You are here . on the pale blue dot


Please note that 'Anonymous' comments without a pseudonym are not published.

Comments for publication should be 'on topic' and not involve third parties please.
If pseudonyms are linked to commercial sites the comments will be removed as spam.

Thursday, 30 March 2017

Jeffrey John's gay chorus augmented by quartet


"Gay dean is in the running to become Bishop of Durham" The Times 6 May 2013 Photo: Chris Harris

Harry Farley has reported in Christian Today that a second complaint has been lodged as "pressure builds" over alleged homophobia by the Church in Wales after a senior gay cleric was blocked from being appointed a bishop.

Where one wonders does Farley obtain his information? The hymn sheet is always the same. One sided, all singing in unison ♫homophobia, homophobia, homophobia ♫. Who is the conductor?

In his Kiwianglo's Blog, an Anglican priest and LGBT advocate wrote a resume of the position of the Church in Wales as seen by the recently retired Archbishop Dr Barry Morgan. He emphasised "the Church in Wales has apologized unreservedly for its mistreatment of gay and lesbian people and strongly indicated it could allow or bless same-sex marriages in the future".

The Church in Wales is not homophobic, it is very gay friendly with LGBT chaplains. An over emphasis which is becoming all too obvious as the LGBT lobby tries to call the tune. There have been complaints from MPs, Cathedral Chapters and Electors with the list growing. Given the absence of any contrary view one suspects that the complainers are either gay themselves or sympathetic lobbyists. Much has been made of the weight of requests for John to be made bishop which merely suggests an orchestrated campaign. Others think it would be  a disaster but they were not asked for their opinion.

This is what one unpublished (anonymous) commentator had to say "I am assured by someone who was present that no homophobic remarks were made in the electoral college. (Already in the public domain so he felt he could concur.) Also that there are a lot of lies being told about what happened."

Jeffrey John has been rejected many times. Originally he had my sympathy but no more. Others dioceses have come to the conclusion that Jeffrey John would be more of a distraction than an asset. He claims that the Church does not speak with authority, advocates same sex marriage claiming that God does too and controversially interprets the Bible to suit his circumstances. Previously he threatened to take the Church of England to court after he was blocked from becoming a bishop contrary to 1 Corinthians 6:7 "The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated?"

Why not rather be wronged, indeed? Nothing good can come out of this. The diocese, the province and the Church are suffering for one man's ambition. If he were to succeed in his outrageous campaign everyone else would be the loser.

Postscript

From ECCLESIASTICALLAW

Electing the Bishop of Llandaff: Propriety and Privacy

"The Thinking Anglicans website relates that the objection ‘has now been referred to the Legal Sub-Committee, which is a body in the Church in Wales assembled to consider legal and governance matters’.

However, it is difficult to see what this Sub-Committee can achieve, however legally learned its members.  Absent proper authority from the Governing Body, it has no power under the Constitution to investigate the deliberations of the Electoral College.  And to be effective in practice, any investigation of the objection is bound to contravene the constitutional rule of privacy concerning the Electoral College meeting.  One procedural impropriety is remedied by committing another."

In full here.

Postscript [31.03.2017]

Two interesting letters have appeared in the Church Times.

The first from the Bench of Bishops of the Church in Wales, The Welsh Bishops on the Dean of St Albans and the see of Llandaff, responding to an "ill-informed, unbalanced" leader comment,

the second from the Rt Revd Dr Barry Morgan objecting to false allegations by the Dean of St Albans that Dr Morgan  blocked his nomination to the sees of Bangor and St Asaph in 2008 and 2009.

LATEST

Church's legal subcommittee advises that complaints are without merit and bishops can proceed with appointment. Details here.

42 comments:

  1. A CofE Priest friend of mine asked me yesterday, "why on earth would Jeffrey John consider surrendering his high-profile job as Dean of St Albans to become the Bishop of Llandaff .....?"

    Why indeed?

    Ramillies

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because Barry Morgan has promised him access to an unaudited annual "discretionary" slush fund of £50k perhaps, in addition to a Bishop's salary and 'status'?

      Delete
    2. ' The legal sub committee ' or not. Are we not agreed that ecclesiastical law ceased to be law in Wales in 1920?

      Delete
  2. @Ramillies, I think the answer is very simple: JJ wants to become a bishop at any cost. He never wanted to be Dean in the first place. It was given to him as a sop for having the Bishopric of Reading taken away.

    There's a theory doing the rounds as to why the two legal complaints (i.e. the Five Electors and the Queer Quartet) are emerging now. This is that the name of the next Bishop of Llandaff (or at least a very likely candidate) has emerged and been leaked to them. Presumably it's someone who has put their noses out of joint so they're stepping their campaign on behalf of JJ.

    As others on the previous thread have noted, this is the last throw of the dice. Personally, I can't see why a legal challenge on the basis of a failed election carries any weight, at least not compared to 2003 when John was actually appointed Bishop of Reading.

    ReplyDelete
  3. At the risk of contradicting you AB, I believe the Diocese, Province and the Church in Wales are suffering for the ambitions of two men - Jeffrey John and Barry Morgan.
    Both need to be told unequivocally to bugger off.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My apologies, I stand corrected 1662.

      Delete
    2. No apologies necessary AB, we are of one mind.
      But on second thoughts I need to amend my original suggestion as one of the two might enjoy it (does ANYONE actually genuinely believe the celibacy crap?).
      They need to be told to go boil their heads.

      Delete
    3. I don't for one 1662.
      If Jeffrey John finds it so easy to support oath breakers and not take their oaths seriously (when it suits him and his cause celebre) then I can't attach any weight to any oath Jeffrey John claims to have made, particularly when it relates to the same cause.
      But then again, I didn't believe his celibacy oath in the first place, it always seemed contrived and very convenient to me.

      Delete
  4. Yes indeed, where does Me Farley obtain his information?
    Is the leaking Bishop is still leaking?
    The swamp continues to reek of l'eau de --Bazza, the shadowy conductor of the Wigley, Masson, Jackson and Capon quartet.

    ReplyDelete
  5. John and puppet-master Morgan grow ever more desperate by the day.
    Has the name of the new Bishop of Llandaff reached their ears?
    If so, I doubt they like what they are hearing.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Here we go again, then!
    Please, please, please, let it be someone fresh, who can inspire and unite, preach a half decent sermon and who doesn’t have the baggage of disputed gender nor sexuality.
    We need calm, yes, in the Diocese – but we need some new life pretty desperately – and hope.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The belligerent and hostile behaviour of Jeffrey John does not in any way reflect the peace of God.
    This man is entirely unsuitable for the leadership of any diocese,in that he,Jeffrey John, is totally intolerant of the Christian whose conscience does not permit him to hold the belief that homosexual couples may receive the Sacrament of marriage.
    For Jeffrey John the Church does not speak with Authority: what an obtuse position for a priest to hold.
    Furthermore, any other candidate for election of Bishop holding the views of Out4marriage should similarly be rejected.
    By law, persons may adopt homosexual relationships. Homosexual persons and those who promote homosexuality do not have the right to have a tantrum because it is deemed inappropriate to incorporate their way of life into the belief system of the Church by way of marriage.
    We do not truly know why JJ did not receive the required percentage of votes.
    JJ has now certainly revealed his true colours in his gross disrespect for the Bishops of the CinW and his inability to keep his counsel. Signs of a dictator.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well said Simple Soul. JJ has ruled himself out of the running by his intemperate and arrogant behaviour which smacks of "I am right and anyone who disagrees with me is wrong." This is totally unacceptable from one who occupies the role of a priest and shows what a disaster he would be as a bishop. I welcome the Bishops' letter to the Church Times which provides a careful and thorough refutation of all the nonsense which has surrounded this matter. Will the orchestrators of this unseemly campaign and the Llandaff quartet now accept the fact that not only have they have made themselves look extremely foolish but have also damaged the C in W by their blinkered and prejudiced behaiour? I doubt it as they too suffer from overbearing arrogance.
      Nemesis

      Delete
  8. As attention seems to focus on an investigation by the Legal Sub-Committee (the outcome of which is so certain that William Hill are refusing to take bets on it), I thought readers might like to know that I have written - again - to the Provincial Secretary about the evasive replies I keep getting about an investigation into the bishop who broke his/her oath of confidentiality.

    Dear Mr Lloyd

    I am grateful for your response to my email, not least in outlining the process relating to the complaint made by the five Llandaff electors (and, presumably, the subsequent complaint made by the four members of the Llandaff standing committee).

    However, having noted the content of my letter, you overlook the fact that I asked you a specific question; and I would be grateful for an answer. Will this investigation by the Legal Sub-Committee of the Electoral College investigate the breach of confidentiality by one of the bishops of the Church in Wales? If not, what investigation will take place into this breach, which is a serious matter that could be constructed as 'conduct unbecoming a clerk in holy orders' and therefore subject to the clergy disciplinary code.

    The Bishop of Swansea and Brecon, in his letter to Dr Jeffrey John, assured him that both he and the Provincial Office would investigate any breach thoroughly. I assume the Bishop was telling the truth. Therefore, could you outline to me the procedure by which this investigation will be progressed - and when?

    I am sorry to have to persist with this matter but attempts to solicit an answer from the Bishop of Swansea and Brecon have proved fruitless, resulting only in obfuscating and dismissive replies.

    As a member of the Church in Wales who contributes financially to its mission and ministry, I am becoming rather tired of a group of embattled clergy who give every appearance of being above accountability, and whose actions are further eroding public trust in our Church.

    Yours sincerely

    Gareth James.


    I will keep you posted on any reply.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The Church Times letters are a fascinating twist. The Bench seems to have grown a collective backbone, and is standing up rightly to the intimidation to which it is being subjected. Much of what they say has been written, repeatedly, on these discussion threads. For instance:

    "What you [the Church Times] see fit to criticise is a required process, set down in the Constitution of the Church in Wales, a democratic and proper procedure to be properly followed, and the requirement of a two-thirds majority is set by the Constitution precisely to ensure that the chosen candidate has widespread support ... Despite the highly regrettable reality that it has not always been fully respected, confidentiality has been, and remains, an important feature of our process. ... What is a bar to preferment to the office of bishop is a failure to secure a two-thirds majority of votes in the election process — nothing more; nothing less."

    +Barry's letter is even more interesting. It is not difficult to guess his mood, and I think we can safely assume that JJ is now off +Barry's Christmas Card list.

    This still leaves the question of the leaky bishop, but I am wondering if that has not resolved itself with the recent resignation ..?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Far be it from me to believe a word that proceedeth from the mouth (or pen) of Barry Morgan but it seems that Jeffrey John are each calling the other a liar.

      The question is this, which (if either) of them is telling the truth?

      In my world any pissing contest between a Dean and Archbishop is likely only to result in one outcome, the Dean will come off second best.

      Never mind Christmas cards, I doubt FRCO's daughter will be seeing them dining together in the Cardiff and Country club again.

      If Jeffrey John's other rather obvious flaws didn't cook his goose, his two tactical errors (outing another Bishop as an oath breaker and resorting to telling tales about your main sponsor and patron) have served to demonstrate -most publicly- his lack of sound judgement.
      He might as well retire at his next birthday because only one thing is now certain; he will never again be considered as potential Bishop material by any Diocese, anywhere.

      Delete
    2. I don't believe it could have been Wilbourne.

      Whoever it was should be dealt with most severely, especially in the light of this, confirmed by the legal sub-committee.

      "The particular ministry of a bishop is described in the Charge in the Order for the Ordination of Bishops in The Book of Common Prayer for use in the Church in Wales (1984):
      “A bishop is called to be a chief minister and pastor. You are to be the centre
      of unity, a teacher of the Faith, and a guardian of discipline in the Church.
      You are to watch over the people committed to your charge, and, after the
      example of the chief Shepherd, to know the flock and to be known by them.
      You are to lead and guide the priests and deacons in your care, and to be
      faithful in ordaining and sending out new ministers. You are to proclaim the
      gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to be the chief minister of the sacraments
      of the New Covenant. You are to confirm the baptised, and guide the people
      of God in the way of eternal life.”"

      The centre of unity?

      A guardian of discipline in the Church?

      At least one more resignation is required without further ado.

      Drain the swamp.

      Delete
    3. Two things strike me about Leak-Gate:

      1. Wilbourne has not said who subjected him to a campaign demanding his resignation, when or why. But 5 consecutive & well-placed phone calls telling him to sling his crozier may have been enough.

      2. Even if Wilbourne did not participate in the Electoral College, given that JJ did not reply to the content of +Swansea's original letter but sent back a commentary on the affront he felt as a result of reports received by various 'phone calls, including from Bishop Leaky, it is possible that the call was not even from a bishop in attendance at the college but one who had been told, supposedly, about what was said at the College .. And since JJ opted for a high risk 'all or nothing' strategy, one more gamble with an approximate truth would have been neither here nor there.

      Unfortunately I doubt we will ever really know the truth.

      Delete
    4. Who foots the bill?31 March 2017 at 19:13

      Well, that's as fine a 16 page example of an eloquent "go forth and multiply" in legalese as I've seen in a while.
      Three complaints, No. 1 made on 24th March by 4 (then 5) Electors, No. 2 made on 28th March by 4 members of the Diocesan Standing Committee and No. 3 made late on the evening of 30th March by 5 of the 11 Area Deans in the Llandaff Diocese.
      It would be no surprise to learn Masson was a signatory to all three complaints.
      And the outcome of all the time, money and publicity thrown at the cause of Jeffrey John?
      All three complaints rejected as without merit.
      As is usual in legal cases rejected as "without merit" one hopes the signatories to the complaints will now be held personally liable for the large bill for the costs they have incurred so unnecessarily.
      The little old ladies sitting in the pews who are constantly asked to reconsider and increase their giving should not be footing the bill and neither should the Church in Wales.

      Delete
    5. "The little old ladies sitting in the pews who are constantly asked to reconsider and increase their giving should not be footing the bill and neither should the Church in Wales." Excellent point Wftb?

      Delete
    6. @Alan

      1. The Ass Wilbourne claims the "campaign" was waged against him for the last 18 months, therefore it can have nothing to do with the recent Electoral College farce which only started on 21st February.

      2. The Bishops will know whether or not the Ass Wilbourne took part in the Electoral College, but all five Bishops certainly did.

      3. In his letter to +John Davies on the 18th, Jeffrey John claims "In a telephone call on the evening of March 3rd one of the bishops present confirmed to me that these ......".
      "One of the bishops present" seems quite clear to me.

      @Gareth James
      If you read the 16 page Judgement that has been published today you will see you have no need to wait for another evasive reply from Provincial Secretary Lloyd.
      As surmised / predicted by 'Augustine' on the previous thread, "the five Electors have not filed a complaint against the leaking Bishop. Why would they? He's obviously a supporter of Jeffrey John, as are they, so they are in the same camp."

      Another formal complaint will definitely be required to pursue the leaking Bishop, especially now that the legal sub-committee have confirmed in their judgement that all those attending were required to swear an oath and put their signatures to a written document to the same effect.

      Let all the leakers be identified and reprimanded appropriately but Jeffrey John's Bishop must definitely go without further ado.

      Delete
    7. @Episkopos: Fair points. But given that JJ's letter seems to be generally rather wide of the truth mark, it is not beyond the realms of possibility - or even probability - that JJ 'gilded the lily' with his tale of the leaking bishop. The timing of the sudden resignation of Wilbourne is more than curious.

      As regards the response from the Legal Sub Committee - paragraph 32 on page 14 re: the 1st complaint packs a wonderful punch!

      Delete
    8. Masson must go1 April 2017 at 00:17

      Confidentiality isn't merely an important part of the process.
      The Bishops letter to the Church Times is completely wrong on this point.
      Confidentiality is absolutely vital.
      Without it being so, how will members of any future Electoral Colleges feel able to raise concerns or objections without fear of being quoted or misquoted?
      Those who have broken their oaths MUST be rooted out, identified, publicly dismissed from their positions and face life bans from any role in the Church requiring confidentiality.
      Laity, clergy, Canons, Deans or Bishops, it matters not.
      Justice must be seen to be done.

      Delete
    9. @Alan
      The timing of Wilbourne's departure may or may not be more than coincidental, but I and many others to whom I speak all feel confident there's much more to drain from this particular swamp.

      P14, para 32, I assume you refer to
      "The complainants in the First Complaint did not withdraw from the Meeting: no member did; therefore, unless they exercised the option not to vote, they voted and must therefore have considered that they were participating in valid proceedings. The proceedings were clearly valid; they do not cease to be so because the result of a vote is not what some members hoped for. It cannot be contended that the difference lies in the effect on the outcome: the vote was by secret ballot, and each member’s conscience is his or her own."?
      The five complaining electors demonstrated they have no more conscience than they do intellect. They failed to get their own way, act like spoilt 5 year-olds having a temper tantrum, breaking their oaths of silence and confidentiality with the a media show of 'I'm going to scream and scream and scream until I make myself sick" bringing the Church in Wales and the bench of Bishops into disrepute, then club together to manufacture a formal complaint that is found to be completely without merit.
      I agree wholeheartedly with "Who foots the bill?" and "Masson must go".
      They should be charged for the costs they have incurred so vexatiously, be named, shamed and sacked. Not only did they break their oaths for the sakes of their political agenda, they were prepared to risk the schism in the Church that so many have worked so hard over so many years to avoid.
      I still have no idea why our Catholic curate Ceirion Gilbert left Llandaff Cathedral or why Barry Morgan and the Capon announced he was no longer welcome in the Church in Wales, spoken to or even mentioned by name and until I do find out, I am not willing to go along with Morgan's condemnation of the man.

      But the Judas', the five electors, the members of the Diocesan standing committee, the area deans and the leaking Bishop, their misconduct and betrayals entirely merit such a reward.
      Absolutely justice must be seen to be done.

      Delete

  10. I am a Priest in the diocese of LLandaff. I’m not a special one. I’m a Parish on ‘the outside’. I’m passionate about Jesus and His mission for the my parish, the diocese, Wales, the UK and the world. I believe in working with all traditions of Church, both inside of Anglicanism and outside. I want to keep Jesus the main thing!

    Ok, I’m a bit old fashioned. I take the bible seriously. I am not a Universalist. I am not a pluralist. I’m not what could be described as a Liberal, but I’m not some screaming fundamentalist.

    I’m often asked why I am in the Church in Wales…..and the answer is because God called me. Even though I have always taken different views from my Bishops and fellow Priests, I have always tried to respect them. I believe in the authority of the Bishops….and even though it has been hard; I have always sought to submit to that authority.

    I’m realistic enough to know that because of my tradition, calling, and if I’m being honest about my self-ability I’m never going to be Bishop. Nor am I going to get a job in the diocese. I am not going to be at the front of a conference giving training. And I’m fine with that. I love my parish. I love telling people about Jesus!

    It might be that I have had so much respect for my betters, but the last few weeks have broken my heart. It has been hard to see the Church implode in such a way. And a number of people in my parish feel the same. It is heart-breaking. To see so many problems come from people who we are to respect is hard! Hearing about it all on from people outside the Church is hard as well. Someone, not in my Church said to me today, if they had slagged off their organisation of work in the way that so many are now they would be suspended! Seeing the Mission that I believe I am called to, in the name of Jesus damaged is hard!

    I suppose, when I engage my thinking brain, this was something that was always going to happen. The tensions have been there for years. And now, like in the bar room ball in a western, the first punch has been thrown and it’s all kicking off!

    But, God is good! And He can shine light in all circumstances. My only prayer is that He will take this situation and turn it too good for His Kingdom.

    MT

    ReplyDelete
  11. Wow JJ has shot his bolt now and looks like a petulant toddler chucking his toys out of the pram. How ridiculous do the chapters of St Albans and Ely Cathedrals look now alongside those interfering MP's who jumped on the bandwagon.

    This is how to stare down the bullying and baying mob and say - No! I hope we can all breath a collective sigh of relief that a massive injustice has been averted. This was an existential threat to the CiW as we know it and an attempted coup d'etat. Those responsible for the breaches in confidence must now consider their positions or be severely dealt with.

    Well done the Bench for refuting this false and vexatious campaign. Let's get +Llandaff in, enthroned and move on to reaching out to this great land.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A Church that has little grace, is spiritually bereft, is morally questionable.
      This is the legacy of an Electoral College where qualities of leadership and humility were sacrificed on the many altars of personal ambition that were the unworthy focus of worship there. It could have all been properly settled within the walls of the Cathedral, as happens in a papal conclave. But no.
      Now, unfortunately, no amount of lengthy missives to the Church Times will easily brush this away.It would be risible as a farce,if it were not so very, very sad.
      Lukas

      Delete
    2. The vocal minority so quick to nail their rainbow flags to Jeffrey John's mast have all been made to look like complete fools and should all be hanging their heads in shame.

      But has there been even the tiniest sign of contrition and repentance from any of them? An apology?
      I didn't think so.

      By all means breathe a sigh of relief that Jeffrey John will now amount to nothing more than a pathetic footnote and get a fit and proper Bishop enthroned in Llandaff asap.
      But we can't just "move on" without the architects of the "false and vexatious campaign" being dealt with most robustly.

      Delete
  12. The problem with many of the CiW committees/groups such as governing body, electerol college etc .....is that it is often job for life. Wardens now have to step down after 5 years and allow new blood in. I think all CiW groups should follow suit. Also somehow, let the average pew sitter have a chance, rather than the one or two who attend deanery conference, often, again, the same person for decades.
    In terms of David Wilbourne, surely if he was appointed as​ an assistant to someone then 62, it should have been a short term contract, perhaps renewable annually after the Archbishop was 65yr old? It was obvious he could not continue. To write and complain to the Church times seems mean and ungodly. So many clergy have been excluded during the Assistant bishop reign as we read above and observe, many have fled to the Church of England, Rome, etc or just kept quiet and got on with the parish ministry.
    The Church times letter says the bench takes the review seriously, they failed to add.... Except the bit about being top heavy.......

    ReplyDelete
  13. I do not firmly believe that Barry and Dean JJ have quarrelled !
    It is all getting a bit too hot for Barry and he can see his seat in the House of Lords being pulled from under him.
    Barry is therefore playing the 'innocent card' : 'this mess has nothing to do with me', (when,of course, this whole mess has been orchestrated by Barry).
    Barry uses and manipulates people,and he is now even using Jeffrey to present himself as a calm voice of good Christian conscience.
    You may call be cynically.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course Barry Morgan is only looking after number 1.
      As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end.

      "Hack" essentially predicted this on an earlier thread.
      His --Darkness has seen the chances of his chosen successor and heir Jeffrey John evaporate into nothing over the last 3 weeks, due largely to JJ's own petulant letter which was effectively the death knell.

      To all intents and purposes bully boy Bazza has now thrown him under a bus.
      You know the game - "It's nothing personal Jeffrey, it's only business".

      Will Jeffery John quietly scuttle back under his rock at St. Albans or will he go decide to go out in a blaze of rainbow-flag-coloured flaming glory by replying to Barry's letter and yesterday's legal judgement?

      Delete
    2. I couldn't agree more Simple Soul. You have nailed him. Barry the 'manipulator', Barry the 'orchestrator, Barry 'the traitor', Barry , 'the liar'. For more on 'Barry the innocent' read www.scandal and offence.com (google)

      Delete
  14. The Next Steps
    What should happen now is,
    • An experienced bishop be installed in Llandaff to restore confidence
    • His replacement be selected from amongst the more plausible of a list of
    fresh, inspiring, theologically literate and spiritual candidates (there may
    be a sign that this is already underway)
    • Some decent mentoring and nurture of the charism of episcope be implemented
    • We all move on, leaving the architects of this chaos to meander at will
    amongst the ruins, if they want

    Even if the Bench are tired of reading this blog (and who could really blame them?), their Press officers are duty-bound to do so, so, hopefully, they will continue to communicate the word on the street.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Never mind the street, the word on The Green is that heads must roll.
      If ever there was a display of the third rate flabby intellects prevalent in the Electoral college, the Chapter, the standing committee and area Deans, this was it.
      Put them up against a couple of sharp intellects and they crumble.
      Little wonder then they've made a lazy comfortable living in the Church rather than try and forge a career in the real world?
      These are largely the same idiots who are fiddling the accounts, failing to repair the fabric, making our choir redundant and bankrupting the Cathedral.
      If there is not a drastic and immediate improvement in the standard and number of ordinands then the Church in Wales has no future at all.

      Delete
  15. "An experienced bishop be installed in Llandaff to restore confidence".
    Call +John Davies. He has stood up to enormous pressure and must have a good idea where the skeletons are. Some knees will be knocking at the prospect and with good reason.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed AB.

      I admit I have had my doubts about +John Davies in the past but all credit where it is due, on this occasion he is to be congratulated on the manner in which he has handled a deplorable situation in which, through no fault of his own, he found himself. He has shown us all a degree of cool-headed sound judgement with considerable finesse that I admit I firmly believed no longer existed in the CinW.

      If he didn't know where some of the skeletons were hidden before he most surely does now. But there remain outstanding matters requiring urgent attention.

      The sad reality is that this entire situation was not merely the result of loose tongues, bragging, crass stupidity, errors of judgement, incompetence or negligence. The few remaining pew-sitters in and around Llandaff Cathedral and the Diocese have become all too familiar with that sort of behaviour during Morgan's corrupt reign.
      No. What has been witnessed over the last 3 weeks or so is something quite different, much darker and far more malevolent, pure wickedness and downright evil.

      Those involved did consciously, wilfully and deliberately engage in a hate campaign designed specifically to embarrass, humiliate, brow-beat, blackmail and bully their fellow Electoral college members, laity, Clergy and Bishops purely as the means to the desired end of rigging the election - all with utter and total disregard of the hurt, damage or cost so caused to everyone else.

      I don't know how such people have the nerve to call themselves Christians.
      They should be too embarrassed to show their face in Church tomorrow, but I bet they will.
      They've earned their 30 pieces of silver, now let them reap what they have sown.

      Delete
  16. Silent Majority1 April 2017 at 19:44

    Things are already changing. The former Archbishop's Chaplain, Mark Dimond, is becoming a Residentiary Canon at St Woolos. Perhaps he didn't want to hang around in Llandaff?

    "We are pleased to announce that we have appointed Dr Mark Dimond, the former Archbishop's Chaplain, as our new Residentiary Canon. He will be licensed and installed on the 18th June at 6.30pm."
    https://www.facebook.com/newportcathedral/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good luck to him, he seems to be a very nice family man.
      The best thing he could do for his family and career is get out of the cess pool that is now Llandaff.

      Delete
  17. I agree with Miriam.
    But have to ask the question, was this appointment made after advertisement, application, interview - as it should have been?

    Salve Nos

    ReplyDelete
  18. Isn't it peculiar how quiet the faux "journalist" Harry "Charley" Farley and the Pink Times have been since the publication of the legal subcommittee advice that the "homophobia" complaints were all without merit?
    One wonders if either will publish the document or the result?
    The smart money on The Green says they will not.

    ReplyDelete
  19. The priest that I quoted at the beginning of this thread was at St Stephen's House at the same time as JJ ... in those days JJ's stance re homosexuality was rather different .... as in 'hard line homophobic'. Methinks he did protest too much ....

    Is this farce over the selection of the next Bishop of Llandaff anywhere near completion yet? Is an announcement likely before the Final Parousia, for instance?

    Ramillies

    ReplyDelete