The Monmouth saga continues

Happier times? Bishop Richard Pain with the Archdeacon of Newport and the vicar of Caerleon
The Dean of Monmouth is behind them. Source: C in W

Martin Shipton stirred up a hornets' nest when he published his article in the Western Mail, Unholy row in Diocese of Monmouth. It was short on facts so readers were left in the dark about the cause of the row but that has not prevented people from taking their chosen side.

Comments appearing on this blog suggest that the lack of information about the row has led to entrenched positions making resolution more difficult. 

From the Introduction to the Church in Wales Disciplinary Policy and Procedure of The Clergy:

Good discipline is essential to the effective working of all organisations and the Church in Wales is no exception. Good discipline for clergy involves:

i) setting expected standards of behaviour;
ii) informing clergy of the standards expected and what will happen if those standards are not met;
iii) taking appropriate action if those standards are not met.

The Disciplinary Procedure applies to all Clerics exercising ministry in the Church in Wales. 

Disciplinary proceedings can be instituted where misconduct or poor performance is alleged to have occurred.  A single act or omission may be sufficiently serious as to justify instituting the procedure.

The grounds for instituting the procedure are as already set out in Section 9 of Chapter IX of the Constitution as follows:

(a)   teaching, preaching, publishing or professing, doctrine or belief incompatible with that of the Church in Wales;

(b)   neglect of the duties of office, or persistent carelessness or gross inefficiency in the discharge of such duties;

(c)   conduct giving just cause for scandal or offence;

(d)   wilful disobedience to or breach of any of the provisions of the Constitution;

(e)   wilful disobedience to or breach of any of the rules and regulations of the Diocesan Conference of the diocese in which such member holds office or resides;

(f)    disobedience to any judgement sentence or order of the Archbishop, a Diocesan Bishop, the Tribunal, or any Court of the Church in Wales.

All complaints should be forwarded to the Bishop in the first instance.  Where the complaint concerns the conduct, behaviour or performance of a Bishop the complaint should be referred to the Archbishop and where the complaint concerns the conduct, behaviour or performance of the Archbishop the complaint should be referred to the next most Senior Bishop.

In this case it appears that the correct procedure was followed. The complaints were not upheld but the complainants refuse to work with the bishop.

Working relationships have broken down. Without the benefit of the facts of the case, parishioners have been left to speculate, championing the bishop or the complainants according to preference.

That may be based on personality, prejudice, having been favoured or disappointed when unpopular decisions have had to be made or conveyed, often by archdeacons.

That the bishop is reported to have been cleared may have come as no surprise to many. The bishops of the Church in Wales stick together under Barry Morgan's blanket of collegiality.

Their stance on same sex marriage, contrary to section (a), above, teaching, preaching, publishing or professing, doctrine or belief incompatible with that of the Church in Wales, does not encourage confidence.

Neither did the appointment of the former bishop of Oxford to validate Morgan's plan to reorganise parishes into ministry areas so how much confidence can there be in the appointment of 'independent investigators' in a cloud of secrecy?

The Dean of Monmouth was the first to defend himself. Coming from a supporter of such clerics as the progressive professor Dean Martyn Percy who works to the detriment of orthodox Anglicanism as he strives to secularise the Church, readers may draw their own conclusions. Not that the bishop of Monmouth or the rest of the bench have done anything in support of Anglican orthodoxy. In that sense they are all tarred with the same brush

Petertide Ordinations 2018              Source:@MonmouthDCO

 The bishop's style is not to everyone's taste as regular readers of this blog will have observed from previous entries.

Similarly, the dean's expressed progressive views are an affront to traditionalists who were promised appropriate sacramental and pastoral care as faithful Anglicans who could not, in conscience, accept the ordination of women.

That promise evaporated on the retirement of the late Bishop David Thomas.

The accused archdeacons have said nothing that I am aware of. Often having to convey unwelcome advice, or doing the bishop's dirty work as some would have it, they find themselves in a difficult position.

Accusations of bullying have been made. That is a serious matter. There is a procedure for dealing with bullying but it is unclear whether the correct procedure has been followed.

Until the facts are known, speculation and damaging accusation are destined to continue.

There have been frequent calls, particularly from the diocese of Llandaff, for Martin Shipton to investigate unease in the Church in Wales but the requests fall on deaf ears. The decline continues.

Update [11/01/2018]

"An end to Bishop of Monmouth’s long absence may be in sight"

Bishop is likely to return to work in February - Church Times