You are here . on the pale blue dot

Blog notes

Anonymous comments for publication must include a pseudonym.

They should be 'on topic' and not involve third parties.
If pseudonyms are linked to commercial sites comments will be removed as spam.
The blog owner is unable to ‘unfollow’ Followers.

Tuesday, 10 July 2012

Anglican bullyboy and girls thump Archbishop Rowan

Rowan Williams
Photograph: John Giles/PA

Not for the first time the Most Reverend and Right Honourable Rowan Douglas Williams, the 104th Archbishop of Canterbury has been humiliated by those he has sought to help gain power and prestige in a changing church. Why? Because he dared to act with a Christian conscience.  In the eyes of the bullygirls' club, WATCH, the now infamous Clause 5 (1) c, the minimum thought necessary to honour a commitment to embrace all Anglicans in the church of England regardless of theological convictions is a step too far. The bullygirls are having none of it. They sense outright victory in a fight between ruthless women and weak men who clearly do not understand women. They have succeeded in gaining more time in which to badger the bishops into submission and have the clause dropped leaving acceptable provision only for themselves, the victors. (The Ugely Vicar has initiated a petition to retain Clause 5 (1) c - please read about it and vote here).  

In what appears to be a humiliating climb down, "Defending their motivations, Rowan Williams said the bishops had only been trying to help when they tinkered with the draft legislation in May. He said he remained unconvinced they had got it wrong. But he said they should question why they failed to anticipate the outpouring of anger from senior female clergy and campaigners for female bishops.

"It is quite clear that the reaction cannot be ignored," he said. "When there is a reaction of real hurt and offence in the church at large, Christians, and Christian pastors particularly, cannot afford to ignore it, because it means that should the measure go through … it's not easily something that can be celebrated by the church as a whole.

"The bishops will be aware that they underrated the depth of that sense of hurt and offence and if other bishops feel as I do they will need to examine themselves and feel appropriate penitence that they did not recognise just how difficult that was going to be." "

I can assure Archbishop Rowan and the bishops that the 'sense of real hurt and offence' is not peculiar to 'senior female clergy and campaigners for female bishops'. Many women and men of faith have been devastated by the way they have been treated. Deemed by WATCH as not worthy so much as to gather up a crumb under the Table of New Anglicanism, these are the people who have been betrayed. Archbishop Rowan says he 'remained unconvinced they had got it wrong'. The bishops must stand firm and not succumb to unscrupulous pressure. They have no need for 'penitence', unlike those who harass them. If contrition were needed it should come from WATCH and their supporters. They show no remorse for the agonies they have inflicted on others. - 'Christians, and Christian pastors particularly, cannot afford to ignore the hurt'! 

WATCH watchers will not be in the least surprised by the ruthless tactics of these domineering, self-promoting women who see service in the church as something to be received while they constantly push the secular values of the general public to justify their cause. But perhaps more alarming is the intervention of the Second Church Estates Commissioner, Sir Tony Baldry, who not only 'issued a stinging rebuke' to the Church’s General Synod but appeared to use blackmail concerning the position of bishops in the Lords. 

Mother Church, what have you done to deserve this, is there no honour left?


Now read this

Having accused those who are apparently regarded as 'appeased conservatives' of being responsible for the "rape, sexual abuse, violence against women and women's political and economic subjugation", the Rev Dr Miranda Threlfall-Holmes has suggested a different amendment [to Clause 5 (1) c] that would,  "Not just to try and tweak the wording, ... but maybe put something in that's a lot more open and gracious and, frankly, a lot more Christian."!

Her suggestion is that female bishops from countries whose Anglican churches already allow them into the episcopate – such as the US or Australia – advise the Church of England bishops "as equals". She cannot be serious.  

Does she have any idea of the mess that has been created in the Anglican church in the US and Australia? Just a couple of examples here and here. Dr Threlfall-Holmes should have the courage of her convictions and resign.

No comments:

Post a Comment