and currently a Bishop of the Church of Nigeria’s Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA) said that during his service as an Air Force chaplain “no one ever tried to muzzle me, not even when I worked as Public Relations Officer for the Chief of Air Force Chaplains.”
In the US armed forces, the chaplain serves as an “adviser to the commander on spiritual, moral, and ethical issues. Therefore, for a commander to muzzle him is to shut off input from a chief source.”
Bishop Bena told The Church of England Newspaper that he believed that while DADT “skirts the issue of homosexuals in the military, it does allow the services to have integrity in managing the force, and allows order and discipline in the ranks.”
He explained that “sexual fraternization on duty is a punishable offence. That includes heterosexual as well as homosexual relations. Many military members live in close quarters – sharing shower and bathroom facilities, sleeping in close proximity to many others.”
“To add the burden that it is somehow ‘okay’ to have sex with a fellow soldier in quarters adds greatly to the pressure of military life. Doing away with DADT opens the door to a decline in morale and an increase in anarchy,” the bishop said.
Push in US for third ‘gay’ bishop: The Church of England Newspaper, April 16, 2010 p 7. April 23, 2010
Posted by geoconger in Anglican Church of Canada, Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Southern Ohio, Utah.comments closed
Bishop Thomas Breidenthal of Southern Ohio waiting to address the House of Bishops
First published in The Church of England Newspaper.
The ‘gay agenda’ in the US and Canada continues to pick up steam, as approval for gay blessings spreads and another diocese shortlists a gay priest to stand for election as bishop.
At its 93rd annual synod the Diocese of British Columbia adopted a resolution authorizing same-sex blessings. While the focus of last month’s meeting was on closing 19 of its 52 congregations in response to a drastic decline in membership, the synod also approved a motion requesting Bishop James Cowan “grant permission for clergy whose conscience permits to bless duly solemnized and registered civil marriages between same-sex couples, where one party is baptized,” and further asked him to authorize rites for gay marriage.
Last month’s vote reverses the decision taken at the 2008 British Columbia synod not to “entertain motions related to the approval of same-sex unions until the matter has been considered and decided upon by General Synod.” The Canadian General Synod is expected to take up the matter at its June meeting in Halifax.
On April 10, the Diocese of Southern Ohio celebrated its first official same-sex blessing, when Michael Harbin (56) and Warren MacPherson (59) exchanged vows at St. Stephen’s Episcopal
The next day two women exchanged vows at Church of Our Saviour in Cincinnati. For the Church of Our Saviour congregation, where the two women are “a wonderful presence and a blessing to the community” because of their active involvement and ministries, the blessing was a time of great joy and celebration, said the Rev. Paula Jackson, rector, who officiated at the Spanish-English bilingual service.
“It was an evangelical moment,” the Rev. Paula Jackson told the Episcopal News Service. The two women were “deeply moved by the blessing. They are people who believe in God but who have been hurt by the church and who are not in church. But they were grateful that the Episcopal Church recognized and blessed godly unions.”
At the diocese’s November convention the Rt. Rev. Thomas Breidenthal announced he would lift the ban on same-sex blessings after Easter. The bishop told the convention that the decision by General Convention last July to lift the ban on same-sex blessings and gay clergy permitted the diocese to proceed.
On April 9 the Diocese of Utah announced that four candidates had been short listed to stand for election as bishop on May 22. Among the four is Canon Michael Barlowe, canon for congregational ministries of the Diocese of California.
A partnered gay priest, Canon Barlowe has had two previous runs for episcopal office in the dioceses of Newark and California. If elected, he would be the church’s third openly gay bishop.
Concerns over the fallout of electing further gay bishops in contravention to the requests of the Archbishop of Canterbury, the primates, and the Anglican Consultative Council is slight among American church leaders.
At a press conference held at the close of last month’s House of Bishops meeting in Texas, The Church of England Newspaper asked whether the bishops had discussed the election of Canon Mary Glasspool as suffragan bishop of Los Angeles, or the Archbishop of Canterbury’s letter warning of consequences for this action.
The Rt. Rev. Kenneth Price, interim Bishop of Pittsburgh, said there had been no discussion, as this had not been on the agenda and had “not come up” in the bishops’ conversations.
US Church approves election of second gay bishop: The Church of England Newspaper, March 26, 2010, p 1. April 3, 2010
Posted by geoconger in Church of England Newspaper, Human Sexuality --- The gay issue, Los Angeles.comments closed
First published in The Church of England Newspaper.
The bishops of the Episcopal Church have repudiated the Anglican Communion’s moratorium on the consecration of gay bishops, and have affirmed the election of Canon Mary Glasspool as Suffragan Bishop of Los Angeles.
On March 17, the Episcopal Church’s Office of Public Affairs announced that Canon Glasspool had received the support of a majority of the 110 diocesan standing committees and diocesan bishops in the church. She will be consecrated on May 15 by Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori.
A spokesman for the Presiding Bishop’s Office in New York declined to state how many bishops endorsed Canon Glasspool’s election. “There was a majority,” Neva Rae Fox told The Church of England Newspaper. “As in previous bishop elections, there are no plans to release the list of bishops.”
In a statement released through by the Diocese of Los Angeles, Canon Glasspool stated she was “profoundly grateful for the many people — in Los Angeles, in Maryland, and around the world — who have given their prayers, love, and support during this time of discernment.”
She stated she was “also aware that not everyone rejoices in this election and consent,” but added she “will work, pray, and continue to extend my own hands and heart to bridge those gaps, and strengthen the bonds of affection among all people, in the Name of Jesus Christ.”
The Bishop of Los Angeles, the Rt. Rev. J. Jon Bruno thanked those bishops and dioceses who had endorsed the election for their support. “These historic elections bring the first women to the episcopate in the Diocese of Los Angeles. I give thanks for this, and that the standing committees and bishops have demonstrated through their consents that the Episcopal Church, by canon, creates no barrier for ministry on the basis of gender and sexual orientation, among other factors.”
One of two suffragan bishops elected at the diocese’s Dec 4-5 convention, the 120-day consent process for Canon Glasspool’s election began on Jan 5. On March 8, the diocese announced that it had received notice that 61 dioceses had endorsed her election; 56 were needed for election.
Canon Diane Bruce, the other suffragan bishop elected at last year’s convention, whose consent process was started on Jan 8, received a majority of consents from both the bishops and dioceses by Feb 17, Los Angeles reported. Canon Glasspool’s episcopal support was not as quick in coming, and a majority of votes were only received in the run up to the March 19 House of Bishops meeting in Texas.
At the time of her election, Canon Glasspool (56) served as canon to the ordinary or assistant to the Bishop of Maryland. The daughter of an Episcopal priest, Canon Glasspool was educated at Dickinson College and trained for the ministry at the Episcopal Divinity School.
Ordained to the diaconate in 1981 and priesthood in 1982, she has served as a parish priest, lecturer, and administrator in her 28 years of ordained ministry. She has lived with a partner, Becki Sander, for the past 19 years.
